Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jules48
Topic Author
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 4:25 pm

Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 8:15 am

Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes.Noticed UA71 Hamburg to Newark this morning.
Surely they have enough 767s or even 739Max if they enough range.
Last edited by SQ22 on Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Title updated
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 8:35 am

Because anything bigger won't fill the plane, and most smaller stuff doesn't have the range; it's why United wants Boeing to build this 797; to replace its 757/767 fleet, although it will increase the volume on some routes as it'll most likely be bigger than the 757 (unless UA goes for the a321LR).

738 MAX (not 739).... could maybe do EWR-DUB? EWR-UK?
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2352
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:56 am

What do you mean, “surely they have enough 767s”?

Their 767s are already flying whatever routes they can while maintaining enough slack to send the planes through Polaris conversion and do the necessary maintenance to keep reliability at an acceptable level.


And don’t call me Shirley.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14147
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:08 am

UA at any given time has both 777-200ERs and 767-300s out of service for Polaris cabin updates. This has caused shortage in the 777-200ER fleet, which is why there are the A models flying EWR-MAD, BCN etc.., and it has also no doubt caused shortages with the 767-300 fleets which might answer the OP's question. With the addition of 78Js starting at the end of this year I think next Summer will be different.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2075
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:13 am

UA 71 isn't HAM-EWR, it is AMS-EWR and it is serviced with a 767-400ER.

The 757 is used on those TATL flights that feature them because anything larger is too much plane. Without the 757, those routes would likely not exist or have their frequency reduced.
 
axiom
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:43 am

Why wouldn't they be flying on TA routes? As Cointrin says, they're the right size for the right mission.

A random sample of UA 752 flights today, showing a good mix of routings including TA but also Hawaii/Florida/South America...
EWR-DEN
EWR-GLA
EWR-HAM
EWR-LAX
EWR-LIM
EWR-MAN
EWR-MCO
EWR-TPA

ORD-EDI
ORD-SFO

IAD-LHR

SFO-BOS
SFO-EWR

DEN-OGG
DEN-LIH
DEN-KOA
 
dcaviation
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:26 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:49 am

CarlosSi wrote:
738 MAX (not 739).... could maybe do EWR-DUB? EWR-UK?


What are you talking about??? United has only 737-9MAX - OP is correct
 
Jomar777
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 12:02 pm

jules48 wrote:
Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes.Noticed UA71 Hamburg to Newark this morning.
Surely they have enough 767s or even 739Max if they enough range.


This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.

The B767 and its replacement, the B787, is too much of an upgauge on several routes.

The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

That's why I always said that the B797 would be a single aisle direct replacement for the B757 (albeit with some different specifications) rather than, let's say, a B737-11 or a B787-7.

Also, whatver others say, United is certianly the US Airline on pole to be the launch customer (or together with any other non-US Airline).

Delta will not get a whiff of it (may be able to order after) and American might get a shout. JetBlue is out of the question (sole Airbus operator).These Airlines will miss out on a big deal here.
 
Andy33
Posts: 2567
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 12:48 pm

Really, by the time Boeing actually start quantity production of any new "797" model, just about every passenger airline in the world apart from in the USA and possibly Iceland that ever had 757s will already have replaced them.
At the moment the big three US passenger airlines have around 240 757s between them, and I doubt if all of these will still be around by the time a 797 appears. This makes getting Boeing's board to approve a business case for a brand new plane specifically targeting the 757 replacement market problematic. Now if we were talking about 767s it would be very different and Boeing may well be looking more in that direction. There only ever were just over 1000 757s, many of these are now freighter conversions or scrapped.

As far as United is concerned, it has already been pointed out that they are currently using 757s as substitutes because 767s and 777s are going through Polaris refits. Once all the refits are done, we can expect fewer longer-range 757 flights, and maybe fewer 757s.
Last edited by Andy33 on Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:01 pm

Surely they have enough 767s


Actually, no they don't. They're currently taking several of Hawaiian's 767s as they come off of lease. Also, United recently asked Boeing about the possibility of acquiring some new-build 767s in search of some intermediate lift. Although this didn't pan out, it underscores how badly United needs some middle of the market, however defined, planes.

I agree with Jomar777. United will likely be the North American launch customer for the 797. The fact that United didn't order the A321 at Farnborough is suggestive that they're satisfied with Boeing's progress on the 797/MOM and are willing to wait, barring an amazing sweetheart deal from Airbus. It isn't proof, of course, but again suggestive. Your mileage may vary.
 
User avatar
GCT64
Posts: 1845
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:02 pm

It will be interesting to see which direction the different airlines go when deciding what equipment to serve EDI, GLA, DUB, SNN etc. with.
Out of EDI today: UA sent 757s to IAD, to EWR and to ORD, DL sent a 757 to JFK and AA would have also sent a 757 to JFK (if it hadn't been canx).
Some of these could be replaced by 737MAXs or A320/321NEOs, others might be replaced with widebodies. It will be interesting to look back in, say, 2022 and see how that Summer season differs from this one.
Flown in: A20N,A21N,A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A359,A388,BA11,BU31,(..56 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:10 pm

If anything bigger is too much airplane (pax numbers/demand) then the A321 LR is going to be near on perfect for them.It will carry 206 pax in two class 4knm,indeed one Farnbrough article now states 4,100 nm.Thats being introduced this year.It appears (from press) that 2 years on the XLR will do 4.4/4.5 knm depending on which article you read.
Different story for replacing the 767 of course.Thats where the 797 is being pitched.
 
estorilm
Posts: 762
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:13 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

The 97t MTOW A321LR easily has the range, how could you say this? United's 757-200 TATL config is 169 seats, and the 321LR was configured for 4kmi at over 200 seats higher density. A similar config would yield nearly the same seating config and range, and wouldn't max out cargo space with the ACT's in there.

Oh yeah and all of this while offering 25%+ cheaper operating costs in an industry where 1% matters. :?

It really seems like a good plane for them, but as the OP implies - they'll have to pull the trigger on something fairly soon.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:40 pm

jules48 wrote:
Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes.Noticed UA71 Hamburg to Newark this morning.
Surely they have enough 767s or even 739Max if they enough range.


They are right sized for what they do. They are right sized and right ranged. They are used to fly from EWR to secondary European markets.
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:49 pm

estorilm wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

The 97t MTOW A321LR easily has the range, how could you say this? United's 757-200 TATL config is 169 seats, and the 321LR was configured for 4kmi at over 200 seats higher density. A similar config would yield nearly the same seating config and range, and wouldn't max out cargo space with the ACT's in there.

Oh yeah and all of this while offering 25%+ cheaper operating costs in an industry where 1% matters. :?

It really seems like a good plane for them, but as the OP implies - they'll have to pull the trigger on something fairly soon.


You are absolutely correct regarding the specifications, but I highly do not think United will order many Airbuses.... given their relationship with Boeing and want for the 797. It does not seem like they talk about the A321 a lot, which probably represents the fact that they're skewed toward Boeing models.
To me, it will always be:
- Bombardier CSeries
- Airbus A321neoLR and A321neoXLR
- EMBRACER ERJ-170, ERJ-175, ERJ-190, and ERJ-195
- MITSUBUSHI MRJ

Anti narrowbody-long range-twinjet gang. Long live the A380 and 747!
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14014
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:43 pm

It can see United order 50 A321LR's, regardless of a yet to be specified " New Boeing product (?) "

Image

They can't wait anymore. Airbus & leasing companies are probably around the table as we speak.

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1384663
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
drdisque
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:57 pm

the highest priority 757's to replace are the remaining 28F pmUA 757's exclusively used on domestic (only scheduled on EWR-LAX/SFO and BOS-SFO). I can see UA putting some of the MAX10's they already have on order into a configuration like this when they have a solid fleet of them. I'm guessing there's significant revenue downside when they operate one of the 16F pmCO TATL 752's on those routes.
 
txtad
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 7:25 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:03 pm

Another point that makes 757s difficult to replace on some routes is that they also have a very high thrust-to-weight ratio. Then can handle density-altitudes that have 73s and 32xs leaving off passengers or fuel.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2575
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:08 pm

It's because it pleases the many A.net's weirdos. That's why 757s are flying across the Atlantic.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4268
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:18 pm

I’m am very curious about what Business Class seat they would use on whatever happens. Are the smallest variant of the Polaris seat suitable for a single aisle? Or would there be a need for another variation?
I’m one of the oddballs that actually like the 757 across the pond.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
Jomar777
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:31 pm

estorilm wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

The 97t MTOW A321LR easily has the range, how could you say this? United's 757-200 TATL config is 169 seats, and the 321LR was configured for 4kmi at over 200 seats higher density. A similar config would yield nearly the same seating config and range, and wouldn't max out cargo space with the ACT's in there.

Oh yeah and all of this while offering 25%+ cheaper operating costs in an industry where 1% matters. :?

It really seems like a good plane for them, but as the OP implies - they'll have to pull the trigger on something fairly soon.


So tell me - why it has not been used for this market niche? Why does UA and others still use the B757? The A321 never did kill the B757 - Boeing did when decided not to continue with the program.

The A321 does not have the range and only a XLR version will be able to do the job.
 
Jomar777
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:39 pm

oldannyboy wrote:
It's because it pleases the many A.net's weirdos. That's why 757s are flying across the Atlantic.


The so called A.net weirdos do not own airlines so your point is flawed.

If A.net bloggers, me and you included, really could sway the Airlines:

1) BBD would have kept the C-Series Program and shifted at least 500 of them (delivering them 2 years earlier than now...);
2) Concorde would still be flying;
3) B747 would still be selling loads;
4) PANAM would still be flying;
5) The Boeing Stratocruiser would still be around (this last one is silly... i know... just me being me... I wish I could have flown on one...)
 
Jomar777
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:46 pm

keesje wrote:
It can see United order 50 A321LR's, regardless of a yet to be specified " New Boeing product (?) "

Image

They can't wait anymore. Airbus & leasing companies are probably around the table as we speak.

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1384663


Without a ULR/XLR, the A321 has no chance unless bags and/or passengers are left behind. Otherwise, United and other current B757 operators would have already replaced their fleets since there's nothing around at present apart for the A321. Yet, it did not happen.

United, specifically, was a Boeing Customer and is much more now. Only has the A320 family aircrafts which gradually is replacing with B737s. Additionally, there's a big chance that their A350 order will go to the bin (see several posts on the subject) in exchange to B787s which are already been ordered.

I feel Airbus is running discretly against the clock towards finding a suitable competitor for the B797 (whatever that one will be). They did miss a golden opportunity to take on the market either by releasing an A322 or a A321 ULR/XLR much earlier to plug the gap in the market.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:16 pm

dcaviation wrote:
CarlosSi wrote:
738 MAX (not 739).... could maybe do EWR-DUB? EWR-UK?


What are you talking about??? United has only 737-9MAX - OP is correct


I meant to say that a hypothetical 738 max with UA could do some TATL runs like Norwegian, but probably not the -9. I’m aware they only have -9s, I understand the confusion.
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1990
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:35 pm

Because there isn't enough demand to fill a 767?
A350/CSeries = bae
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:36 pm

keesje wrote:
It can see United order 50 A321LR's, regardless of a yet to be specified " New Boeing product (?) "

Image

They can't wait anymore. Airbus & leasing companies are probably around the table as we speak.

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1384663

Even if UA opts for the A321LR to replace the 757s I doubt they would order 50 of them. That is a bit much. 737-10s (of which UA has quite a few in order) and regular A321s can easily cover domestic 757 routes.

Also still leaves UA in a bind as to how to replace the 767s.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15281
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:37 pm

One problem with the UA TATL 757's is during the winter when stronger headwinds westbound frequently means a fuel stop. During most of the rest of the year, this is unlikely a problem (unless WX issues on the USA side) would the new proposed A321LR or Boeing matters be able to overcome that ?
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 3525
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:37 pm

For OP's question - b/c CO then UA find the 757 perfect for going to all these secondary Europe destinations out of EWR? Even a 763 is too large. It's one of those 757 niche that UA (and DL to certain extent) are finding hard to replace anyway (Hence the whole Boeing MoM proposal).

Jomar777 wrote:
oldannyboy wrote:
It's because it pleases the many A.net's weirdos. That's why 757s are flying across the Atlantic.


The so called A.net weirdos do not own airlines so your point is flawed.

If A.net bloggers, me and you included, really could sway the Airlines:

1) BBD would have kept the C-Series Program and shifted at least 500 of them (delivering them 2 years earlier than now...);
2) Concorde would still be flying;
3) B747 would still be selling loads;
4) PANAM would still be flying;
5) The Boeing Stratocruiser would still be around (this last one is silly... i know... just me being me... I wish I could have flown on one...)


How can you left out A380? You know, China flying population is growing extremely quick with a ultra crowded airspace that Chinese airlines would need like 50x A380 operating domestic routes. Or every airline should stop flying 20x RJ daily on a route, and instead, should fly widebodies like 777 or 380 3-4x daily to carry all those pax?
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15281
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:38 pm

One problem with the UA TATL 757's is during the winter when stronger headwinds westbound frequently means a fuel stop. During most of the rest of the year, this is unlikely a problem (unless WX issues on the USA side) would the new proposed A321LR or Boeing matters be able to overcome that ?
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:01 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.


This has been discussed ninety-two million times over before but without recovering too much of it, this is hindsight speaking in the worst possible way - applying contemporary and knowledge and views to historical decisions without allowance for circumstances at the time.

For a start, the 757 wasn't designed for the work it's doing today - it was intended to deliver a more efficient, more capable, and more flexible aircraft to replace the 727 and also better target the capacity gap between the 737 and the 767, which had itself been designed to replace the 707 and slot in below the 747 and which - despite the concurrent design - was the "leader" of the pair from Boeing's commercial perspective at the time.

It was more than three years after the 757 first entered service in 1982 (with EA and shortly thereafter BA, both on short-range domestic shuttle flights) that ETOPS allowed operators to start developing the long-and-thin trans-Atlantic profile the 757 is known for today.

Regardless of this though there were more than a few times in the 757's life where airlines were just not interested in it, and the post-2001 slump where it not only gathered orders for only five new frames in three years but also actively lost six when CO converted its remaining orders for the 753 to the 738 was all the writing Boeing needed to call time. They used the production line space to consolidate all 737 production at Renton, and the improvement in production capacity and reduction in overhead achieved by doing has in my mind done a hell of a lot more for Boeing than keeping the 757 on the books ever would have.

Indeed arguing that the 757 should have been kept on life-support for nearly fifteen years to fulfil a few paltry niche jobs now is no different as I see it to arguing that the 717 should have been treated the same way, just because a few airlines now find them commercially and technically attractive.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2352
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:06 pm

XAM2175 wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.


This has been discussed ninety-two million times over before but without recovering too much of it, this is hindsight speaking in the worst possible way - applying contemporary and knowledge and views to historical decisions without allowance for circumstances at the time.

For a start, the 757 wasn't designed for the work it's doing today - it was intended to deliver a more efficient, more capable, and more flexible aircraft to replace the 727 and also better target the capacity gap between the 737 and the 767, which had itself been designed to replace the 707 and slot in below the 747 and which - despite the concurrent design - was the "leader" of the pair from Boeing's commercial perspective at the time.

It was more than three years after the 757 first entered service in 1982 (with EA and shortly thereafter BA, both on short-range domestic shuttle flights) that ETOPS allowed operators to start developing the long-and-thin trans-Atlantic profile the 757 is known for today.

Regardless of this though there were more than a few times in the 757's life where airlines were just not interested in it, and the post-2001 slump where it not only gathered orders for only five new frames in three years but also actively lost six when CO converted its remaining orders for the 753 to the 738 was all the writing Boeing needed to call time. They used the production line space to consolidate all 737 production at Renton, and the improvement in production capacity and reduction in overhead achieved by doing has in my mind done a hell of a lot more for Boeing than keeping the 757 on the books ever would have.

Indeed arguing that the 757 should have been kept on life-support for nearly fifteen years to fulfil a few paltry niche jobs now is no different as I see it to arguing that the 717 should have been treated the same way, just because a few airlines now find them commercially and technically attractive.


This is where airliners.net needs a "Like" button.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:11 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
jules48 wrote:
Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes.Noticed UA71 Hamburg to Newark this morning.
Surely they have enough 767s or even 739Max if they enough range.


This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.

The B767 and its replacement, the B787, is too much of an upgauge on several routes.

The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

That's why I always said that the B797 would be a single aisle direct replacement for the B757 (albeit with some different specifications) rather than, let's say, a B737-11 or a B787-7.

Also, whatver others say, United is certianly the US Airline on pole to be the launch customer (or together with any other non-US Airline).

Delta will not get a whiff of it (may be able to order after) and American might get a shout. JetBlue is out of the question (sole Airbus operator).These Airlines will miss out on a big deal here.

DL will get more than a whiff of it. I predict that both UA and DL will have their 797 orders announced on the same day, alongside at least one foreign carrier, possibly more. I think there’s even a fair chance AA could be there.
A313 332 343 B703 712 722 732 73G 738 739 741 742 744 752 762 76E 764 772 AT5 CR9 D10 DHH DHT F27 GRM L10 M83 TU5
 
wave46
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:02 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:13 pm

XAM2175 wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.


This has been discussed ninety-two million times over before but without recovering too much of it, this is hindsight speaking in the worst possible way - applying contemporary and knowledge and views to historical decisions without allowance for circumstances at the time.



Also, aside from the US carriers, Icelandair and cargo airlines there isn't much interest of aircraft that could do what the 757 does. Even the closest existing modern competitor - the A321neoLR, derived from an existing model - hasn't sold in huge quantities. I doubt a 757 would be an easy sell today - it would be very much a niche plane.

However, a model that could overlap between the distance and capacities of the 757 and 767 could be a potential winner, hence the furious debate over the MOM/797.
 
AirbusOnly
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:06 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:18 pm

Guys, you misconceive some very important things - knowingly or unwittingly: even the existing A 321 neo are able to fly more than 4.000 nm NONSTOP!
WOW Air made it: KEF-LAX 4.313 nm, KEF-SFO 4.204 nm, KEF-MIA 3.664 nm, KEF-TLV 3.283 nm (last one even easily flown by A320neo). All routes nonstop with A321 neo - still no LR!
And PRIMERA already is flying TATL daily with A 321 neo! So even the A321neo has the same capability and performance like the 757! IMO The A 321LR will surpass her!
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:12 pm

AirbusOnly wrote:
Guys, you misconceive some very important things - knowingly or unwittingly: even the existing A 321 neo are able to fly more than 4.000 nm NONSTOP!
WOW Air made it: KEF-LAX 4.313 nm, KEF-SFO 4.204 nm, KEF-MIA 3.664 nm, KEF-TLV 3.283 nm (last one even easily flown by A320neo). All routes nonstop with A321 neo - still no LR!
And PRIMERA already is flying TATL daily with A 321 neo! So even the A321neo has the same capability and performance like the 757! IMO The A 321LR will surpass her!

You are not considering payload. UA would like to fly their routes with all their seats filled year round.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1775
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:28 pm

estorilm wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

The 97t MTOW A321LR easily has the range, how could you say this? United's 757-200 TATL config is 169 seats, and the 321LR was configured for 4kmi at over 200 seats higher density. A similar config would yield nearly the same seating config and range, and wouldn't max out cargo space with the ACT's in there.

Oh yeah and all of this while offering 25%+ cheaper operating costs in an industry where 1% matters. :?

It really seems like a good plane for them, but as the OP implies - they'll have to pull the trigger on something fairly soon.


The 757s are paid for. This gives them much more flexibility vs an expensive new plane. 757 is pretty ideal for for the trans-Atlantic routes they are operating them on. Agree that 1% operating costs matter. But capex is very important as well. 757s are still very useful for UA.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 3525
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:35 pm

AirbusOnly wrote:
Guys, you misconceive some very important things - knowingly or unwittingly: even the existing A 321 neo are able to fly more than 4.000 nm NONSTOP!
WOW Air made it: KEF-LAX 4.313 nm, KEF-SFO 4.204 nm, KEF-MIA 3.664 nm, KEF-TLV 3.283 nm (last one even easily flown by A320neo). All routes nonstop with A321 neo - still no LR!
And PRIMERA already is flying TATL daily with A 321 neo! So even the A321neo has the same capability and performance like the 757! IMO The A 321LR will surpass her!


KEF-LAX and KEF-SFO (along with KEF-DFW) are both on A333. WW basically fly the 2 of their 3 A333 back and forth between KEF and LAX/SFO all day, with the 3rd A333 being used on non-daily DFW and some rotation to Europe (CDG seems to get the most A333). WW also doesn't fly to MIA, either. The longest US route flown by A320/321 is STL, which is 3201mi/2781nmi (in another word, shorter than TLV)

BTW, KEF-TLV is 3283mi, which is 2853nmi. Huge difference. That's well within specified A321ceo range of 3200nmi. KEF-SFO is 3653nmi, KEF-LAX is 3748nmi, and yes, that would required A321LR, which WOW doesn't have any (Regular non-LR A321neo doesn't fly that far).
 
AirbusOnly
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:06 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:49 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
AirbusOnly wrote:
Guys, you misconceive some very important things - knowingly or unwittingly: even the existing A 321 neo are able to fly more than 4.000 nm NONSTOP!
WOW Air made it: KEF-LAX 4.313 nm, KEF-SFO 4.204 nm, KEF-MIA 3.664 nm, KEF-TLV 3.283 nm (last one even easily flown by A320neo). All routes nonstop with A321 neo - still no LR!
And PRIMERA already is flying TATL daily with A 321 neo! So even the A321neo has the same capability and performance like the 757! IMO The A 321LR will surpass her!


KEF-LAX and KEF-SFO (along with KEF-DFW) are both on A333. WW basically fly the 2 of their 3 A333 back and forth between KEF and LAX/SFO all day, with the 3rd A333 being used on non-daily DFW and some rotation to Europe (CDG seems to get the most A333).



I wouldn‘t have mentioned it, if they wouldn‘t have flown these routes with their A321neo! Look at the flight history in FR24 of TF-SKY f.e. at 24.January, 21. February or 4. March this year! You are right currently they are using their A333 for these routes, but they did it several times on their A321neo
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2182
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:51 pm

jules48 wrote:
Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes.Noticed UA71 Hamburg to Newark this morning.
Surely they have enough 767s or even 739Max if they enough range.

Because they can.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:56 pm

AirbusOnly wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
AirbusOnly wrote:
Guys, you misconceive some very important things - knowingly or unwittingly: even the existing A 321 neo are able to fly more than 4.000 nm NONSTOP!
WOW Air made it: KEF-LAX 4.313 nm, KEF-SFO 4.204 nm, KEF-MIA 3.664 nm, KEF-TLV 3.283 nm (last one even easily flown by A320neo). All routes nonstop with A321 neo - still no LR!
And PRIMERA already is flying TATL daily with A 321 neo! So even the A321neo has the same capability and performance like the 757! IMO The A 321LR will surpass her!


KEF-LAX and KEF-SFO (along with KEF-DFW) are both on A333. WW basically fly the 2 of their 3 A333 back and forth between KEF and LAX/SFO all day, with the 3rd A333 being used on non-daily DFW and some rotation to Europe (CDG seems to get the most A333).



I wouldn‘t have mentioned it, if they wouldn‘t have flown these routes with their A321neo! Look at the flight history in FR24 of TF-SKY f.e. at 24.January, 21. February or 4. March this year! You are right currently they are using their A333 for these routes, but they did it several times on their A321neo

At reduced payloads.
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2962
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:08 pm

jules48 wrote:
Why are United still operating 757,s on transatlantic routes?
Because UA doesn’t want a sub-fleet of TATL configured B737-700 just to fly between EWR and Scotland/Ireland?
It’s pretty remarkable what UA (Continental) did with the B757 TATL, thanks to its range and performance, UA got to open some secondary major European markets from EWR.
If the frames are paid for and well maintained, untill UA can find a replacement, those will be used.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:20 pm

The 757-200 is the difference between a route existing or not at all. Two examples are EWR-LIS and EWR-LIM. Even a 767-300ER is too much plane. When CO had them, in the winter, a 174-seat 767-200ER was used on thin routes at the edge of the 767 range. Nothing else can do these missions profitably year round.
 
PEK777
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:56 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:29 pm

Because it is the Mighty 757 and the other planes do not stand a chance
 
Austin787
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:47 pm

Because United doesn't have A321LR
 
DaveFly
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 9:35 pm

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:54 pm

FWIW, I flew EWR-LHR a few years ago. Several roundtrips. They were perfectly fine. I do prefer the 767 for comfort, although that might only be my perception, but I had no complaints about the 757.
717,727,737,747,757,767,777,787
L1011,DC8,DC9,DC10,MD80/90
A300,A319,320,321,330,340,
CRJ,E135/45/190,
DH8,Avro85,DHBeaver,AstarHelo,F100,ATR42
 
Chemist
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?

Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:55 pm

"Why is United still operating 757's on transatlantic routes?"

Because if they didn't, all of the people in them would fall to the ground.
 
reltney
Posts: 660
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:34 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:26 pm

XAM2175 wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
This is a good point but highlights how the 757 is being missed. Not only United but others also have B757s operating similarly. The issue is that those frames are pretty old now and, given Boeing no longer has a production line for them, they have been withdrawn without a proper replacement. They should never have withdrawn the model. Airbus never had a proper replacement for it.


This has been discussed ninety-two million times over before but without recovering too much of it, this is hindsight speaking in the worst possible way - applying contemporary and knowledge and views to historical decisions without allowance for circumstances at the time.

For a start, the 757 wasn't designed for the work it's doing today - it was intended to deliver a more efficient, more capable, and more flexible aircraft to replace the 727 and also better target the capacity gap between the 737 and the 767, which had itself been designed to replace the 707 and slot in below the 747 and which - despite the concurrent design - was the "leader" of the pair from Boeing's commercial perspective at the time.

It was more than three years after the 757 first entered service in 1982 (with EA and shortly thereafter BA, both on short-range domestic shuttle flights) that ETOPS allowed operators to start developing the long-and-thin trans-Atlantic profile the 757 is known for today.

Regardless of this though there were more than a few times in the 757's life where airlines were just not interested in it, and the post-2001 slump where it not only gathered orders for only five new frames in three years but also actively lost six when CO converted its remaining orders for the 753 to the 738 was all the writing Boeing needed to call time. They used the production line space to consolidate all 737 production at Renton, and the improvement in production capacity and reduction in overhead achieved by doing has in my mind done a hell of a lot more for Boeing than keeping the 757 on the books ever would have.

Indeed arguing that the 757 should have been kept on life-support for nearly fifteen years to fulfil a few paltry niche jobs now is no different as I see it to arguing that the 717 should have been treated the same way, just because a few airlines now find them commercially and technically attractive.



I think your close. The 757 was withdrawn way before it time.
I fly (pilot) the 757 and 767 transatlantic /Asia and transcontinental . The 737-900er can’t carry both full pax and cargo . Just can’t make it. The 321maxNGneoXLR with sharklets and wiffledust with bigger tanks has a good shot but the -900 with sharklets and wiffledust was pulled off most Hawaii runs and don’t even think Atlantic. The 757 can fly it without any mods wether you believe it or not. Sure it burns a bit more fuel but never had to restrict pax to make trans Atlantic/Hawaii/transcons even with 150kt headwinds. No contest.

Pulled out of production 15 years to soon is a correct statement. Biggest mistake Boeing made was bowing to SW and not putting the 757 cockpit on the 737. Plenty of articles on that so no need repeat it.

The 737 and 321 are great planes but cannot close that gap yet in replacing the 757 . Being old is the only fault in the 757.
Knives don't kill people. People with knives kill people.
OUTLAW KNIVES.

I am a pilot, therefore I envy no one...
 
77H
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:38 pm

dcaviation wrote:
CarlosSi wrote:
738 MAX (not 739).... could maybe do EWR-DUB? EWR-UK?


What are you talking about??? United has only 737-9MAX - OP is correct


How do you not understand what CarlosSi is saying? He's saying that the 7M8 could probably fly those routes nonstop but not the 7M9. Whether or not UA has the 7M8 is irrelevant. The point is, the 7M9 is not a viable alternative to the 752 thus invaliating the OPs claim...

77H
 
gsg013
Posts: 569
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:03 pm

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:03 pm

VC10er wrote:
I’m am very curious about what Business Class seat they would use on whatever happens. Are the smallest variant of the Polaris seat suitable for a single aisle? Or would there be a need for another variation?
I’m one of the oddballs that actually like the 757 across the pond.


Part of me wonders how many seats would fit in a 1-1 J product with Polaris on the 757 or whatever aircraft replaces it. I know UA does not use the reverse herringbone seats in J like AA does in intl J and Transcon F. If you were to do 1-1 Polaris on a 757 or 737-MAX/ A321 NEO how many seats could you fit in the present space that currently fits 16 J? I think 1-1 would be far superior from the PAX perspective but not sure from a revenue/profitability stand point if it would be viable for UA.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1841
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: United 757s

Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:44 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
estorilm wrote:
Jomar777 wrote:
The A321 does not have the range, although Airbus is working on this.

The 97t MTOW A321LR easily has the range, how could you say this? United's 757-200 TATL config is 169 seats, and the 321LR was configured for 4kmi at over 200 seats higher density. A similar config would yield nearly the same seating config and range, and wouldn't max out cargo space with the ACT's in there.

Oh yeah and all of this while offering 25%+ cheaper operating costs in an industry where 1% matters. :?

It really seems like a good plane for them, but as the OP implies - they'll have to pull the trigger on something fairly soon.


So tell me - why it has not been used for this market niche? Why does UA and others still use the B757? The A321 never did kill the B757 - Boeing did when decided not to continue with the program.

The A321 does not have the range and only a XLR version will be able to do the job.

So tell me how can you operate a plane that has not entered service yet? Tell me when 97t MTOW A321LR has entered service or got its type certificate?

And also tell me how many 757s have NOT been replaced by an A321? How many pax 757 are still in service and how many are flying TATL?

We got your Boeing fan and Airbus bash, move on.

Michael

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