Assuming Airfleets.net is correct, legacy United had about 100 P&W powered 757-200s, most delivered between 1989 and 1993. After the merger, the majority of these aircraft were disposed of from around 2010-2014, with about 40 getting parked in the desert, and 40 getting sold to FedEx to be converted to freighters. Only about 15 of the P&W 757-200s were retained, mostly for transcon Premium Service flights.

United was a different airline in a different environment in 2010-2014 when compared to today. Back then, oil prices were going through all-time highs, and United’s strategy seemed to be “shrink to profitability.” Today, oil prices are lower, and United has been purchasing all the used narrow body aircraft they can find, in order to increase their domestic lift and associated profits.

The current MAX grounding makes the lack of domestic lift even more pressing.

I find myself pondering what would have happened had United kept some portion of those P&W powered 757-200s. I’ve heard rumblings that those aircraft suffered from lots of deferred maintenance, and I assume there were some tails that it would have been cheaper to retire than keep. However, at the very least, it’s worth noting that FedEx found it worthwhile to buy and refurbish 40 of them (granted, freighter flying is different than pax service).

How would things have been different, assuming United decided to hang onto at least 40 of those aircraft? Obviously, this would have allowed United to better weather the MAX grounding. Would United’s network have looked any larger if the 757-200s had been flying? What kind of shape were those aircraft in when UA sold or retired them?

AirlineBob wrote:

How would things have been different, assuming United decided to hang onto at least 40 of those aircraft?

They did exactly that. They got 40 or so 752's from Continental.

airbazar wrote:

AirlineBob wrote:

How would things have been different, assuming United decided to hang onto at least 40 of those aircraft?

They did exactly that. They got 40 or so 752's from Continental.

That's right, however what if they had kept another 40 or so of the legacy-United 757s? Instead of selling them off to FedEx?

AirlineBob wrote:

Obviously, this would have allowed United to better weather the MAX grounding.

That doesn't logically follow, unless you're arguing they'd just have an extra 40 jets sitting around not flying, waiting for some unanticipated grounding.

If United could have predicted the future, they would have put a few more P&W 757s through heavy checks and not ordered the 737 MAX. If they could predict the future they would have ordered A319NEO, A320NEO, A321NEO, and A321LR.

If United could predict the future they would have ordered Boeing not to destroy the 757 tooling and to launch the 757 MAX instead of the 737 MAX and they would have been a launch customer of the 757 MAX. The 757 Classics still would have been retired.

The former Continental B752s were way more versatile. All were internationally-configured with lie-flat J, had a higher MTOW with higher-thrust RB211-535E4 engines, and were ETOPS equipped for Continental's strategy of serving a lot of secondary destinations in Europe, at one time having 20 757 destinations in Europe. The replacement for the non-p.s. United B752s was actually the Boeing 737-900ER order that United inherited from the merger with Continental (IINM, every United B737, B738, and B739 (base and ER) is ETOPS-equipped). The legacy United B752s had none of what the former Continental frames had.

Also, when FedEx was buying planes for freighter conversion, they were paying airlines and lessors a premium on the value of much of the acquired B752s, meaning airlines and lessors were happy to sell to FedEx. FedEx was valuing frames at about $10M per.

MIflyer12 wrote:

AirlineBob wrote:

Obviously, this would have allowed United to better weather the MAX grounding.

That doesn't logically follow, unless you're arguing they'd just have an extra 40 jets sitting around not flying, waiting for some unanticipated grounding.

I guess I'm mostly focused on the fact that UA sold/parked/scrapped those 757-200s between 2010-2014, and then a short two years later (around 2016), they started on a continual push to acquire used aircraft. I believe the ex-China Southern A319's started arriving around mid-2016. And UA still seems to have an insatiable appetite for used narrow-bodies.

Instead of being in the current push for buying used aircraft, they could have already had that capability via the 757-200s.

AirlineBob wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

AirlineBob wrote:

Obviously, this would have allowed United to better weather the MAX grounding.

That doesn't logically follow, unless you're arguing they'd just have an extra 40 jets sitting around not flying, waiting for some unanticipated grounding.

I guess I'm mostly focused on the fact that UA sold/parked/scrapped those 757-200s between 2010-2014, and then a short two years later (around 2016), they started on a continual push to acquire used aircraft. I believe the ex-China Southern A319's started arriving around mid-2016. And UA still seems to have an insatiable appetite for used narrow-bodies.

Instead of being in the current push for buying used aircraft, they could have already had that capability via the 757-200s.

The 757 is a type they’re trying to shrink though, owing mostly to their higher operating costs. The majority of UA’s domestic flying does not require the extra weight and performance of a 757 and can easily be handled by smaller narrowbodies. The upfront cost of purchasing those used aircraft is also likely insignificant when compared to the revenue capabilities and gains in efficiency from optimizing fleet assignments.

Removing those aircraft from the fleet was the right call. Had the 757s remained would have added little to no benefit with the MAX situation since you would in theory still have the same total number of aircraft in the fleet.

AirlineBob wrote:

Assuming Airfleets.net is correct, legacy United had about 100 P&W powered 757-200s, most delivered between 1989 and 1993.

A consistent message that I got from maintenance folks (both sCO and sUA) was that the long term health of the PW752s had been neglected during the Tilton regime. That probably had something to do with the decision, too.

The 737Max wasn't part of the decision. Rather the the PW752s were replaced with new 737-900NGs at considerable fuel savings.

Granted, the 739NG isn't the fun-to-fly performer like a 757, but the fun-to-fly factor hasn't yet found a place on the bean-counter spreadsheets, has it?

I have plenty of time in both. If I had a choice of which airplane I could have flown, it would have been the 767-200!

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The former Continental B752s were way more versatile. All were internationally-configured with lie-flat J, had a higher MTOW with higher-thrust RB211-535E4 engines, and were ETOPS equipped for Continental's strategy of serving a lot of secondary destinations in Europe, at one time having 20 757 destinations in Europe. The replacement for the non-p.s. United B752s was actually the Boeing 737-900ER order that United inherited from the merger with Continental (IINM, every United B737, B738, and B739 (base and ER) is ETOPS-equipped). The legacy United B752s had none of what the former Continental frames had...

Largely agreed, however, pmUA did have 15 or so ETOPS PW757-200s, IIRC.

FlyHossD wrote:

If I had a choice of which airplane I could have flown, it would have been the 767-200!

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

the PMUA 752 also had a lot of cycles compared to PMCO 752's. Cargo airlines can get away with a high cycle plane, since they only fly a handful of flights per day.

I fly SFO-EWR about 10x a year, and i try to avoid the PW birds....they are always delayed due to a mechanical error. the RR birds are much more reliable. I'll pick the RR 752 or the 78J over the PW powered 752's.

I can understand UA's fleet rationale at the time. Why not replace your older, less reliable, expensive to operate, and in need of refurbishment planes with brand new planes that you already have a ton of fleet commonality with? Sure, today UA is buying old A320-series plane, but they have high fleet commonality with their existing processes and supply chains. So it makes sense to capitalize on that opportunity. But if UA had the chance to used buy PW 752s today, I don't think they would.

Today, they can deal with the current (small) PW 752 fleet because its restricted to only a few airports. But in terms of keeping all of those other (80) PW 752s, it doesn't make sense with an overall domestic network strategy. Today UA's 737 series planes fly all over the country. High reliability, easy parts/maintenance coordination, consistent onboard product for customers, etc.

AirlineBob wrote:

...the majority of these aircraft were disposed of from around 2010-2014, with about 40 getting parked in the desert, and 40 getting sold to FedEx to be converted to freighters.

Between 2010-2014, United has added about 75x 739 and 13x 738, all new. And between 2010-2017, its a combined total of about 130 new 737s. At some point, the (PW) 752s have to be replaced as it can't be done overnight. And its also important to remember, no one expected the whole MAX situation.

Overall... could they have used some extra planes today? Sure. But do I think they specifically miss their PW 752s? Not at all.

blacksoviet wrote:

If United could have predicted the future, they would have put a few more P&W 757s through heavy checks and not ordered the 737 MAX. If they could predict the future they would have ordered A319NEO, A320NEO, A321NEO, and A321LR.

If United could predict the future they would have ordered Boeing not to destroy the 757 tooling and to launch the 757 MAX instead of the 737 MAX and they would have been a launch customer of the 757 MAX. The 757 Classics still would have been retired.

And Boeing would have promptly laughed them out of the meeting and pointed out that there were 7 orders over the last 4 years of the program.

Tough decision... Make a Max version of your highest selling type with thousands of orders, or make a max of an out of production type that barely broke 1000 deliveries (good numbers but no 737...)

Also pretty sure that unless your name is Juan Trippe, Boeing likely doesn't take too kindly to any airline "ordering" them to do something.

blacksoviet wrote:

If United could have predicted the future, they would have put a few more P&W 757s through heavy checks and not ordered the 737 MAX. If they could predict the future they would have ordered A319NEO, A320NEO, A321NEO, and A321LR.

If United could predict the future they would have ordered Boeing not to destroy the 757 tooling and to launch the 757 MAX instead of the 737 MAX and they would have been a launch customer of the 757 MAX. The 757 Classics still would have been retired.

If United could have predict the future, I think they would have pushed Boeing to develop an all new narrow body, 797, which would not have the drawbacks of the 737 MAX. United would have been one of the launch customers. 797-8 would be same size as 737-800, 797-9 same size as 757-200, and 797-9ER would be the long range version to replace 757 TATL.

catiii wrote:

FlyHossD wrote:

If I had a choice of which airplane I could have flown, it would have been the 767-200!

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed


When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different


When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual


In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)


However as the 767-2 and -4 paid substantially more as a widebody than the narrowbody 757-2 and -3 junior pilots rarely got to fly the 767’s and senior pilots would rarely fly the 757


The really nice thing about the combined fleet was all four were very enjoyable to fly and the variety of trips and routes was incredible, from domestic to Caribbean, Latin America, South America, all over Europe, Hawaii, Guam and Japan



After years of flying ancient, worn out aircraft at Cal we were suddenly flying all brand new types all over the world


Good times

Max Q wrote:

catiii wrote:

FlyHossD wrote:

If I had a choice of which airplane I could have flown, it would have been the 767-200!

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed


When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different


When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual


In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)


However as the 767-2 and -4 paid substantially more as a widebody than the narrowbody 757-2 and -3 junior pilots rarely got to fly the 767’s and senior pilots would rarely fly the 757


The really nice thing about the combined fleet was all four were very enjoyable to fly and the variety of trips and routes was incredible, from domestic to Caribbean, Latin America, South America, all over Europe, Hawaii, Guam and Japan



After years of flying ancient, worn out aircraft at Cal we were suddenly flying all brand new types all over the world


Good times

I really wish I was old enough to have become a commercial pilot when the 767/757 common fleets were still strong. Like you said, the amount of destination variety sounds incredibly enjoyable, and would allow me to get a taste of whether I prefer long or short haul flying without committing to a fleet type.

don’t forget that the 752 needed the expensive NGS mod in order to fly beyond 2018. FAA doesn’t require this for freight operators.

speedbird52 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

catiii wrote:

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed


When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different


When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual


In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)


However as the 767-2 and -4 paid substantially more as a widebody than the narrowbody 757-2 and -3 junior pilots rarely got to fly the 767’s and senior pilots would rarely fly the 757


The really nice thing about the combined fleet was all four were very enjoyable to fly and the variety of trips and routes was incredible, from domestic to Caribbean, Latin America, South America, all over Europe, Hawaii, Guam and Japan



After years of flying ancient, worn out aircraft at Cal we were suddenly flying all brand new types all over the world


Good times

I really wish I was old enough to have become a commercial pilot when the 767/757 common fleets were still strong. Like you said, the amount of destination variety sounds incredibly enjoyable, and would allow me to get a taste of whether I prefer long or short haul flying without committing to a fleet type.

What are you flying now S52 ?

wn676 wrote:

AirlineBob wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

That doesn't logically follow, unless you're arguing they'd just have an extra 40 jets sitting around not flying, waiting for some unanticipated grounding.

I guess I'm mostly focused on the fact that UA sold/parked/scrapped those 757-200s between 2010-2014, and then a short two years later (around 2016), they started on a continual push to acquire used aircraft. I believe the ex-China Southern A319's started arriving around mid-2016. And UA still seems to have an insatiable appetite for used narrow-bodies.

Instead of being in the current push for buying used aircraft, they could have already had that capability via the 757-200s.

The 757 is a type they’re trying to shrink though, owing mostly to their higher operating costs. The majority of UA’s domestic flying does not require the extra weight and performance of a 757 and can easily be handled by smaller narrowbodies. The upfront cost of purchasing those used aircraft is also likely insignificant when compared to the revenue capabilities and gains in efficiency from optimizing fleet assignments.

Removing those aircraft from the fleet was the right call. Had the 757s remained would have added little to no benefit with the MAX situation since you would in theory still have the same total number of aircraft in the fleet.

In the past? United has removed airplanes before the economics of the airplane ran out right about the 18-20 year mark. With the 737-900 and the 737-9 coming? they thought they could get some traction by getting Rid of the 757's that needed the Center fuel tank inerting system installed, And go on with the 737-900 and the 737-9. Nobody foresaw the mess Boeing would get themselves into with the MCAS system and remove the AOA indication. the ONLY reason that same thing didn't happen in the USA was because most all the carriers kept the AOA indication to be compatible with the older 737's.

I flew a Pratt 757 from SFO-TUP last month to get scrapped. Surreal and sad to think I was the last one to ever fly that plane. It’s almost unbelievable for me to think that all of our 757s will be gone in a relatively short matter of time. Obviously the Rolls planes will be around for a bit, but it’ll be the end of an era soon enough.

Max Q wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed


When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different


When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual


In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)


However as the 767-2 and -4 paid substantially more as a widebody than the narrowbody 757-2 and -3 junior pilots rarely got to fly the 767’s and senior pilots would rarely fly the 757


The really nice thing about the combined fleet was all four were very enjoyable to fly and the variety of trips and routes was incredible, from domestic to Caribbean, Latin America, South America, all over Europe, Hawaii, Guam and Japan



After years of flying ancient, worn out aircraft at Cal we were suddenly flying all brand new types all over the world


Good times

I really wish I was old enough to have become a commercial pilot when the 767/757 common fleets were still strong. Like you said, the amount of destination variety sounds incredibly enjoyable, and would allow me to get a taste of whether I prefer long or short haul flying without committing to a fleet type.

What are you flying now S52 ?

Pixels in video games, hopefully starting this year Cessna 172s.

Guys, I think the issue here is also "perspective". Meaning that we (including myself) sometimes get a little carried away with how much we all love the 757, and how 'stuck in the modern 1980s bubble' we might be, and tend to forget that these PW birds now would be considerably older than the actual average age the 727-100s were retired at. The 727s looked positively ancient to most us when they were retired. I remember referring to them as "1960s technology". This would have been during the late 80s. Eye opening.
Let's get over it - the 757 is old. Just like ourselves. Is it shocking? Yes, by all means. Did we all think this day would never arrive? Absolutely.

oldannyboy wrote:

Guys, I think the issue here is also "perspective". Meaning that we (including myself) sometimes get a little carried away with how much we all love the 757, and how 'stuck in the modern 1980s bubble' we might be, and tend to forget that these PW birds now would be considerably older than the actual average age the 727-100s were retired at. The 727s looked positively ancient to most us when they were retired. I remember referring to them as "1960s technology". This would have been during the late 80s. Eye opening.
Let's get over it - the 757 is old. Just like ourselves. Is it shocking? Yes, by all means. Did we all think this day would never arrive? Absolutely.

I'm afraid you're right. Fortunately for us, there is still a future for them in cargo, however long that lasts.
The generation birthed in the A220|FSA age of tech will soon call A320s and B738s old as well. C'est la vie.

Max Q wrote:

catiii wrote:

FlyHossD wrote:

If I had a choice of which airplane I could have flown, it would have been the 767-200!

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed

When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different

When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual

In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)...

Good times

Good post - thanks for that Max Q.

The 757s and 767s were fun to fly, but the near constant pining for the 757 "glory days" reminds me of a former lover pining for a lover-lost. Get over it already! Times change, life moves on, eh?

speedbird52 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

I really wish I was old enough to have become a commercial pilot when the 767/757 common fleets were still strong. Like you said, the amount of destination variety sounds incredibly enjoyable, and would allow me to get a taste of whether I prefer long or short haul flying without committing to a fleet type.

What are you flying now S52 ?

Pixels in video games, hopefully starting this year Cessna 172s.

Best wishes and let us know how that goes

Yup, not so so much "pining for the old days of the great 757," as I know there is already too much of that out there (some deserved, most not).

More speculating on the fact that, a couple short years after getting rid of all those P&W 757-200s (some younger than the current 757/767 fleet), United began on a quest to buy as many used A319/A320 and 737s as they could get their hands on. Apparently, someone decided that there is money in domestic travel after all, and UA is trying to get their hands on it.

In an alternate universe, UA would have kept some of the younger P&W 757s, and used those. Course, no one has a perfect crystal ball, and Jeff Smisek certainly didn't.

The points about the P&W 757s being high-time and needing the NGS mod are valid. Interesting perspectives from all.

FlyHossD wrote:

The 757s and 767s were fun to fly, but the near constant pining for the 757 "glory days" reminds me of a former lover pining for a lover-lost. Get over it already! Times change, life moves on, eh?

AirlineBob wrote:

Yup, not so so much "pining for the old days of the great 757," as I know there is already too much of that out there (some deserved, most not).

More speculating on the fact that, a couple short years after getting rid of all those P&W 757-200s (some younger than the current 757/767 fleet), United began on a quest to buy as many used A319/A320 and 737s as they could get their hands on. Apparently, someone decided that there is money in domestic travel after all, and UA is trying to get their hands on it.

In an alternate universe, UA would have kept some of the younger P&W 757s, and used those. Course, no one has a perfect crystal ball, and Jeff Smisek certainly didn't.

The points about the P&W 757s being high-time and needing the NGS mod are valid. Interesting perspectives from all.

AirlineBob - I wasn't referring to just your post, but the nearly endless "love-the-mighty-757" threads on this site. It was - still is - a great airplane, but so was the Lockheed Constellation. I do feel fortunate to have flown 757s, but I enjoyed the 767s even more.

It's just my opinion, but I think UA's current approach of seeking quality used narrow body aircraft and growing the domestic network is the correct strategy. Smisek's fixation on costs wasn't healthy. On the rare occasion that his name comes up in conversation with my old CO/UA colleagues, it's always met with, "Thank God he's gone!"

I believe the number is less than 15 now. I haven’t seen ship 5302, 5305, 5312, 5318 for a long time.

speedbird52 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

catiii wrote:

How'd they bid the -200 at CO? Same category as the 757 or rolled into the 764 category?

At Continental the 757-200/300 and 767-200/400 were all flown with one pilot group, as the common type allowed


When the 764 arrived we did a differences course and three take offs and landings in either the actual aircraft or in the simulator after that arrived, as the cockpit displays were quite different


When the 762 aircraft were delivered (after the 764’s) no aircraft or sim training was required at all as the cockpit was very similar to the 757, there were just some systems differences reflected on the overhead panel, these were covered in the flight manual


In short, you were qualified on all four versions (unlike Delta which has always flown the 764 as a separate type)


However as the 767-2 and -4 paid substantially more as a widebody than the narrowbody 757-2 and -3 junior pilots rarely got to fly the 767’s and senior pilots would rarely fly the 757


The really nice thing about the combined fleet was all four were very enjoyable to fly and the variety of trips and routes was incredible, from domestic to Caribbean, Latin America, South America, all over Europe, Hawaii, Guam and Japan



After years of flying ancient, worn out aircraft at Cal we were suddenly flying all brand new types all over the world


Good times

I really wish I was old enough to have become a commercial pilot when the 767/757 common fleets were still strong. Like you said, the amount of destination variety sounds incredibly enjoyable, and would allow me to get a taste of whether I prefer long or short haul flying without committing to a fleet type.

agreed. I can only really do so much in FS9. Such diversity, such /favorable/ diversity. Long and short haul on one type. Hawaii or the mountains and more.

I guess you could sort of do the same now with 737 and a320, but not always, not the same.

AirlineBob wrote:

Yup, not so so much "pining for the old days of the great 757," as I know there is already too much of that out there (some deserved, most not).

More speculating on the fact that, a couple short years after getting rid of all those P&W 757-200s (some younger than the current 757/767 fleet), United began on a quest to buy as many used A319/A320 and 737s as they could get their hands on. Apparently, someone decided that there is money in domestic travel after all, and UA is trying to get their hands on it.

In an alternate universe, UA would have kept some of the younger P&W 757s, and used those. Course, no one has a perfect crystal ball, and Jeff Smisek certainly didn't.

The points about the P&W 757s being high-time and needing the NGS mod are valid. Interesting perspectives from all.

Perhaps those younger P&W engined 757's had more value if sold for conversion to freighters while flying the older ones till they timed out.