albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:23 pm

Hey just wanted to know that why was the 757 not as a great as selling as the new 737NGs??? I mean it seems that the new 737-900(ER) is trying to be the replacement for the 757 but the 757 was a great aircraft (to see and fly!) It suprised me that boeing didnt try and update this aricraft like they did with the 737. Was she too heavy or not upgradable?? I cant see why that production line has closed when the 737 is still open (and will be for a long time)
IMO I thinkg that the 757 is a greater aircraft and had some great performance as well (mainly due to her being overpowered). I mean you dont know what a take off is like till you have been launched into the back of your seat as the 757 climbed away!!! Also with the 757 now being used on long ETOP journeys, it seems odd how boeing didnt think of upgrading her to allow more sales! I know she is still bigger than the 737s but she was a wonderful aircraft and i am sad to see her not being produced anymore and now some of them being taken to the scrappers!!
Any comments would be great.
 
planesailing
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 4:57 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:43 pm

I believe it was because new orders had dried up to a trickle. However, since the closure of the line, airlines have found the aircraft as a niche operator across the ponds on thin routes.

In closing the 757 line, Boeing consolidated "its" resources into the 737 family, which is going from strength to strength in sales.
 
ZBA320
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:36 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:53 pm

I guess it could of got upgraded Avionics and a fully glass flight deck like the 777 or 737NG. Shorting the fuselage isn't economically viable and Boeing study this years ago.

The only real upgrade it got was in the form of the -300 series of which only around 50 were built. Boeing simply introduced too late in the market.

Perhaps if 757 was used earlier on Atlantic routes it might of soon a increase in sales promoting Boeing to reconsider closing production.  Sad

The 757 is still a major workhorse and I, despite me been an Airbus fan, always love to fly a 757. Where it's in 28in pitch or 50in, it's still one of the best birds that flies.  Smile
An Engineer made a bet that a 747 Gear wouldn't retract in a Hangar. He lost the bet.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:30 pm

Because airlines stopped ordering the type, so simple is it.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23713
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:41 pm

Quoting Albird87 (Thread starter):
Hey just wanted to know that why was the 757 not as a great as selling as the new 737NGs?

The 757's forte was long-range travel. Before the launch of the A320 family and Boeing's introduction of the 737NG family, the 757 was the most efficient transcontinental (2000-2500nm) performer. Now with the A320 and 737NG, the 757 really only shines in the mainland-Hawai'i and East Coast-trans-Atlantic markets. And that need is covered pretty well by existing frames, so new orders fell to the point Boeing would make far more money converting the space taken by the 757 line to a 737 line - which is what they did.
 
warreng24
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:22 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
The 757's forte was long-range travel. Before the launch of the A320 family and Boeing's introduction of the 737NG family, the 757 was the most efficient transcontinental (2000-2500nm) performer. Now with the A320 and 737NG, the 757 really only shines in the mainland-Hawai'i and East Coast-trans-Atlantic markets.

Exactly.

The only reason that a 757 would be preferable to a A320 or 737NG would be if you needed the Hot and High take off benefits of the 757 or you needed that extra MTOW for cargo or fuel.

For the typical transcontinental flight, the A321/A320/73G/738 is so much more fuel efficient.

Also keep in mind, that the 757 didn't benefit from the rise of the LCC's (like the A320 and 737NG did) mostly because it take a lot longer to load and unload. Have you ever noticed how long it takes you to get off a 753 if you're seated in the last row?  Smile
 
albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:47 pm

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 5):
Also keep in mind, that the 757 didn't benefit from the rise of the LCC's (like the A320 and 737NG did) mostly because it take a lot longer to load and unload. Have you ever noticed how long it takes you to get off a 753 if you're seated in the last row?

but LCC use both rear and fore doors!! so if ur at the back then ur out first!! Big grin . same could then be said for a 747 if ur at the back!
 
Ferret
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:40 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 5):

For the typical transcontinental flight, the A321/A320/73G/738 is so much more fuel efficient.

Is that really true? I thought that at least the A321 was not really that efficient even compared to the 20+ year old 752 on long hauls.
Murphy lives here.
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:34 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Before the launch of the A320 family and Boeing's introduction of the 737NG family, the 757 was the most efficient transcontinental (2000-2500nm) performer.

IIRC, that was still the case even after these other aircraft entered service.

There really was a business case for shutting down the 757 line. At the time it may have been the right decision. Long term, it may have been the wrong one and it is becoming apparent.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:39 am

I think that fundamentally Boeing missed the mark with the B757 from the outset. It was intended to be a B727 replacement but, at the request of early customers, grew to be something larger with too much range. If Boeing had paid more attention to the market at the time, they would have built a smaller 150 seater model and then grown into the larger market that the B752 served. Instead, once they realized their mistake, they had to quickly develop the B733 and muddled about for a few years with the 7J7 concept till they realized that the B733 was good enough and would be competitive enough with whatever Airbus did.

As for the B757, it eventually found a good size market, but really was never the huge success they had hoped for the B727's successor. Ending the line came because orders had dried up, there wasn't any real promise of a second wave of orders to warrant an update, and Boeing needed to consolidate the number of models they offered - with just three as the eventual target.
 
albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:58 am

Quoting Ferret (Reply 7):
Is that really true? I thought that at least the A321 was not really that efficient even compared to the 20+ year old 752 on long hauls.

I thought that the A321 couldnt do the same range/ performance as the 757 as its a stretched version of the A320 so there is a limited weight it can put on the frame before those single rear wheel bases would have to be strengthend considerably? as the 757 was built as a stand alone airframe (with similarities in the 767) which means that the 757 performs better than that of the A321?
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:01 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 9):
I think that fundamentally Boeing missed the mark with the B757 from the outset. It was intended to be a B727 replacement but, at the request of early customers, grew to be something larger with too much range.



Quoting Grantcv (Reply 9):
As for the B757, it eventually found a good size market, but really was never the huge success they had hoped for the B727's successor.

What world do you live in where 1,050 deliveries constitutes "missing the mark" or not being a success? Do you consider the 707 a success? More 757s were delivered than civil 707s.

[Edited 2006-12-06 18:02:16]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:03 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 9):

You pretty much hit it. I have kept reading some of my old aviation books, and they all have mentioned that the 757 was a slow seller. The 757 was so much more capable than the 727, that Airbus was able to swoop in and clean house with the A320. And then Boeing made the mistake of not updating the 737 till much later.

When the 757 capabilities started to be exploited more lately, the 787 was almost on its way or already well on its way.
 
Ferret
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:40 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:34 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 12):

I think you summed it up. The 757 sold well, but I think as you mention it was all about the timing. In the what could have been category: Had Boeing updated the 737 maybe 8-10 years sooner, I'd say the 757 would continue in production until the 787 EIS. But Boeing lost focus there for a few years and the 757 paid the price.

Some interesting side-by-sides:

..................737-800..............737-900ER..............757-200
.......................................... (2 aux fuel)
PAX 2cls.......162....................180 ......................200
Max Fuel.......6,875.................7,837.....................11,489
Cruise Spd....0.785 Mach..........0.78 Mach..............0.80 Mach
Max Rng.......3,060..................3,200.....................3,900
Max Cargo....1,555 cu ft .........1,585 cu ft..............1,670 cu ft

Source: Boeing.com

I think this underscores that they really are different aircraft. The 737-900ER is a 'close enough' filler until the 787 comes along.
Murphy lives here.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3208
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:39 am

I think its fair to say that a number of operators didn't make good use of the 757's talents. BA for one utilised much of its fleet on short haul shuttle services, even domestic. They did however require the seating capacity, and the manufacturers at the time could not offer any other narrowbody of similar capacity, Boeing had only the 737-200, and McD the MD80 series. Airbus had no narrowbody to offer at all.

As the 737 grew, and the A32 series arrived there were good economies to be made by replacing short haul 757's.

These have then been put to good use on Transatlantic routes and for freight conversion, but of course its only a limited market.

In the UK however the charter airlines do seem to get good utilisation out of their 757's flying as many passengers as possible as far as possible.

I've enjoyed my 757 flights, hope to have more and susupect that this plane will be with us for a while.
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:50 am

Maybe if updated engines had been available, sales wouldn't have tailed off?

A problem for the 757, is that no other aircraft (apart from the C17) uses engines of that size - by contrast variants of the smaller CFM56 have been used in the 737, 737NG, A320, A340, DC8-70, KC135...
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3208
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:00 am

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 15):
Maybe if updated engines had been available, sales wouldn't have tailed off?

A problem for the 757, is that no other aircraft (apart from the C17) uses engines of that size - by contrast variants of the smaller CFM56 have been used in the 737, 737NG, A320, A340, DC8-70, KC135...

I don't think its just the engines, which in all likelihood RR & P & W could have upgraded; most aircraft see a gradual change in engine mod standards during production, and often even a new design engine. There's the fundamental problem of bulk, just look at a 737 and a 757 side by side its like comparing agymnast to a shotputter. The 757 is vastly overengineered for shorthaul and can never compete.
 
ZBA320
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:36 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:04 am

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 15):
Maybe if updated engines had been available, sales wouldn't have tailed off?

The engines were the key to 757 success on longer routes because of it's Hot and High performance. The RR 757 were basically smaller version of 747 engines so there was some, but not a lot of communality between 757 and 747 in MX terms.

I don't think updated engines would of made a difference to sales IMHO.
An Engineer made a bet that a 747 Gear wouldn't retract in a Hangar. He lost the bet.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6489
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:13 am

Now we have to keep in mind that all 757s are not the same.

I have often wondered why so many a.netters have told about the 757 being overpowered and such. I never experienced that, but then I have only been on 757s from BA and Icelandair.

Lately I found the explanation:

Most 757s on the west side of the pond are equipped with the RB-211-535-E4 or -E4B which makes them good hot-and-high performers which at a modest extra cost came in handy on for instance North-South American routes.

Most European 757s have the much lower powered RB-211-535-C. Probably few European operators needed that hot-and-high performance, and also didn't need the extra range of the high powered birds. A 535-C powered 757 has somewhat lower weights, smaller fuel tanks and a typical range of only 3,000 nm (typical range on high powered versions being 3,900 nm).

That explains why European 757s are mostly considered nice 727 replacements, while in the US 757s are considered "rockets". It is simply true. While American 757s have rather exceptional take-off performance, then European 757s are just ordinary lame airliners.

European 757s are capacity and range wise almost head on competitors to heavy A321 versions. Also available power is not all that different, 2 x 37,000 lbs on the 757 vs. 2 x 33,000 on the 321.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
ChicagoFlyer
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:00 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:48 am

Quoting Ferret (Reply 7):

Is that really true? I thought that at least the A321 was not really that efficient even compared to the 20+ year old 752 on long hauls.

Of course it all depends on the market and the configuration of the aircraft. I would say that (taking the same cabin density) in terms of CASM on a US transcon route B757 is definitely more efficient than a A319, mostly (depending on the market) more efficient than A320, and approximately equal to or somewhat less efficient than A321.

However, airlines need to produce profits, not lower CASMs. And transcons are notoriously difficult to make money on, because the RASM is often not there. A 757 due to its size will almost certainly have a lower RASM than a smaller airplane (again, assuming the same cabin density). Reason is that 1) A bigger plane is more difficult to fill and 2) Once filled, the marginal seat will likely have sold for a lower price.

This is part of the reason we see p.s. with UA. A creative use of a 757 which deliberately increases costs but takes much higher average (and marginal!) revenue. And once again,the opportunity to have this option depends on the market.

Otherwise, I agree about Hawaiian and transatlantic flying as the best niche for 757s as they age. 757 fans shoud feel good though as the trend is clearly toward extending the longevity of the airctaft with winglets rather than replacement.
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:48 am

The 757 works great, but burns more fuel than the A321/B739ER.

The 757 is still the best plane in the world for some missions (and maybe will be for years to come). However, for those missions, the existing fleet of ~1,000 birds is totally sufficient. For example, NW will fly some 752s to Europe in 2007. Yet NW did not need to buy any, because they already have too many as it is (and some are parked IIRC).

For other missions, the 757 is inferior to the 739ER and A321. For example, flying 175 people 1,500 miles. The 757 is no longer the best bird for that mission.
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14881
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:33 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 9):
I think that fundamentally Boeing missed the mark with the B757 from the outset. It was intended to be a B727 replacement but, at the request of early customers, grew to be something larger with too much range. If Boeing had paid more attention to the market at the time, they would have built a smaller 150 seater model and then grown into the larger market that the B752 served.

I agree with your point but I will point out that I've read why this happened. The 757 was launched during a weak economic period in general and for the airlines in particular, and Boeing only had the choice between listening to the launch customers who wanted the larger airplane, or not launching it at all.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:36 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 11):
What world do you live in where 1,050 deliveries constitutes "missing the mark" or not being a success? Do you consider the 707 a success? More 757s were delivered than civil 707s.

Yes, the B757 was a success, but not the success it should have been. It sold at roughly half the rate that the B727 sold - yet in a period where the market for aircraft was much larger. The older yet updated B737 become the hot seller. That wasn't what was originally anticipated.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):
I agree with your point but I will point out that I've read why this happened. The 757 was launched during a weak economic period in general and for the airlines in particular, and Boeing only had the choice between listening to the launch customers who wanted the larger airplane, or not launching it at all.

The B757 was concieved just before deregulation in the US. Boeing (and Eastern Airlines) were still thinking in terms of pre-deregulation models and percieved a need for a larger B727-300 to complement the B727-200. This evolved into the B757-200 with a smaller B757-100 to replace the B727-200. But by the time the design was finalized the B757 was closely related to the B767 and the -100 model was no longer feasible, leaving a serious hole in Boeing's lineup - to be filled by the B733 and then the B734.
 
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1036
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:45 am

The 757 was dropped for a very simple reason. The 737 was beginning to reach the size and passenger capacity of the of the 757-200. Boeing did not want two of their aircraft competing against each other. It also eliminated one production line, allowing Boeing to focus on the 787. The 757-300 is to long and narrow and is a nightmare for enplaning and deplaning passengers. Economics simply made the 757 expendable.
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:11 am

Quoting Nwarooster (Reply 23):
The 757-300 is to long and narrow and is a nightmare for enplaning and deplaning passengers.

Can I ask if you have personally experienced problems with 753 boarding or deplaning......either as a pax or working a flight either as ground agent or as an F/A? The reason I ask is that, contrary to popular belief, there are very few problems with getting pax on and off the 753 - most of my experience has been flying the 753 on CO.......the only issue is the FLL flight where there are 120 wheel chair pax, but that is another story.

When LH ""borrowed"" a Condor 753 for a couple of months and operated the 753 on German domestic routes (they were evaluating the 753 as a possible A300 replacment).....they concluded that enplaning/deplaning pax on a 753 was not an issue and really did not take longer than widebodies with similiar capacities. LH never went with the 753 for other reasons.

The 753 is one of my favorites.......and has amazing operating costs. Its sad that the 753 was ""the wrong airplae at the wrong time"", it really is a great but undiscovered airliner that could have been a profit machine for many US airlines on high demand/low yeild domestic services.
 
warren747sp
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:21 am

Why did Boeing destroyed all the tooling and molds for the 757.? Maybe they could have sold it to China or were they afraid they will learn the know how of plane building 101?
747SP
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:37 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 25):
Why did Boeing destroyed all the tooling and molds for the 757.?

Because production of the type came to an end, which is because airlines were no longer placing orders for the type.......trust me, Boeing thought long and hard before bringing the 757 program to an end. The tooling was destroyed because Boeing had no intent to re-start production.....the program was over. Some here at a.net dont seem to understand that idea and somehow think that the 757 is coming back, but the men and women at Boeing understood what they were doing. The 707, 727, 737Classic and 757 programs have come to an end and they are not coming back.

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 25):
Maybe they could have sold it to China

I am not sure why China would want the tooling......airlines were not interested in ordering new 757s.
 
Ward86IND
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:13 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:36 pm

Quoting Albird87 (Reply 6):
Have you ever noticed how long it takes you to get off a 753 if you're seated in the last row?

Haha tell me about it. I was in row 46 on a full NW flight last summer. The only cool part about being back there is how freakin loud the roar of the engines are!
Live your dream.
 
Boston92
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:58 pm

In terms of cars, lets say that the 757 is the F-150, and the 767 is the F-250. The 787 is the the all new remodeled, 2009 F-250 Super Duty V8 Diesel.
The 777 and 747 can be the F-350. If you were a client, which would you choose, the 1998 outdated F-150 (757), or this state of the art 2009 F-250 Super Duty V8 Diesel.

It was perfect time to stop 757 production, but they will still be around for a long while to come.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:11 pm

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 18):
Most 757s on the west side of the pond are equipped with the RB-211-535-E4 or -E4B which makes them good hot-and-high performers which at a modest extra cost came in handy on for instance North-South American routes.

Or, handy in Denver, Salt Lake, and Phoenix, where United, Delta, and America West operated dozens of 757s at their respective hot and/or high hubs.

-Rampart
 
CO767
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:06 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:50 pm

Ask Continental what they think. You know they would love some 757ERs for the Euro expansion. And I'm sure a couple more 753s couldn't hurt (except maybe from a pax standpoint).

But the closing of the 757 line is also evident with their 739ER purchases. I bet we see the 739s fly trans-atlantic (in 1-2 decades of course when the 757 is too old and the 739 has a farther range and load capacity. Think about flying a 737 trans-atlatic, yikes.
 
sparkingwave
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 1:01 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:01 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 26):
Some here at a.net dont seem to understand that idea and somehow think that the 757 is coming back, but the men and women at Boeing understood what they were doing.

On a.net, the 757 is like Elvis. People still believe that there will be a second coming.  Smile
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
 
albird87
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:15 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:22 pm

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 28):
In terms of cars, lets say that the 757 is the F-150, and the 767 is the F-250. The 787 is the the all new remodeled, 2009 F-250 Super Duty V8 Diesel.

Um yeah...... but ford brings out a new model every year of the F-150 so how does that compare??? Also thinking about that... is there anyway for a manufacturer to update there models as there going through production?? i know it cant be a big change but take example of the 737NGs... they have had the "eyebrow" windows taken off them to save weight in later models.. Couldnt they do this to all there models?? lets say just by changing a couple of parts making them lighter and more fuel efficient. Then you might find a couple more orders...
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3385
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:45 pm

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 18):
Most European 757s have the much lower powered RB-211-535-C

About the only B757s delivered in Europe with RB211-535C were the BA fleet. BA operated this fleet until they sold the whole lot to DHL where they now operate as freighters. All the other B757 have RB211-535E engines, including BAs remaining 13 B757 (except for a few PW2000, Royal Air Maroc, Ethiopian, and Finnair).
The 535C worked well for BA and was interchangeable on all its intra-European routes. The main drawback was its fuel consumption which was about 10% more than the C engine. (and it was non-ETOPS.
 
User avatar
Buyantukhaa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 5:33 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:29 pm

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 33):
The 535C worked well for BA and was interchangeable on all its intra-European routes. The main drawback was its fuel consumption which was about 10% more than the C engine. (and it was non-ETOPS.

Eh? The C engine used more than the E engine, or the other way around?
I scratch my head, therefore I am.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3385
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:54 pm

Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 34):
Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 33):
The 535C worked well for BA and was interchangeable on all its intra-European routes. The main drawback was its fuel consumption which was about 10% more than the C engine. (and it was non-ETOPS.

Eh? The C engine used more than the E engine, or the other way around?

Soory mis typing. The C used 10% more than the E.
 
jamesjimlb
Posts: 940
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:48 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:03 pm

i wish boeing would go ahead and start making more!imagine the profit, airlines like American and continental pretty much depend on those planes.!
but i believe the 787 Dreamliner came on to this planet for 3 reasons, to fly, to replace the 757, to replace the 767. it will be sad when you stop seeing 757s.

,James
The sky is no longer the limit, but the mere minimum
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:14 pm

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 9):
As for the B757, it eventually found a good size market, but really was never the huge success they had hoped for the B727's successor. Ending the line came because orders had dried up, there wasn't any real promise of a second wave of orders to warrant an update, and Boeing needed to consolidate the number of models they offered - with just three as the eventual target.

Boeing sold over 1,000 757s. That's hardly a bad news story. The 727 sold over 1,800 examples and sales like that are pretty rare. The 737 has been one of the most wonderful success stories you could ask for ... and the numbers clearly prove that.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
StevenG
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:19 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:42 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):
I agree with your point but I will point out that I've read why this happened. The 757 was launched during a weak economic period in general and for the airlines in particular, and Boeing only had the choice between listening to the launch customers who wanted the larger airplane, or not launching it at all.

As far as I know that is same reason why the 767 was a slow seller in the early eighties. Only in the second half of the eighties sales for both types started to increase.
In the same period another project, the MDF100, developed by Fokker and McDonnell Douglas, didn't make it due to the downturn in the economy then. Although I am not sure if the 757 and MDF100 were meant to be designed for the same market.
And probably the introduction of the A310 in that same era has had some effect. But that doesn't make the 757 to a failure in my opinion.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:26 am

Quoting CO767 (Reply 30):
Ask Continental what they think. You know they would love some 757ERs for the Euro expansion. And I'm sure a couple more 753s couldn't hurt (except maybe from a pax standpoint).

But the closing of the 757 line is also evident with their 739ER purchases. I bet we see the 739s fly trans-atlantic (in 1-2 decades of course when the 757 is too old and the 739 has a farther range and load capacity. Think about flying a 737 trans-atlatic, yikes.

1. CO neither wanted not needed additional 752s - trust me, Boeng asked CO (and every other major Boeing operator) before they closed down the line. CO is using the 752s on thin transatlantic routes not because the 757 is the ideal transatlantic airliner (its not), CO is using the 752s for thin transatlantic routes because it has the airplanes and its a way to make money with the type. For Euro and international expansion, CO wants more 777s and is looking forward to the 787, it does not want or need more 752s.

2. CO itself cancelled orders for six of the fifteen 753s that they ordered...CO took six 738s instead of the originally ordered 753s. Later on, CO picked up 8 753s from ATA (via Boeing) in a very sharp leasing deal......its was one of those cases where Boeing made CO an offer that they simply could not refuse. Its very unlikely that CO would have ordered more 753s if the line was still up and running.

3. CO will not be using the 739ER accross the Atlantic.....the 739ER will be fitted with a domestic F class interior and be used on long US domestic routes (think EWR-West Coast transcons) and some routes to the caribbean and latin america, allowing 752s to pick up some additional European services. The 739ER has about the same range as the 738, and that is simply not adequate for most transatlantic segments.....especially when real world issues such as high winds, ATC delays, fuel for diversions, and heavy loads are taken into account. The 752s will continue to fly transatlantic (all 752s are now fitted with BF interiors and winglets) and some US domestic and the 739/739ER fleet will take over some of the domestic flying once handled by the 752.

4. CO's 752s and 757-200s, not 757-200ERs.....as far as I know, there is no such thing as a 752ER although the degination is used from time to time.
 
trintocan
Posts: 2728
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:42 am

I think that the end of the 757 line does not in itself reflect badly on the design - it did see over 1000 sales which is considerable in any terms for a modern jetliner. It simply demonstrates that a design has a natural lifespan insofar as airlines want to buy the type and the plane offers the best performance characteristics. The 757 design is over a quarter of a century old. While it may be argued that it was too much aeroplane as a pure 727 replacement, the additional range and capacity enabled many airlines to expand their services in the late 1980s and early 1990s, which is when the majority of the frames were sold. Perhaps the 757 ended up being available at the time when the philosophy of airlines and builders changed from merely going for "bigger" each time a design or fleet was updated, to one of going for "better" directly-sized equivalents. Even so, the 757 eventually created its own niche and that has ensured its ongoing success.

Now, though, the 737 family has grown to supersede the 757 and with the 787 coming in from the other side of the spectrum, orders for the 757 faded away. It should not be considered altogether sad - it is just the passing of times. The 727, DC-9, 707, 737 Classics, TriStars and MD80s have all gone - time moves on.

TrinToCan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
jamesjimlb
Posts: 940
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:48 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:41 am

the 757 is probably the best aircraft there is, from short commutes to translantic flights the 757 does it all it will be a shame when there gone.
i do know airlines will still operate them in 20 years just like delta operates a 747-200 still and a 737 200 two old aircraft. i will miss the 757 very much.  no 
The sky is no longer the limit, but the mere minimum
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:17 pm

It's only dead until a replacement version comes along in the form of the 737RS. The 757 is the perfect US transcon bird with airfield performance per pound the A320 and 737 can only dream about. There are a ton out there with enough legs on them to get to the 737RS program, at which time they will need to be replaced, and odds are based on what Boeing says with regard to the RS seating 90 to 220, you'll see something that looks a lot like the 737 and a lot like the 757 in a two aircraft line. There are a lot of high density US routes between hubs and major cities that demand it now but maybe don't demand a 787-3, and will continue over time to demand such an aircraft as no one seems all that intrested in building runways. It's not a niche aircraft, its a much needed aircraft, just not in the same level numbers of the 130 to 150 seat variety. That wasn't the intent of the 757. The intent was a narrowbody where a widebody would otherwise be required.

A Failure? Lay off the dope.
 
tcfc424
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:56 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:57 pm

My personal opinion is that because of the expansion of the 737NG line to accomodate nearly 200 pax and the introduction of the 787, Boeing decided to create a demand for a 75-type airliner. We all know that the 787 is selling well and that (at least in North America) the 75 is a hot item. I love the aircraft and would fly on it exclusively if I could. However, with various carriers, it is not the most fficient aircraft...no flaming...what I mean is that the void can be filled by aircraft groups that are larger (i.e. 737NG). Only at the end of the product lifecycle was it discovered that the 75 made a great across the pond jet...and that discovery was too late to save the line.

I disagree with those that say the 75 is not economical transcon...if that were the case, then AA would not be starting AUS-SJC with 753's...It fills a void in that 180-300 range...and because of that airlines are utilizing the aircraft better.

Ultimately I see a few things leading to the demise of the great 75. First, Boeing did not market it correctly. Second, airlines didn't utilize it correctly. And finally, I think that Boeing was looking beyond the line too soon. They were looking at the 787 and the 739 and (in this case) missing the mark on the 75.

The 75 is a great aircraft and one that I hope to see reincarnated with the developments Boeing has made with the 787. The 737NG series is great...it affords flexibility and commonality. The 787 is wonderful...it affords efficiency and capacity. Eventually, I would like to see Boeing revamp it's product line to include the 717, 737, 747, 757, and 767 with 787 technologies. These lines afford flexibility within a fleet, and if done correctly, efficiency and commonality. (think: 757/767 certs) If they could pull that off...there would be one major manufacturer of aircraft.

Mike
 
CO767
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:06 pm

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:56 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 39):
For Euro and international expansion, CO wants more 777s and is looking forward to the 787, it does not want or need more 752s.

Well who doesent want to fly a 777 trans-atlantic. However, 777s are just not feasable from EWR to cities like Edinburg, Glasgow, Oslo, and Stockholm.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 39):
CO will not be using the 739ER accross the Atlantic

I think thats a given and it was a joke. Like I said, in 1-2 decades.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 39):
CO's 752s and 757-200s, not 757-200ERs.....as far as I know, there is no such thing as a 752ER

Also a given. That's why I said, "CO would LIKE to have ERs."

PS - I was in Amsterdam 3 weeks ago, enjoyed your country!
 
N766UA
Posts: 7849
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:06 pm

Because it's 30 year old technology, that's why.
This Website Censors Me
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:09 pm

old airliners never die...


they just get their seats ripped out, receive engine modifications, and fly cargo for infinity
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
User avatar
Buyantukhaa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 5:33 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting StevenG (Reply 38):
In the same period another project, the MDF100, developed by Fokker and McDonnell Douglas, didn't make it due to the downturn in the economy then. Although I am not sure if the 757 and MDF100 were meant to be designed for the same market.

This is the only pic I could find:

Google doesn't come up with much...
I scratch my head, therefore I am.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23713
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Why Did The 757 Die?

Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:48 pm

Looks like the original 757 227/7N7 proposal:

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00007984.jpg
Photo courtesy of Modified Airliner Photos. Copyright Jennings Heilig.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos