Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:48 pm

The Boeing 757 is basically flying as long as it a good business decision to continue operating the aircraft. The 737 MAX is about the end of the line for further development or enhancements of that aircraft. Boeing is going to need to come out with a new narrow body aircraft to replace both aircraft. It may involve two models, but they should be working on it now. The A321 will never quite equal the 757 and Airbus will need to address that issue also. Airbus's narrow body aircraft will be pretty much past it's prime in another ten years and they should also be addressing that issue now.
Both Airbus and Boeing are going to find it pretty much tough sledding in the under 150 to 165 seat aircraft with the potential competition of Bombardier and Embraer along with any other manufactures that can get their acts together.   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:51 pm

Quoting delta88 (Reply 12):
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?

So, putting aside the business case for the plane, what sort of features do you guys/gals think the 7X7 will/should have?

1. New engines - (duh) GTF? sole engine offering? who's got the best product?
2. New wing - (again, I think this is a given) - flaps at the wingtips? 787 style flex? carbon construction?
3. Carbon fuselage?
4. Width - (please God have them make the damn thing a scooch wider!)
5. Larger windows?
6. 2L door of sufficient placement to allow regular use for boarding between cabins??

From my (passenger) perspective, a 737 isn't and will never be a 757. One of the great features of the 757 that I love is, when flying business, being able to board through the second door so everyone isn't tramping through business on the way to the sardine class. I believe a new narrow body aircraft, with a international business cabin, capable of flying transatlantic would be very attractive to the airlines.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6593
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:41 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 19):
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.

But not nearly enough of a difference to make the "762 MAX" more attractive than a used 757 below it or a 788 above it. The OEW difference will be partly undone by worse aerodynamics, and the capacity is not that different from a 757. The 757 will have far lower seat-mile costs.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 19):
Heck, people are still makng good profits with the current gas sucking 767's...and they'll be flying for another decade yet.

People are making decent money with 763s, not 762s, and that's only because of low capital cost. Very few 762s are left in operation because they just aren't profitable. UA's are gone (despite the young age of some frames), DL's are gone, pmAA's are gone, and pmUS's are just around until the next A330s are delivered. Globally, they're strictly the territory of third-rate operators. Expensive new engines would help the operating cost a bit but make the capital cost equation even worse.

Again, this is a problem that can only be solved by a narrowbody. A widebody below 788 size just won't be able to compete in today's market.
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 4:41 pm

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

They've been kicking it around since 787 launch to including asking airlines and airports about the criteria, so its hardly slim and none. The market needs a 180 to 220 seat aircraft that can pull off cross country flights with ease, bounce out of short field airports without a weight penalty and hop the Atlantic with better comfort than the 737/A320 can provide.

Quoting JoeCanuck (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.

They both have horrid airfield performance and apparently the 737-900 has a tipping problem when its not loaded properly. In the air, I'm not sure there is much a difference.
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 4:57 pm

Quoting karlB737 (Reply 48):
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.

As stated by Stitch... because they are paid for.

Quoting karlB737 (Reply 48):
If there was a 757 replacement I'll bet airlines might lean towards that instead of the A321 or B739.

They wouldn't because the 757 replacement would be significantly more expensive to purchase and residuals would pose a problem.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 50):
Boeing is going to need to come out with a new narrow body aircraft to replace both aircraft. It may involve two models, but they should be working on it now.

They constantly are working on and refining concepts.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 50):
The A321 will never quite equal the 757 and Airbus will need to address that issue also. Airbus's narrow body aircraft will be pretty much past it's prime in another ten years and they should also be addressing that issue now.

They don't "need" to address "that issue". And the A321 will not be past its prime becuase the engines are the key drivers and there is an improvement and upgrade path for them.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 50):
Both Airbus and Boeing are going to find it pretty much tough sledding in the under 150 to 165 seat aircraft with the potential competition of Bombardier and Embraer along with any other manufactures that can get their acts together.

EMB will not enter the market. BBD is no "threat".
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
T5towbar
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:06 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:02 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
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.

IMHO, nothing beats the 757-200. That's one beautiful bird that can do it all. Power. Performance. Comfort. I love flying on those birds. Except the 753, IMHO, it's the best narrowbody out there bar none.

Why replace it with a souped up 321 or a 739? Both of those aircraft are great at what they do now. The Airbus birds are more comfortable seating wise and more roomier. Is their a need for a high performance, all purpose narrowbody now?
A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
 
intermodal64
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:16 pm

Quoting bchandl (Reply 18):
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.

Love it! You just made my day!
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:21 pm

Quoting T5towbar (Reply 55):
Why replace it with a souped up 321 or a 739?

Why - operational costs. According to Condor the new A321WL they are getting beat their 753s when it comes to CASM. So although they do love their paid for former CASM kings 753, the CEO says they hardly won´t be around after 2020 and A321s (NEOs) will replace them.

For Condor / Thomas Cook the NEOs (as well as their new CEO WL) have enough range and payload to fly all routes they used the 757s on.
 
intermodal64
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:43 pm

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

I'll take a 757 or an A-321 over a 10-across 777 any day. It's the same misery but on a much smaller scale. My last flight across the Atlantic in a 757 was not bad. I keep waiting for A to put 4 engines on an A-321 and declare it more efficient  
 
KarlB737
Posts: 2828
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:45 pm

Quoting T5towbar (Reply 55):
IMHO, nothing beats the 757-200. That's one beautiful bird that can do it all. Power. Performance. Comfort.

This sums it all up. T5towbar I fully agree.
 
karadion
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:06 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:00 pm

Curious question. Is it possible that the 783 can be a possible candidate for replacing the 757? I know the 757 is a single aisle whereas the 783 was a proposed twin-aisle for the Japanese market.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27039
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:07 pm

Quoting Karadion (Reply 60):
Is it possible that the 783 can be a possible candidate for replacing the 757?

Boeing (jokingly, IMO) suggested the 787-3 could be a replacement for the 757-300.

Of course, it's a moot point due to the 787-3's wingspan proving to be too narrow to be efficient (and I do not believe folding wingtips are the answer as the fold would need to be 4m inboard and I believe control surfaces are within that space).
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:46 pm

I think it is about time for a true 757 replacement, do not get me wrong, A321s and 739s are ok a/c, but they are not the best 757 replacement. I think a 9 hour narrowbody could work, if it has a cabin width of 13 ft 8 inches.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:53 pm

Quoting bchandl (Reply 18):
A very small market. Very small, DL doesn't even fly this.

I believe NW did pre-merger (if not then I think DL did, shortly postmerger). Which craft did they use? It probably wasn't a 752, though if it was I'd be extremely impressed (and surprised that they couldn't fill it with East Coast traffic).

Quoting bchandl (Reply 18):
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.

I say this as a range example; take whatever else you want out of HNL in that general circle range. That includes DFW and IAH, though those are both already connected to HNL via Widebody. Obviously you're only going to do something that far from somewhere that's a hub, and I wouldn't be too surprised if AUS at least became a strong focus city for someone in a not too distant time. If anything, I'd expect a 752 size craft to be able to at least fill on that, particularly if there is connecting traffic.
 
by738
Posts: 3077
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 7:59 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 7:06 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 57):
For Condor / Thomas Cook the NEOs (as well as their new CEO WL) have enough range and payload to fly all routes they used the 757s on

What about short runway performance and short runways ie Samos etc plus its not all about current routes, but expanding markets to destinations they perhaps dont serve, longer haul that dont need the 767
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 7:29 pm

Quoting Karadion (Reply 60):
Curious question. Is it possible that the 783 can be a possible candidate for replacing the 757? I know the 757 is a single aisle whereas the 783 was a proposed twin-aisle for the Japanese market.

More a 767-3 replacement. Two-class with 6 across in 38" pitch F (32 seats) and 8 across in 32" pitch Y (224 seats) with transcon range. That's a 767-300ER of there ever was one. The airfield performance was insane like a 757 though. Just under 7,500-feet at max payload. Landing was under 5,000-feet. Range was about 4,000 miles.
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 8:13 pm

In order to compete with A321/B739 an all new design must sell 2000 birds - the 757 market never was this size and 90% replacement are already done.

So is there any way to create a new 7x7 with 200 seats and 5000 miles range with below 10 billion development costs?

All I could think of is a significantly changed 737 wing (+ wing box) that allows for 20-30 tons higher MTOW 737 variants, using 737 fuseledge and components and production lines.
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 8:44 pm

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 66):
In order to compete with A321/B739 an all new design must sell 2000 birds - the 757 market never was this size and 90% replacement are already done.

So is there any way to create a new 7x7 with 200 seats and 5000 miles range with below 10 billion development costs?

All I could think of is a significantly changed 737 wing (+ wing box) that allows for 20-30 tons higher MTOW 737 variants, using 737 fuseledge and components and production lines.

First, when you consider the market size you have to consider the 757 and the 767-200 along with some downgauging of domestic range 767-3s.

Second, it wouldn't be a one off aircraft type replacement, it provides the tube and many systems that would transfer to the 737 replacement. When the initially built the 757 it ultimately started with a 727, went to a 737 and finished up with the 757 using largely the same tube and variations in other features (lower lobe, wing, nose, empennage). This would be a reverse of that so the real cost that would need to be offset is the wing and probably empennage for this type. Everything outside of that would transfer to the 737 replacement. Its why this won't be a small widebody as some have suggested. In fact, it may even just be one aircraft slotted between a 757-200 and a 757-300. Shrink it, replace the wing and empennage and you have a plane between the 737-8 and 737-9. Shrink it again and you have a plane between the 737-7 and 737-8 and you're done.

Now you're talking about recovering most of your development costs over 5,000-10,000 aircraft.

[Edited 2014-06-27 13:45:23]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:22 pm

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 67):
Everything outside of that would transfer to the 737 replacement.
Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 67):
Shrink it, replace the wing and empennage and you have a plane between the 737-8 and 737-9. Shrink it again and you have a plane between the 737-7 and 737-8 and you're done.

The timing is off. In the scenario presented the 757 replacement falls into a box canyon.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
bchandl
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:49 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:26 pm

First, I 100% disagree with the idea that AUS would ever have a HNL flight. But if they did, let's take a look at your choices in aircraft.....

Quoting S75752 (Reply 63):
It probably wasn't a 752,

The 757-200 has a listed range of 3900mi, so like 3500 in reality.

MSP-HNL is 3972.

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=msp-hnl,+aus-hnl

Quoting S75752 (Reply 63):
I'd expect a 752 size craft to be able to at least fill on that, particularly if there is connecting traffic.
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=msp-hnl,+aus-hnl

AUS-HNL is 3763mi. Again, too much distance for the birds.

Also, having widebody service from two of your next door neighbors is gonna make this a really hard flight to fill. Especially to a sand and sun destination that is widely used as a mileage dumping ground. Not good yields.

I agree that one day AUS may become a focus city of someone. But that someone will not be United(IAH), AA(Dallas), WN(HOU) so that really leaves DL to make a focus city there.

That is something I could really see down the line if AUS area keeps up it's impressive economic growth. However, even if DL made a focus city with ~50 flights a day, there would not be a HNL flight. They offer it from ATL, LAX and SEA through alaska air.

With LAX and ATL, there are not a whole lot of areas in the country that make either don't have service from LAX or ATL and that are better served by AUS as a connection point.

Now add back in that the 757 does not work..... 767 or 787? If someone did do it, which they won't, the best bird for the job is the 787, but nobody will use a 787 for this kind of route.

Interesting thought though, they did get a BA flight on a 787! Who saw that coming? Nobody.

bchandl
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:41 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 32):
Nobody was buying it anymore. You can't keep the line running without orders.

People seem to forget that. Boeing even took it on a Wide World Tour to try to drum up support. No response. No one was buying it.
Add to that, it was expensive to build (kind of handmade...).

Operators buy them used now... because they are cheap.
But at today's fuel prices, they wouldn't buy them new for the price that Boeing would need to set.

I'm with everyone here... A 757 capable replacement will be part of the upper end of a new narrow body program.....2025.
learning never stops.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 10:16 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 70):
I'm with everyone here... A 757 capable replacement will be part of the upper end of a new narrow body program.....2025.

10 years is quite a bit of time. But, on the other hand, you can go through old 737 replacement threads and posters were 'screaming' that Boeing would have their 737 EIS by... 2012. I know. Looks funny now.  

The moral of the story is... we don't know. So much can change!  
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2531
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:23 pm

Hi all,
I believe that IF a true 757 replacement was to be designed and built, Qantas and Virgin Australia could well be interested for domestic, near-Asia and transTasman flights. Jetstar might also be interested, but I could see them retaining their one narrow body family policy (A32X) for cost reasons.
I also agree that the true 757 successor will be the upper end of the Boeing NSA in a decade or so. As much as I would love a 757MAX, or a clean sheet design now, I don't believe either will happen. I believe eventually a 787 'regional' will happen further down the track, perhaps when the Dreamliner goes through an inevitable 'Classic' to 'NG' transition.
Keep smiling,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:46 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 71):

787 was announced in 2005 as the 7E7 and they were doing legwork with the airlines and airports 2 years before that. Time flies when you're having fun and maybe they have actually learned a thing or two from the 787 on production timelines....
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:03 am

Quoting bchandl (Reply 69):
Quoting S75752 (Reply 63):
It probably wasn't a 752,

The 757-200 has a listed range of 3900mi, so like 3500 in reality.

One of the longest 757 nonstop routes I recall was DTW-FRA (3.616 nm) on NW which only lasted a few months. And NW's 757s used on transatlantic routes had a very low-density seating configuration with only 160 seats (16 J at 60-inch pitch and 144 Y at 33/34-inch pitch).

Westbound fuel stops aren't unknown on shorter 757 Europe-U.S. routes.
 
FSXJunkie
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:30 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:15 am

Quoting skystar767 (Reply 7):

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.

Agree, I'm thinking that (if true) this maybe 'Yellowstone 1'

Boeing was originally resistant to do a re-engine of the 737, citing plans for a wholly new airframe. Boeing had to cave to demand and produce the MAX, stalling Y1. So (again, if true) marketing Y1 as a 757 successor would be a means of saving face.

Interesting bit is the rumor that Y1 is to have a "near elliptical" fuselage, with a twin aisle 2-3-2 arrangement, if that is indeed the case...bundle that with the 787's growing pains and marketing as a 757 replacement is the best route (serves as a 'soft open' to iron out the kinks.)

Also think the retro designations for the 737 replacement versions will be, 797-5 (737-700), 797-6 (737-800), and 797-7 (737-900.) [Would be hilarious if they did a 797-4 (737-600) with the 'near elliptical' fuselage, it'd look like a cocktail weenie with wings.]
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:23 am

 
bchandl
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:49 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:32 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 74):

Westbound fuel stops aren't unknown on shorter 757 Europe-U.S. routes.

Exactly. AUS/MSP-HNL are both longer than that.

...And I am no geographer but I am pretty sure there are very few fuel stops between the west coast and HNL.

If you are going to stop on the west coast for fuel, it totally defeats the purpose of having a "direct" flight from AUS or MSP.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 4:49 am

Quoting bchandl (Reply 77):
Exactly. AUS/MSP-HNL are both longer than that.

...And I am no geographer but I am pretty sure there are very few fuel stops between the west coast and HNL.

I am specifically saying that a 757 successor should be able to handle routes such as that and more, to function also as a partial 767 replacement for some of the 767's lower range routes. I did not say that it should be a direct clone of the 757-200ER, which I don't doubt is unable to practically handle most if not all of the routes I listed.

Those are routes I would think would at least be able to fill a 752 sized plane with connecting traffic.

So all in all... I'd hope for a successor with a size somewhere between 752 and 753, a 737-similar cockpit, and something of a ~4300 Mile headwind range.

When the 757 was actually open for orders, was it widely known yet that it could handle TATL's?
 
bchandl
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:49 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:20 am

Quoting S75752 (Reply 78):
So all in all... I'd hope for a successor with a size somewhere between 752 and 753, a 737-similar cockpit, and something of a ~4300 Mile headwind range.

When the 757 was actually open for orders, was it widely known yet that it could handle TATL's?

I think there is a place for such a plane in today's market. Not a big one.

TATL would be the only advantage it has over a 737max/a321neo. With most major airlines having orders for one or both of these birds, it is unlikely they would order a fleet size to do both TATL and trans con routes.

Small use in the route networks of fleets moving forward.

But if the 767s are leaving, and they are, and you want to fly thinner tatl routes..... what are the options?

A330 and 787?

777 and the X is way too much plane.

This is where the A330neo will become very very useful.
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2531
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:28 am

Actually, I am beginning to think maybe there is more to the story re 767-2C, the KC-46A Pegasus tanker for the USAF, as a poster much earlier in this thread suggested. I seem to recall Boeing making statements years ago during the selection process about this plane being made available on the commercial market, and it has been veiled in a cloak of near secrecy since it's (re)launch after the competition fiasco of years ago. Could this veil be hiding the development of some kind of 767-2 MAX? I doubt it, but I think it's more possible than a near-term all-new 757 replacement, and Air Astana have been taking deliveries of new 767s lately...
Food for thought,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
opethfan
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:44 am

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 70):

The consensus among many is that the entire world's airlines are scratching at the doors in Everett screaming "Please! Make some more 752s! We want them so badly! Please!" and Boeing have put a chair under the door handle and is reading a magazine while taking pleasure in the woe of their customers. "Buy some Dreamliners instead!" they call through the door every now and again.

Because they hate money, y'know.
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1739
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:59 am

I can see WN needing something with 4500mi range. This would get them to Europe from places other than BWI and deep into South America like LIM, SCL, and EZE nonstop from the bigger cities. WHen the 787-3 was first announced, it sounded like the perfect plane for WN's future growth.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
bchandl
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:49 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:01 am

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 80):
Could this veil be hiding the development of some kind of 767-2 MAX?

I'll give you the long answer:

No.
 
SXDFC
Posts: 2025
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:07 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:04 am

IMHO which ever engineer at Boeing who gives the go-ahead for the 757 replacement, should be awarded a free lifetime First Class membership as it would end these 757 threads.. I am also starting to believe that a-net should replace that 747 banner with a 757..

IMHO the 757 can be compared to a "modern day DC-3" because "only a DC-3 can replace a DC-3." If Boeing nor Airbus can offer a true 757 replacement, then why cant Boeing come up with some sort of "life extension" package for the 757? WN is currently re-skinning their 733s, and I can imagine the same can be done on a 757. So with new skin, Schimitar winglets, and cabin refurb, it will almost be like a "new 757."
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2531
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:17 am

Quoting bchandl (Reply 83):

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 80):
Could this veil be hiding the development of some kind of 767-2 MAX?

I'll give you the long answer:

No.


Hi mate,
Is that an opinion or fact from some source you are aware of that isn't public.
I'm curious...
Thanks,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:24 am

Quoting by738 (Reply 64):
What about short runway performance and short runways ie Samos etc plus its not all about current routes, but expanding markets to destinations they perhaps dont serve, longer haul that dont need the 767

The CEO said nothing about any limitations. They can serve the 753 routes with a even lower than expected fuel burn. (based on the 3 CEO in the fleet so far) They would love to keep the 753 flying for as long as possible, but they do not see sense in it after 2020 due to the A321NEO.

It is interesting that Condor currently sees no sense in replacing the 763 with 787s, as they consider them too expensive, too large and they can not make use of the range.

Quoting bchandl (Reply 79):

TATL would be the only advantage it has over a 737max/a321neo. With most major airlines having orders for one or both of these birds, it is unlikely they would order a fleet size to do both TATL and trans con routes.

TATL, the A321NEO is aiming for 3650nm range with 185 pax. Let them find a 1-2% percent performance increase in testing and maybe do a IGW with an additional fuel tank, they can probably easily go to 3900-4000nm.

[Edited 2014-06-28 00:33:10]
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:52 am

DL would be all over this like flies on poop   

The main issue is i'm not certain this will be rolling out until at the very least, 2020. The amount of retooling and designing involved means this will probably be past any currently flying 757's lifespan.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21798
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:05 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 15):
and the fact many airlines have already ordered A321's to fill this segment

As time goes on, the A320 NEO will gain more MTOW and more range until it is functionally a 752 replacement.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:06 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 88):
As time goes on, the A320 NEO will gain more MTOW and more range until it is functionally a 752 replacement.

I would never in my life go TATL on a cramped A320. Maaaaybe on a 321.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:09 am

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 81):
The consensus among many is that the entire world's airlines are scratching at the doors in Everett screaming "Please! Make some more 752s! We want them so badly! Please!"

Well, that's the first problem... they are scratching at the wrong address.  
Quoting SXDFC (Reply 84):
then why cant Boeing come up with some sort of "life extension" package for the 757?

Coz no one will pay for it.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 86):
TATL, the A321NEO is aiming for 3650nm range with 185 pax. Let them find a 1-2% percent performance increase in testing and maybe do a IGW with an additional fuel tank, they can probably easily go to 3900-4000nm.

PW already has the upgrade path mapped for the GTF to proved a 10% improvement by early '20s.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21798
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:23 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 89):
I would never in my life go TATL on a cramped A320. Maaaaybe on a 321.

It's as least as wide as the 757.

I've sat on an A319 for almost 7h from JFK to SFO. That's like a TATL flight.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18955
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:48 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 89):
I would never in my life go TATL on a cramped A320. Maaaaybe on a 321.

Other than there being more rows of seats on an A321, you'd have exactly the same space as on an A320 (or A319 for that matter).   
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 9:20 am

My predictions of what a 757 successor will be:

Boeing:

- A clean sheet designed narrowbody twin engine jet
- Entry into service around 2025
- Family name 797
- It will be part of the same fleet type and developed together with the 737 successor (maybe 797-2/-3/-4 for the 737 successor, and 797-8/-9 for the 757 successor) and use refined 787 technology
- It will have the same cockpit as the 787 and 777-X for commonality
- It will have a range of 2500 to 5,500 NM depending on model (maybe two sets of wings)
- It will burn 20% less fuel than contemporary aircraft of the same size, and will be 25% cheaper to operate
- It will open new markets nobody have yet thought about seriously

Airbus:

- It will not be a clean sheet design
- An A321 stretch named A322 with the NEO engines
- Entry into service around 2020
- It will have the same cockpit as the A321NEO
- It will have a range of up to 4500 NM

Of course these are completely unqualified speculations, but that's part of what makes airliners.net forums fun.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:53 am

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

Karel seems to have an answer for you downthread...    ...

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 32):
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.
http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/attachment.php?attachmentid=52212&d=1261596498
http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/attach...hp?attachmentid=52212&d=1261596498

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/2/5/2213529.jpg
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/2/5/2213529.jpg

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):

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.

It's a lonely crusade we are on here, my friend...but why not make it a longer term replacement?   .

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
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.

They should not focus on just the A321NEO when there are bigger pickings in the A330NEO. And you had just put forward a good candidate for that.....

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
If they need the space, the 764 has about a foot and a half longer gear.
.
Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 13):
It's called the 787-8 Dreamliner. CF6-80s will work just fine with the 767.

The Dreamliner has the GEnx1B and is made of CFRP. Non-updated 767s won't stand a chance...CF6-80s are older generation and less efficient.

Quoting S75752 (Reply 17):
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.

   Though not only for the lower range routes.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 19):
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.

Never say never...with Boeing promising to "react" to the A330NEO's launch...and GE smarting from its exclusion and wanting another application for their GEnx2B.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 27):
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.

Sounds like a viable plan for a B764E refresh...   .

Quoting bchandl (Reply 79):
This is where the A330neo will become very very useful.

Or whatever Boeing will come up with.   

[Edited 2014-06-28 05:11:31]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
pierrelav
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:48 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:00 pm

9 Hours in a single aisle plane!!!! Unles flying business class, I will always look for an other kind of plane...,.. Hell for the crew and passengers!!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27039
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:03 pm

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 80):
Actually, I am beginning to think maybe there is more to the story re 767-2C, the KC-46A Pegasus tanker for the USAF, as a poster much earlier in this thread suggested. I seem to recall Boeing making statements years ago during the selection process about this plane being made available on the commercial market, and it has been veiled in a cloak of near secrecy since it's (re)launch after the competition fiasco of years ago. Could this veil be hiding the development of some kind of 767-2 MAX? I doubt it, but I think it's more possible than a near-term all-new 757 replacement, and Air Astana have been taking deliveries of new 767s lately...

Boeing will certify the 767-2C under a Supplementary Type Certificate for the 767 so it will be available for commercial sale if anyone wants it. Keep in mind, however, that the 767-2C is only offered as a freighter, not as a passenger frame.

And there will definitely not be a new engine option for the airframe. The only chance of that happening would have been if the USAF paid for it, and they instead chose to go with an uprated version of the existing Pratt & Whitney PW4000.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10224
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:30 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 46):
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.

The 787-3 could have been much more if it was not specifically targeted for one nation versus a market segment.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 52):
A widebody below 788 size just won't be able to compete in today's market.

I take this to be general since the 788 is larger than the A330, let's leave the 767 out for simplicity sake.

Quoting Karadion (Reply 60):
Curious question. Is it possible that the 783 can be a possible candidate for replacing the 757? I know the 757 is a single aisle whereas the 783 was a proposed twin-aisle for the Japanese market.

I think a re-designed 787-3 with a smaller barrel and wing but using the same construction methods of the larger 787, whether financially possible is the question. The a/c would be the 757 / A300 replacement and possible open some additional routes with more comfort options than a narrow body does today.

Quoting S75752 (Reply 78):
When the 757 was actually open for orders, was it widely known yet that it could handle TATL's?

The a/c was always TATL capable, so not flying those routes was not a physical issue, one may say it was a cultural one.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 88):
As time goes on, the A320 NEO will gain more MTOW and more range until it is functionally a 752 replacement.

How much time does the a/c have to achieve those gains, when do we envision a new narrow body a/c? Boeing bit the bullet and went upgrade versus NSA, some still think this was a bad idea as there is much more room for improvement on its competitor a/c than the 737, so will the try a bridge too far again?
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:46 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 97):
How much time does the a/c have to achieve those gains,

The major gains come from the engines and PW has laid out an improvement path (some have speculated that it is conservative) that will result in a further 10% gain by early 2020s. And now add in the other PIPs.

Quoting par13del (Reply 97):
when do we envision a new narrow body a/c?

Realistically... not till the later part of next decade.

Quoting par13del (Reply 97):
Boeing bit the bullet and went upgrade versus NSA, some still think this was a bad idea as there is much more room for improvement on its competitor a/c than the 737, so will the try a bridge too far again?

On A.net, speculation is like playing Monopoly... it ain't your own real money!   In the real world it really is the bottom line when it comes to launching a new program and all that matters to Boeing is to make investors "happy".

So there won't be any new NB program until the second half of the next decade. So much can change in the next ten years that the best speculation is to outline the various possible scenarios for 2025+ and imagine what the response might be.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
sv11
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

RE: The 757 Successor

Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:01 pm

I suspect Boeing may use the 737 max systems and fuselage and new wing, engines to get a 757 replacement. The wing, engines could be modified slightly from the ones in the max also.

sv11

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