EA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 1285
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:54 pm

I have been researching the 757-300 a bit, but was just wondering how the 753s takeoff performance was? More in line with the average airliner  wink  or still impressive. Going on thrust numbers alone tells me that the 753 with RB211-535E4Bs, or PW2043 if there were any, would still have excellent hot and high capabilities. But thrust isn't the only factor in takeoff performance. Have any of you flown both COs and NWs 753s, or any of the 753s in Europe??

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Compolo



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Starnes

We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
 
KPDX
Posts: 2374
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:04 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:35 pm

The I've flown both CO and NW 753's and they still climb like a bat out of hell, even fully loaded.  Wink

In fact, I've seen some 753s fully loaded climb steeper than 752s.
View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4326
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:30 am

While I haven't flown any 757-300s of Condor, I once watched a 753 take off from CGN. It took off earlier than the A320s and 737s before it, and had an impressive climb performance. However, I must note that I do not know the destination of that 757. It is possible that it flew to Fra, and in that case it would have been extremely light.

But I guess the 753 retained the good climb performance.
 
goboeing
Posts: 2433
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:04 am

Here's what it is for NWA.

The engine is rated for a higher takeoff thrust for the 757-300 because it needs it.

The climb thrust, in order to keep some kind of warrantee they have for the engine maintenance, is the same as it is on the -200. So with the additional weight in payload but with no additional climb thrust to compensate, the 757-300 is a bit of a dog in the climb.
 
EA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 1285
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:27 pm

Thanks for the comments guys  thumbsup 

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 3):
Here's what it is for NWA.

The engine is rated for a higher takeoff thrust for the 757-300 because it needs it.

The climb thrust, in order to keep some kind of warrantee they have for the engine maintenance, is the same as it is on the -200. So with the additional weight in payload but with no additional climb thrust to compensate, the 757-300 is a bit of a dog in the climb.

I always wondered why NW opted for the PW2040 instead of the 2043. Their 753s are rated at 272K MTOW, and are etops rated, so why not go for the extra oomph to get you off the ground and buy you more range? Does NW operate their 753s to Hawaii?? And does the 753 have the range to do TATL?
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5054
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:56 pm

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 4):
why not go for the extra oomph to get you off the ground and buy you more range?

The extra thrust doesn't get you more range. It gets you shorter takeoff rolls and better climb, which only gets you more range (or payload) if you are runway length or climb performance restricted. I don't think NW operates 753s anywhere where those conditions apply. So why bother spending the extra money?

The 757-300 with any engine has a thrust/weight ratio that is quite good. It's not a rocket like the 752, but it does just fine -- it's not a "dog" compared to any plane but a 752 (or 73G).

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 4):
And does the 753 have the range to do TATL?


Not for nonstop scheduled service between most destinations. ATA used to use them for charters, but they'd have to stop westbound.

The 753 only has a slightly higher MTOW than the TATL 752 -- it's a pretty straightforward range-for-capacity swap.

[Edited 2008-07-31 10:00:08]
 
Clipper136
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:07 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:20 pm



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 5):
The 757-300 with any engine has a thrust/weight ratio that is quite good. It's not a rocket like the 752, but it does just fine

I don't have exact climb numbers, but I have see quite a few 753's (usually CO) not being able to make a 2,400' crossing restriction 6 miles North of MCO while taking off on a 12,000' runway. Of course the aircraft was full of passengers, but only traveling approx 800 nm to EWR. (I'm not sure of the density alt at the time or if it was a derated take off, I'll have to note it next time)

By looking at the aircraft's AOA on take off, it may seem like a rocket, but its actually rate of climb may be something less impressive.
You can't beat the Experience.
 
User avatar
TZTriStar500
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

RE: Takeoff Performance Of 757-300

Sat Aug 02, 2008 2:42 am



Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter):
Going on thrust numbers alone tells me that the 753 with RB211-535E4Bs, or PW2043 if there were any, would still have excellent hot and high capabilities.

Actually TZ's exclusively had the RB211-535E4C which was a specially uprated engine to allow for full gross Ops out of Midway.

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 3):
The climb thrust, in order to keep some kind of warrantee they have for the engine maintenance, is the same as it is on the -200. So with the additional weight in payload but with no additional climb thrust to compensate, the 757-300 is a bit of a dog in the climb.

After the bulk of TZ MDW Ops were ended and the 753s no longer operated out of there, I believe the 753 engines where de-rated to save on the power-by-the-hour engine mx contracts.

There were discussions last summer about possibly operating them on LAS-HNL, but they did not have the necessary payload/range during the hot operations. Also, winglets were discussed with APB at improving this and its TATL capabilities.
35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1989worstyear, Chese and 21 guests

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