777200
Topic Author
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 1999 10:26 pm

Boeing 757-200X

Thu Sep 02, 1999 8:15 pm


Boeing is studying a new longer range 757-200X, and the launche costumer maybe will be Continental Airlines.

I think with this project means that Boeing 757-300 wasn't a commercial success.
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Boeing 757-200X

Thu Sep 02, 1999 10:47 pm

The 757-200X is not meant to take the place of the 757-300. If what I know of the project is correct, the 757-200X is a 757-200 that has been modernized and may be called the 757-400 or 757-100. It is basically a 757-200NG with new avionics and possible cockpit commonality with the 767-400ER, 777-200 and of course 757-200/300.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Guest

RE: Boeing 757-400

Fri Sep 03, 1999 5:23 am

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alright Boeing!
What they need is an aircraft similar in size and PRICE to the -200. 80 million is just a little expensive for an aircraft, and although it's economical, it's pricey! People will buy a 767 instead for cheaper than a 757-300. But, if Boeing makes a 757-400 variant, they could implement the auxilary fuel tanks standard on the -300, and airlines will gobble them up for their long-range routes. And efficency, WOW! The 757 tops that category. It has the best fuel burn of any airliner. They should keep the PW and RR standard engines, they are big in comparison to the body and give it the "powerful aircraft" look.  
The 757 is very powerful and is a great workhorse in the industry. I am gald Boeing finally realized it's potential. They should give it a cockpit similar to the 777's.
I love the Boeing 757 and always will!

DL 604
 
Guest

RE: CX747

Fri Sep 03, 1999 5:26 am

The new 757 couldn't be called the 757-100, as that version was made, but no one bought it. It's the "wierd" looking 757 that looked more similar to a 727, until Boeing reshaped it and called it the -200. Therefore, it could only be 757-200NG or 757-400.  

DL 604
 
Guest

I Don't Agree

Fri Sep 03, 1999 6:20 am

No offense people but as much as I like the B757, it is an aircraft for 4hrs or less routes....the new project will give the aircraft an additional 200-250 nm so that Continental can fly it comfortably on thin routes over the Atlantic...Come on! if you fly BusinessFirst, it is great (it is almost like flying on the top floor of a 747) you have nice environment, enough toilets and ample legroom, but if you are a coach passenger, forget it! One aisle for a 6+ hrs flight, narrow-body interior....it is too uncomfortable. Other than CO, only some charter airlines might buy it, but even they are more incline to buy the A330/B767 nowadays...

With 757 flying over the atlantic, we will be back to 707 and DC-8 days, with more cramped interiors!!!!
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: I Don't Agree

Fri Sep 03, 1999 7:59 am

I don't think that anyone said they would operate it in large numbers over the Atlantic. I think that they will be ordered to replace 727-200s that are still around along with early build 757-200s themselves. This will also combat the A321-200IGW if it is built.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
777200
Topic Author
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 1999 10:26 pm

RE: GoA340

Fri Sep 03, 1999 6:11 pm

I agree.
Is very rough fly a transantlatic route with 8 hours in a single-aisle plane. I like Boeing but this is not the way to make the diference.

Regards.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

What Is Wrong With A Single Aisle?

Fri Sep 03, 1999 6:16 pm

What is wrong with a single aisle plane?! I really don't understand! Where the hell are all you twin-aisle fans walking to? You're on a plane! Go and sit down and behave!
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Guest

Right On Cedarjet!

Sat Sep 04, 1999 6:40 am

Ther you go, my friend! The 757-400 has alot more potential than you all think! Look at how successful the old -200 is, if Boeing gives a plane like that newer aviaonics and gives it better range, plus adds a cockpit like the 777's, it will sell like hotcakes. That is one of the best ideas Boeing has had in a while. So what if we go back to DC-8 and 707 days? Hell, those were the best aircraft you could fly on! Whether the aircraft is a wide body of narrow body, it makes no difference, it's still a plane, and it still flies. Plus, the added fuel will add MUCH more range that 250-nm, more like 1,000 or so.
Guys, you're looking at the future of aviation. The 757-200X, if launched, would still be around in 2040. Production would end in about 2020. This aircraft will be something great, just wait and see.  

DL 604
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4934
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: I Don't Agree

Sun Sep 05, 1999 1:49 am

Well, I just flew on a 757-200 on a near 3 hr flight. I cant imagine flying in there for 5 hrs or more. With max passengers like we had, it was cramped. I agree, 4 hrs trip max for a 200. It s an efficient airliner and powerful and great for that type of service. Lets be realistic. You need more room for a longer flight.
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, aflyingkiwi, alphonze, An767, B777LRF, Baidu [Spider], ChristopherS, conaly, David_itl, ERJ135, Glidesloper, Google Adsense [Bot], JAMES1, Mcgarvey216, PhilDur, Prost, rohel777, sassiciai, withak, Wolfman, Yirina77 and 242 guests