Boeing is close to announcing a new aircraft to succeed the 757 jetliner that ceased production almost a decade ago, according to central Asian carrier Air Astana, which is keen to purchase the plane.

Quote: Boeing is gauging the appetite of airlines for a new medium-size jet for transcontinental travel within the U.S., executives said at the Singapore Air Show in February. A plane seating 180 people in two classes able to fly as many as 9 hours also would meet requirements from Almaty, Kazakhstan-based Air Astana on so-called long, thin routes, Foster said. “They made absolutely clear that this is now firming up and that they’ll be making an announcement soon,” Foster said of the Doha discussions. “That for us is very interesting.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...or-to-757-jet-air-astana-says.html

[Edited 2014-06-26 14:11:02]

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter): Boeing is close to announcing a new aircraft to succeed the 757 jetliner that ceased production almost a decade ago, according to central Asian carrier Air Astana, which is keen to purchase the plane.

Two chances of this happening, slim and non.

Boeing's solution? Passing the phone number of John Leahy  

Considering Boeing have just invested in new manufacturing equipment to assemble the wings of the current and max 737 models I would have thought they had a long term commitment to this model.

On the same point, I think the A321 just out guns the 737-9 and as such Boeing needed / had to do something for this segment.

Time will tell.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 5):

I just don't see where the 321NEO really outguns the 739MAX. The 321 is more plane but, at least from a specs point of view, not a whole bunch.

It carries 5 more people in typical 1 or 2 class seating, has only about 50 miles longer range, (with standard tanks I presume), and is ahead in sales 564-413.....which is pretty good, but not a real slaughter, in my opinion.

It all looks to me that just like the current models, the newer models are going to keep pretty much nose to nose on deliveries for probably the rest of the decade...and deliveries is where the cash is handed over and it really matters.

I still don't think either is a real replacement for the 757 in all areas, but the gap is definitely closing.

I think Stitch is thinking the right way.

A 797-8 / 797-9 to cover the 752/753 sector leads NSA to market at reasonably low production volumes, allowing the technology to be proven. 797-2 and 797-3 (or whatever) come later, replacing MAX.

The big question for me is whether or not Boeing can find an economic way to produce the (assumed) 797 carbon tube. I wonder if the 787 autoclaves have any spare capacity for a 797 tube? AFAIK the NSA was to use cold-cure composite technology, which has not matured yet. Doing a low volume 752 replacement might be viable using autoclaves, while continuing to work on cold-cure for the high volume smaller models. Also, GTF would be the ideal powerplant for the 757 replacement.

I think Boeing made a big mistake by stopping the 757 line. The 757-300 was dumb. They need to reopen the 757 line or come up with another replacement fast for the 757. The 737-9 is not well liked by airlines. AB 321 is making in road big time in the US when it comes to narrow body airplanes.

Quoting skystar767 (Reply 7): I think Boeing made a big mistake by stopping the 757 line.

There were no more orders. Why keep the line open without any demand?

Quoting skystar767 (Reply 7):

The 737 lines, (NG and MAX), are completely sold out, pretty much the end of the decade. If you add up the 321 (classic and NEO), and 739 (NG and MAX), they have sold more than the 757 and have pretty well covered over 90% of the traditional 757 market.

I'm sticking with my guns, (perhaps tilting at windmills...), but if Boeing wants a temporary 757 replacement, NG the 762 with GEnx -2B's, put windows in the USAF rig, slap on some scimitar winglets, maybe do a few bits out of AlLi, and sell it for cheap. If they need the space, the 764 has about a foot and a half longer gear.

The line is already running and even if all they do is steal some 321 sales and get that last 10% of the 757 market, they'll probably make a few bucks.

The 321 and 739 will never have the high/hot/short field performance of the 757...and maybe they don't really need it...but the 762 with -2B's would be a rocket...and almost exactly between the 739 and 788 in every category....range, MTOW, payload, passengers and price.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10): and almost exactly between the 739 and 788 in every category....range, MTOW, payload, passengers and price.

But not operating cost, which is what matters most. Such a beast wouldn't be much cheaper to fly than a 788. It would be quite a bit more expensive to fly than a used 752, of which there are plenty of high-quality examples in the market.

Widebodies are not going to solve the 757 problem. It will be solved either by further enhancements to various members of the A320 and 737 families or by a new narrowbody family.

And a few months from now we will get another article saying the exact same thing....

But seroiusly, it will be interesting to see what the replacement would be. Something like a 737, or something bigger, smaller, longer, wider, wingspan and such. Anyone have any idea what engines may power a 757 replacement?

Let's see here.

The current 757-200/-300 seats:
200 for the -200 and 243 for the -300 (Or 229 and 289 in a one class configuration, respectful.)

The 737 MAX 9 seats 180 (2 Class Config.)
The A321neo seats 185

The 787-8 seats 296 (or 242 in a 3 Class Config.)

So, assuming this 757 replacement materializes, which I'd assume would be the 797-8/-9, would the seating number mirror that of the the current 757 family?

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10): 762 with GEnx -2B

It's called the 787-8 Dreamliner.

CF6-80s will work just fine with the 767.

[Edited 2014-06-26 18:18:46]

I'm sure there are many Boeing 757 fans out there saying, "The only replacement for a 757 is another 757."

 

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10): I'm sticking with my guns,

Quoting delta88 (Reply 12): But seroiusly, it will be interesting to see what the replacement would be.

Considering the size of the potential 757 market and the fact many airlines have already ordered A321's to fill this segment, I am not sure Boeing could make a business case work for a new build 757 type aircraft.

As the 757 was of the same family of aircraft as the 737, there could be scope to develop a derivative of the 737MAX to fill this void. I am not sure of the scope to increase the wing area of the current 737 wing and what type of engines (new or re-rated engines from an existing program) would be required for such an aircraft, but this solution would seem to be the more economical.

Such an aircraft could be built at the existing 737 production line leveraging existing facilities (which will be capable of producing 60 + aircraft per month) and manufacturing equipment making the business case (investment in manufacturing equipment, assembly halls, etc) for such an aircraft more likely to be viable!

At the end of the day, I would really love to see the nose and tall landing gear of the 757 grafted onto the 737. For plane spotters alone, Boeing couldn't make a better decision!!

[Edited 2014-06-26 18:56:58]

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter): On the same point, I think the A321 just out guns the 737-9 and as such Boeing needed / had to do something for this segment.

By the time Boeing shuts down 737-7/8/9 line and opens up the MAX line they will have

* Sold and delivered approx 9,500 737s

* Built an order book for over 2,000 737MAX's (Probably 2500+ by then...it's 2050 orders now)

* Sold more than 1 737 per day, on average, since 2008.

Nobody is going to knock this bird off anything. There is no 757 replacement coming. The A320/1 and 737 are great marketplace compliments to each other and the market is PLENTY big enough for both of them.

If anything, I think an ideal move would be if they were to make a 757 not as just a 757 replacement, but also as a 763 replacement, for the lower long-range routes that a 763 would be thrown on.

I'm talking not just for transcons (which the 738/739 do fine), but for trying to target the TATL stuff that a 788 is overkill for, including existing 752 routes, much of the 763 routes (say, JFK to central or northern Europe), as well as a deeper Southeastern US coast to Western europe reach.

Thinking a craft that would handle routes of range along the lines of;
JFK-HEL
MCO - EDI
MIA - GIG/GRU
MSP - HNL
AUS - HNL
SFO-PPT
LAX - LIM
HNL (rather, any other island) - NGO (or whichever Japanese airport)
HKG-BNE
LHR-DEL
SVO-PKC (in particular, any Russia transcon or Russia to Asia stuff)
ORD-ARN
(I know those are bad examples, considering that widebodies are currently and likely successfully used on each one of those that exists, but my intention is simply to point out the general areas that such a range expansion would open up.

Basically, around the ~4500 Mile max range, with headwinds and the usual pax load. As for how they'd accomplish this? Dunno. Composite materials, maybe if they were to up it to 767-level engines, add a bit of fuel capacity?

It's so tempting to bring up the Tu-204... But that's even more of a distant thought.

Quoting S75752 (Reply 17): MSP - HNL

A very small market. Very small, DL doesn't even fly this.

Quoting S75752 (Reply 17): AUS - HNL

Okay, the only way this would ever happen is if A or B made a plane powered by glitter, unicorns and the hopes and dreams of hippies.

Nobody could ever make that profitable, regardless of the plane used.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):

It would certainly beat the 788 at operating costs. We all know that most of the 788 efficiency comes from the engines and the GEnx-2b's are only a few percent more thirsty than the ones on the 788. Given that a 762 has an OEW up to 80,000lbs lighter than a 788, (that's a whole 737's difference), and using the same engines at significantly reduced power settings....adds up to a definite trip cost difference.

It doesn't need the double extra nifty wings because it only needs a fraction of the range.

It might not be as cheap on a seat/mile basis....but no smaller plane will. The MAX and the NEO won't either.

The 788 isn't a 762 replacement or even 763...It's a 764 replacement because that one is close to the 788 in specs. It's definitely an A330 competitor

The 788 is in a different category altogether than the 762...which is the closest plane that has ever been to the 757.....to the degree of sharing cockpits and type ratings. Basically, if you can fly a 757, you can fly a 767 with the same ticket...so they ain't all that different.

Besides, I already said, In My Opinion. It's never going to happen but it would be the cheapest and quickest to do. Virtually everything is off the shelf, (the 767 already uses 747 engines so using the -2B's isn't much of a stretch), and the production line is still in operation. Development cost would be billions cheaper than anything else.

If somebody wanted something bad enough to pay for the hundreds of copies it would take to pay for the program....then maybe. Heck, people are still makng good profits with the current gas sucking 767's...and they'll be flying for another decade yet.

Still.....it's fun to think about but in reality, there won't be any new planes until the NSA, which won't even get off of the CAD screens until next decade.

[Edited 2014-06-26 23:44:17]

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter): would meet requirements from Almaty, Kazakhstan-based Air Astana on so-called long, thin routes

I think this underscores how big the market segment for a 757 replacement is, that is not already covered by the 739/321 relations  

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 20): I think this underscores how big the market segment for a 757 replacement is, that is not already covered by the 739/321 relations

There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement:
Icelandair
Aer Lingus
TAP Portugal
Thompson Airways
Thomas Cook
Jet 2

And they are just the EU based carriers looking to for better TATL performance and range to/from smaller markets.

Take into account Delta, United and the likes of Westjet, who need/want to serve EU secondary cities, I think the 10% difference between the neo/max and 757 becomes all the more compelling.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3): That being said, nine hours in a narrowbody (even with 18+ inch wide seats) sounds like hell.

Relative hell...pre-widebody passengers endured substantially similar flight times. But if you have a choice of course, people will go for widebodies...unless the price is right.


Faro

It was a big mistake to end production of the B757 and I do believe Boeing will come up with a true successor.
The Ceo of Delta has mentioned on numerous occasions how invaluable their capabilities are and that Boeing
should build a successor.



You can expect UAL and AA to order this aircraft as well and many others around the world. there is a definite and unique
niche for the performance the 757 has that is not shared by any other aircraft in its category (because it has it's own) This longer range capability was just starting to be explored when Boeing prematurely pulled the plug on production.



A successor with improved efficiency and say, 5000nm range would be a huge hit.

I do not see it. Such a plane would be too much of a plane to be the basis for NSA, so it would onyl fill the 757 niche, which is already eaten up from below by the 737/A320 which will only get worse with NEO/Max. I think it is just Boeing talk to keep Airlines from pushing Airbus into a A321HGW or something.

Quoting flyingcello (Reply 6): 752/753 sector leads NSA to market at reasonably low production volumes, allowing the technology to be proven. 797-2 and 797-3 (or whatever) come later, replacing MAX.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23): You can expect UAL and AA to order this aircraft as well and many others around the world. there is a definite and unique niche for the performance the 757 has that is not shared by any other aircraft in its category (because it has it's own) This longer range capability was just starting to be explored when Boeing prematurely pulled the plug on production. A successor with improved efficiency and say, 5000nm range would be a huge hit.

This would be the only thing that would really replace the 757. If there were a demand for the aircraft I would think that either manufacture would have come up with a replacement. Boeing had the 753 on offer but there were very few takers and I have yet to see it do what the 752 is capable of.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24): I do not see it. Such a plane would be too much of a plane to be the basis for NSA, so it would onyl fill the 757 niche, which is already eaten up from below by the 737/A320 which will only get worse with NEO/Max. I think it is just Boeing talk to keep Airlines from pushing Airbus into a A321HGW or something.

Boeing already won that sector with the 752ER. The A321 just doesn't have the legs that the 757 has and it was never designed that way. The A321 filled a niche very successfully but I don't believe that it was designed to be in direct competition with Boeing's 752ER.

Quoting skystar767 (Reply 7):

When Boeing took the decision there was no demand, the recession compounded things further.....it was only later that as a freighter the B757 took off and the demand for it increased.....but by then the production line had been shut.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 19): It would certainly beat the 788 at operating costs. We all know that most of the 788 efficiency comes from the engines and the GEnx-2b's are only a few percent more thirsty than the ones on the 788. Given that a 762 has an OEW up to 80,000lbs lighter than a 788, (that's a whole 737's difference), and using the same engines at significantly reduced power settings....adds up to a definite trip cost difference

If a 757 successor were to be floated, the GEnX would not be the engine as GE doesn't have an engine in that class as of yet. Id Look for an updated and uprated version of the Bolls RB211-535E4 OR
a GTF version of the PW-2040. somewhere under 50K# thrust. and a seating capacity somewhere between the 757-200 and 757-300 with a 4500-5500 NMI range
If it's built for the workhorse that the 757 is then I'd HIGHLY doubt if would be all composite as any composite damage and repair could render the airplane out of
service for 2-3 days while the repair is bagged and cooked. I'd look for the newer Alcoa Aluminum-Lithium alloys because
Alcoa was pretty upset that an all composite airframe was lighter and as strong as an Aluminum airframe so I'd look for Alcoa and Reynolds to come up with an alternative somewhere in advance of the Reynolds 4130 standard.
Id also look for them to mill entire fuselage sections with Stringers installed from Section 41-46. and make mating the sections a "slip and fit" to reduce assembly time
I would also look for Composite wings, advanced landing gear and Fly by wire flight controls to save upwards of 6K-7K Lbs. of weight in cables and pulleys with actuators that have their Own reservoirs and
5K Lbs Hydraulic Pressure. Self diagnostic systems and full EICAS fault reporting and monitoring where even the Rig and adjustment of the flight controls, Ailerons, slats, flaps, elevators, spoilers and rudder are all monitored from the flight deck.
triple redundant Flight management and guidance computers and Air data -inertial reference units that not only cross talk but will upload data and faults real time down to 'c' level. for troubleshooting and an onboard MATS computer like the 777 and 787's have
With all of these things the new airplane could come in with a 99.7% reliability rate right out of the box. Also, Install the Wi-Fi system as part if the airframe build and possibly have it installed in the wing to body fairings or the vertical stabilizer.

The $65K question is just how good is the A321NEO GTF going to be? No one knows but rumours have been flying around that it could beat spec.We read about the new slimline seats,we read about the slimline galley , we read about 'double slide' exits and along with a big bump in seating capacity (240ish?), even engine uprate- (its a 757-2 in all but name). What if it has enough range too?
Is this what's worrying Boeing? Because it could get a whole shed load of (US) orders if it does turn out to beat stated spec'.It may well be better than the 788 for many/most tasks! (Oh and cheaper - and available).

Ok, wild and crazy idea! Can Embraer step in? Don't they have a partnership agreement with Boeing already? I could see an E275 or E295, with Boeing's help. Yes, it means Embraer would really start to swim with the giants vs staying under A/B radar as "regional" folks. But I think that Embraer has the right stuff to do it!

I think something's been lost in translation here.   

Someone wake me up when Boeing actually announces something.   

Quoting skystar767 (Reply 7): The 757-300 was dumb

It's still a good aircraft for trans-con.....and you look at the loads on UA and DL and it's always full.

Quoting fanofjets (Reply 14): I'm sure there are many Boeing 757 fans out there saying, "The only replacement for a 757 is another 757."

√ of course!

Re-launch the 757 line....composite it, update the flight deck, and keep the RR engines and I think even the 757-300 could make it over water as well (I know it's a stretch)

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 1): Two chances of this happening, slim and non.

Well, why would Air Astana make such statement in the first place?

Quoting travelhound (Reply 15): Considering the size of the potential 757 market and the fact many airlines have already ordered A321's to fill this segment, I am not sure Boeing could make a business case work for a new build 757 type aircraft.

We don't know what kind of product the 757 successor will be. In fact, we don't know if it will be part of the next narrowbody generation. A few months earlier, Jim McNerney said there will be no moonshot projects (i.e. no clean-sheet programs) in the nearby future. He added a 757 successor might be some sort of 787 derivative with a smaller/narrower fuselage.

I agree a clean-sheet 757 replacement will probably not happen, unless it's part of a new narrowbody family.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23): It was a big mistake to end production of the B757

Noddy was buying it anymore. You can't keep the line running without orders.

[Edited 2014-06-27 05:15:09]

Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2

Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2

That's at least another 20 planes ...I really don't think there's much of a market whatsoever, at least not one a manufacturer would take much interest in.

I still think it's a shame that Boeing said no to Fed Ex when they enquired about a potential 90 plane order about three years after the line closed. Who knows how many more orders could have been had then during that production run as well. But that's all maybe's, the reality is that there isn't likely to be a new aircraft in that segment for the next decade at least but continual improvement tweeks to the B739max and A321neo.

Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2

And how many would they order, around 15, 20 total maybe?

According to AirInsight, less than 50 757 are currently flying routes the A321neo and 737MAX-9 will not be able to serve.

http://airinsight.com/2014/06/26/757-replacement-issue/
http://aeroturbopower.blogspot.com/2...57-successor-discussion-again.html

No idea how many new routes a 757 would open, but I have the feeling we're talking about a nice aircraft here. It's either going to be part of a new narrowbody family, or some sort cheap 787 derivative (see reply #32 above).

[Edited 2014-06-27 05:06:17]

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 33): Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2 Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2 That's at least another 20 planes ...

That's the thing. DL is headed for a mainline fleet of ~800 aircraft and is planning, IIRC, for just 17 to be 757-200s in the TATL/flat-bed config.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 15): Considering the size of the potential 757 market and the fact many airlines have already ordered A321's to fill this segment, I am not sure Boeing could make a business case work for a new build 757 type aircraft.

Totally agree, but let's play around as we do on this topic every quarter.

What is the break even point on the a/c?

Figure the following orders from US based operators:

UA (41 INTL +15 ps + 17 753  73 units
DL (50 (would have been 75 except the 321 order): 50 units
AA (50 new and 50 transfer of 739max orders (latin America, carribean, etc.): 100 units

Who else?

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 37): AA (50 new and 50 transfer of 739max orders (latin America, carribean, etc.): 100 units

AA did not order the B737MAX-9, they ordered the A321neo. I guess they will only take the MAX-8 to replace older -800NG.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 37): UA (41 INTL +15 ps + 17 753 73 units

UA has 21 753s.

Quoting VFRonTop (Reply 21): There are plenty of other airlines that would jump at a true 757 replacement: Icelandair Aer Lingus TAP Portugal Thompson Airways Thomas Cook Jet 2

Aer Lingus? They've only just started operating three (!) humid-leased 757s to test the waters on that market segment. To suggest they'd "jump" at a true 757 replacement is maybe overstating things just a little.

In any case - Boeing shut down the 757 line due to lack of demand, and when they were considering what to do with the 737 re-engine, they also passed on the option of spending more money to develop a more capable 737-9 and/or new 737-10.
Which for now - in my view - tells you all you need to know about the chances of Boeing (or Airbus, for that matter) launching a new narrowbody family this decade with one family member plugging the 757 gap.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23): It was a big mistake to end production of the B757

There was no more demand for it. There wasn't a single 757 order in 2002 and only 7 were ordered in 2003. And you can be sure Boeing tried to drum up some demand before deciding to close the line.
Also note how nobody says "geez - I'd love a new-built 757 now". The only talk is of a 757 successor.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23): You can expect UAL and AA to order this aircraft as well and many others around the world.

If there had been so much demand in this sector, a) the 757 line wouldn't have been shut down, b) Airbus and Boeing would have tried to accommodate a full-on 757 replacement in the MAX/NEO revamp by means of a 737-10 or A322 or c) both.
The truth is - besides very few airlines, the market has largely moved on to the 737-900/-9 and A321ceo/neo. Especially the re-engined variants can do most of what the 757 was able to do, except more efficiently.
I'm sure a 757 replacement will be part of the next narrowbody families. But as I said above, these won't get launched prematurely just to fill the 757 gap.

If they were offering decent efficiency 200 seats and thin transatlantic capacity could see-

Icelandair 5-10
Thomson 10-15 (+TUI scandinavia +5)
Thomas Cook 5-10
Aer Lingus 5
United 15
US American 10-15
Condor Thomas Cook 5
Air Astana 5
Some of the Russian carriers 10+
Finnair ? 5
WestJet 5
Air Transat 5
Monarch 5


So thats 50+ already out of nowhere

Quoting by738 (Reply 41): So thats 50+ already out of nowhere

In other words, a niche.

Show me 1,000 airplanes and you'll have a business case.

[Edited 2014-06-27 06:05:53]

Air Astana seems to think there will be a 757 successor.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...o-delay-787-deliveries-ceo-400828/

"The Air Astana chief says the carrier has no plans to firm up any of those options for the time being, saying he is more interested at this point in Boeing’s plans for a reconstituted 757."

Quoting by738 (Reply 41): Icelandair 5-10 Thomson 10-15 (+TUI scandinavia +5) Thomas Cook 5-10 Aer Lingus 5 United 15 US American 10-15 Condor Thomas Cook 5 Air Astana 5 Some of the Russian carriers 10+ Finnair ? 5 WestJet 5 Air Transat 5 Monarch 5

To be honest - that list doesn't really make a strong business case I'd base the decision to launch a development programme worth a few billion on. Not even a $2bn rewing and stretch of the 737MAX (or A321neo).
For starters, as I already pointed out, Aer Lingus have only just started flying humid-leased 757s, so they're not exactly a strong contender as launch customer for a 757RS, Finnair got rid of all 7 of their 757s already (just like BA got rid of 57 of them)...
Strongest contenders on that list are probably Air Astana (they've said so) and Icelandair.
Still - that's maybe 15 frames and a fair amount of optimism.

As I said before - if demand had been all that strong, we would already have rewinged/stretched A321neo and 737-9 variants on offer.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 37): Who else?

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 32): Jim McNerney said ......... He added a 757 successor might be some sort of 787 derivative with a smaller/narrower fuselage.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 44): To be honest - that list doesn't really make a strong business case

If we join the dots together, we just might come up with a different reality.

If we use current operators of the 757, the route missions they currently fly and than consider the routes where the A321NEO & 737-9MAX will not be suitable, we will have a very small market segment for a true 757 type replacement aircraft. I don't think this type of aircraft will happen!

If we use Jim McNerney's comment that a 757 replacement might be a derivative of the 787, we have an aircraft that is very different to a 757. Subsequently, if we have a plane that is very different to a 757 we might also have a market segment that is very different to the market the 757 flies today.

As such the market segment for the 757 replacement aircraft Jim McNerney talks about, may not actually be definable by current markets flown today.

If we head left filed with our thinking and reference the reasoning behind a A330 Regional aircraft, we just might have a few indicators of the type of market segment Jim McNerney envisages for his 757 replacement aircraft.

I have always been a fan of the NSA/797 for the simple reason it would have been a great aircraft for Pan-Asian airlines. It would have been a plane a little larger than today's narrow bodies, added range enabling it to fly the majority of markets in Asia and of course would have been latest generation technology making it a very economical aeroplane. In other words it would have been a great plane.

If we throw into the mix a 787 derivative plane would be a wide body, Jim McNerney just might be talking about a plane with broad appeal within the market place (LCC's and full service carriers). The business case just might work.

But than again, it could just be Boeing throwing paper plane ideas into the market place to help stall sales of the A321NEO!

Interesting idea, anyway!

Quoting anfromme (Reply 44): To be honest - that list doesn't really make a strong business case I'd base the decision to launch a development programme worth a few billion on

Agreed.

Unless one of the ME3 buy 200 units, it's probably a dead deal.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 1): Two chances of this happening, slim and non.

From an earlier thread:

Boeing Studying A Replacement For The 757

https://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/5413902/

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 8): There were no more orders. Why keep the line open without any demand?

Many forum members who reply to this subject state this however it seems many current 757 operators have held on to their 75s for some reason. If there was a 757 replacement I'll bet airlines might lean towards that instead of the A321 or B739.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 45): I expect a major reason those 757s are still in service is that they are fully depreciated assets.

As Stitch has pointed out, the 757s are fully depreciated assets. The market for new builds would be marginal because the economics would be marginal.