Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Simlar Is 757 Etop To Proposed 757 200LR?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3758 posts, RR: 2
Posted (4 years 10 months 21 hours ago) and read 4399 times:

In the late 90's, Boeing proposed a long range version of the 757 200 called the 757 200LR. The 200LR was supposed to have the same wings and engines as a 757 300. I remember CO and I believe Condor was intersted in the 757 200LR , but Boeing cancel the project. Now a lot of US airlines are turning their 757 200 into 757 200 ETOP. The 757 200 ETOP are used on some of the routes that I believe the 200LR was going to be used on. So I wonder, are 757 200 ETOP, pretty much what the 757 200LR was supposed to be?

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5856 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 21 hours ago) and read 4390 times:

No. An IGW version of the 752 would have had... IGW, probably 272,500 lbs. like the 753. I expect they would also have equipped it with ACTs to improve range. There is no physical difference between an ETOPS 752 and any other 752, and no difference in weight.

User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 20 hours ago) and read 4350 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
There is no physical difference between an ETOPS 752 and any other 752, and no difference in weight.

  

The difference is on the MX and equipment side of things. ETOPS planes have different MX procedures and dispatch requirements. And AFAIK all ETOPS planes must carry life rafts, even if used for mostly over land flights. That's why you'll see that all of CO's 737NG aircraft carry life rafts whereas WN's don't since WN does not have ETOPS planes, last time I checked at least.


User currently offlinenws2002 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 926 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 20 hours ago) and read 4344 times:

Most (if not all) of the 752s being using for trans-Atlantic flights are the higher weight versions that have been fitted with winglets to increase the range. I have no idea what the 757-200LR plan was, but some airlines call these wingleted 752s 757-200ERs.

User currently offlineKimberlyRJ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 385 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 4208 times:

Does anyone have any information on the range of the proposed B752LR in the late 90’s?

If Boeing had the B752 still production and they could extend the range of 3,900nm by say a further 1,500nm to 2,000nm I am sure a lot of airlines would be placing orders for quite a few aircraft, as other then the Airbus A313ET or Boeing 762ER (which are the closest to the B752 in size – but still much, much bigger) and from my understanding the seat per mile cost is quite a bit higher?

The Boeing 752LR with an extra 1,500nm to 2,000nm could have opened up quite a few new markets for airlines both sides of the Atlantic.

Kimberly


User currently offlineboeing767mech From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 4162 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
There is no physical difference between an ETOPS 752 and any other 752,

That statement is not completely true. Our 752ER's have a extra fuel crossfeed valve (NON ER's have one) and a Hydrualic Motor Generator that our NON ER 757's don't have.

David



Never under-estimate the predictably of stupidty
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31439 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 4120 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 757-300 had a lower fuel capacity than the 757-200 (if by 90 liters) and appears to have the same wing as the 757-200 (perhaps strengthened for the higher MTOWs)

So the only way to extend the range of the 757-200 would have been to use belly tanks which would just eat into the cargo hold capacity. At that point, just operate a 767-200ER.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5856 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4009 times:

Quoting boeing767mech (Reply 5):
That statement is not completely true. Our 752ER's have a extra fuel crossfeed valve (NON ER's have one) and a Hydrualic Motor Generator that our NON ER 757's don't have.

Thanks for the correction. I guess I should say "don't have any extra fuel capacity or differences to the wing."


User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3994 times:

Quoting boeing767mech (Reply 5):
and a Hydrualic Motor Generator

Is this another way of saying RAT? Or is it actually something completely different?


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3958 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 8):
Is this another way of saying RAT? Or is it actually something completely different?

Completely different. The hydraulic motor generator uses hydraulic power to spin an electric generator. It provides an electricity source independent of the APU & engine generators. On many more modern aircraft, the same function is provided by an electric RAT.

Tom.


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3929 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
The 757-300 had a lower fuel capacity than the 757-200 (if by 90 liters) and appears to have the same wing as the 757-200 (perhaps strengthened for the higher MTOWs)

So the only way to extend the range of the 757-200 would have been to use belly tanks which would just eat into the cargo hold capacity. At that point, just operate a 767-200ER.

I would question the conclusion here. While the belly tanks would eat into the hold, a 752 would generally be used where hold space isn't that important. If you care about hold space, why fly a narrowbody? Greater fuel tankage and the 753's MTOW would have made a lot of sense for a few routes. I presume the niche nature of this aircraft is the reason it didn't see the light of day, rather than the hold limitation.

Besides, an MTOW upgrade would have increased the payload at range and they didn't do that either, which I think says something about the importance of belly cargo to the 752.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

Quoting boeing767mech (Reply 5):
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
There is no physical difference between an ETOPS 752 and any other 752,

That statement is not completely true. Our 752ER's have a extra fuel crossfeed valve (NON ER's have one) and a Hydrualic Motor Generator that our NON ER 757's don't have.

I think The poster was referring to the Exterior difference.

This B752ER......Where did this term -ER come attached to the B752......All
I've heard is the B752/B752SF/B752PF/B752PCF.


regds
MEL.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31439 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3867 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting thegeek (Reply 10):
While the belly tanks would eat into the hold, a 752 would generally be used where hold space isn't that important.

Well if you're going to put in a real low-density boutique cabin like UA's p.s. service or only have Business Class seats, you could probably sacrifice most of the hold for fuel tanks since you only need space for around 100-200 bags.

But if you're going to have close to 175 seats (say like CO's TATL birds), then that's going to be 300-350 bags. I'm not sure how much hold space that needs, but it might impact capacity depending on the number of tanks you need.

As to their being no demand for revenue cargo, I'd find that surprising - if a route can justify non-stop passenger service, I would think there would be some demand for non-stop cargo service, for "time-sensitive" product, if nothing else, and that's usually high-revenue.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5856 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3844 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 11):
This B752ER......Where did this term -ER come attached to the B752......All
I've heard is the B752/B752SF/B752PF/B752PCF

Some operators, in their own internal nomenclature, refer to their 757s with ETOPS certification and 255,000+ lb MTOW as "757-200ERs." That is an internal name only. Boeing never produced anything called a 757-200ER.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3792 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 13):
Boeing never produced anything called a 757-200ER.

They considered it. Boeing referred to the proposed model as 757-200X and 757-200ERX at various times. Related items between 1997 and 2000 from Flight International archives. CO was interested in the longer-range -200 but at some stage their interest seemed to switch to the -300 and with 757 orders falling off to almost nothing andnot much interest in the -300, Boeing didn't pursue the llonger-range -200 model.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1997/1997%20-%202275.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...e/view/2000/2000-1%20-%200960.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...e/view/2000/2000-1%20-%201469.html


User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3791 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
Completely different.

Interesting. I have been enlightened.   


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3615 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
As to their being no demand for revenue cargo, I'd find that surprising - if a route can justify non-stop passenger service, I would think there would be some demand for non-stop cargo service, for "time-sensitive" product, if nothing else, and that's usually high-revenue.

I'd also expect some, but how much?


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3583 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 13):
That is an internal name only

Is this a verbal term or officially stated in Documents?
regds
MEL.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5856 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3461 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 17):
Is this a verbal term or officially stated in Documents?

Here is an example of an operator that claims to the public that it has "757-200ER":

http://www.delta.com/planning_reserv...ft_types_layout/757200er/index.jsp


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic How Simlar Is 757 Etop To Proposed 757 200LR?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
How Easy Is It For Pilots To Pick Routes They Want posted Thu Nov 6 2008 16:13:29 by DL767captain
Icelandair 757 Liege To Portsmoth, NH posted Sat Jul 26 2008 19:14:10 by ChrisNH
Q: How Is A Plane Weighed To Determine Fuel, Etc.? posted Sun Apr 8 2007 21:09:27 by JAAlbert
How Easy Is It To Change Config. Of A Plane? posted Thu Oct 19 2006 04:08:48 by Brenintw
How Similar Are 757 And 767 Cockpits? posted Tue Dec 6 2005 18:17:46 by Mozart
A Testament To 757 Climb Performance posted Thu Apr 17 2003 00:13:01 by Rick767
How Hard Is It To Fly One? posted Wed Sep 12 2001 00:31:20 by Bruce
How Friendly Is MDW To GA? posted Wed Aug 23 2000 06:02:38 by Pilot1113
Is It Possible To "land Using Only The Knobs"? posted Fri Feb 5 2010 21:18:05 by MrSkyGuy
How Long Do It Take To Fuel An A380? posted Tue Feb 2 2010 17:00:50 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format