Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
n7371f
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:54 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:46 am

The whole 757 issue ought to be dubbed the "Harry Stonecipher". He's the one who butchered the 757 decision - and got into a pissing match with Alan Mullally about it. The decision to shut down the 757 came down to an ego battle between the two. I know it's hard to believe - but this is true. Told to me one night over drinks by someone who worked right alongside these two.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:09 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
Bottom line is that the line's been gone for over a decade now, and for good reason. The a/c was overbuilt for the mission and needed a unique engine thrust rating, and no one was ordering them any more. The factories are either now shopping malls or 737 final assembly lines, and both of those things brought Boeing more cash than making more 757s would.

This is a good a post as anyone has ever made on this subject.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 31):
Quoting Aesma (Reply 28):
Also I'm not sure why it is often overlooked in these threads that the 757 was mainly bought by US airlines.

Mainly, but BA was a launch customer, owned up to 54 of them and operated them for 27 years.

Yes BA had 54 of them, and totally underutilised their capabilities. Flying a heavy over powered aircraft on an average sector length of a few hundred miles.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 40):
Biggest mistake Boeing's ever made and they're paying the price now with the dilemma of how to fight the A321N



Shutting down the 757 line because of a temporary slump was very shortsighted, if they'd kept it ticking over sales would have picked back up, especially with the proposed, revamped version and it would still be in production today saving Boeing billions in development costs for a new version to compete with AB.


They may have saved a bit back then but its going to cost them dearly now.

Do you have any idea of the costs involved in keeping a line open ?
Firstly there's the bit that everyone sees, the assembly building and its jigs.
Then there's the press tools and such like, many of which are held by sub contractors. A sub contractor doesn't mind having some Boeing owned tooling taking up space when its used to produce 50 units per year, when however production falls to just a handful, not only are they looking for a price increase due to the loss of efficiency, but are also questioning if its a good use of their factory space. One present example of this is the 748I, I recall that one major sub contractor pulled out last year due to low build rates and Boeing have had to take the work in house.
Lastly we have the cost of continuing engineering, as the years pass, proprietary products go out of production and need to be replaced,
Also rules and regulations change and have to be worked in. As one example many years ago in the UK they banned cadmium plating, my employers had to implement changes across hundreds of products as a result.

Of course even with stopping production a manufacturer can't entirely walk away from some of these issues, but its a lot easier to assess the future needs of the fleet and make final purchases of spares as parts become obsolete, than it is to continue low quantity production. Especially as there is a large market in breaking aircraft down for spares.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3552
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:45 am

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 22):
Using these numbers, the hypothetical comparison would become: In the 25 years the 757 was available for offer, Boeing sold 1,049 units (~42 per year). In the 13 years since Boeing stopped accepting 757 orders, they've sold 922 of the largest 737 models available at the time (~71 per year).

You also have to figure in the increase in passenger numbers & flights that have nothing to do with we sold this many over this many years claims. There has been a huge increase in flights that had to have new airframes to cover. You need to figure in those percentages to get a more accurate figure.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:04 am

The OP goes from "flying drunk isn't a problem you people are just too PC" to now talking about bringing back the 757? Is there no website not overrun with youtube level trolls?
 
hiflyer
Posts: 1274
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:38 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:29 am

IMHO this is one of the top threads that rises from the dead over and over.....and usually from our newer members. Says a lot about the 757. Mercure/Airbus started with a clean sheet with that narrowbody design whereas Boeing has played hug the ground with all the narrowbody 7 series except the 757 (cheaper for airlines as did not have to own a lot of ground equipment...worked them all standing on the ground sometimes). Giving it 'legs' and a hot motor and cockpit commonality to the 767 made the aircraft the legend it is rapidly becoming. Meanwhile Airbus built lighter...gave the barrel some width...and none of those engine constraints which let them have multiple vendors and competition on engine pricing.

So...why did Boeing just rewing the 739...give it real legs...get some engine choices and go for it? First off cheaper not to...and still hit 75% or more of the 757 missions. I understand the 788 is planned to cover the difference and does for Non-US carriers...believe AA is going to use one on the ORD-MAN run....UA still goes with about a 8 hr rule it seems except for positioning to/from mtc bases to gateways.

Cleansheet a 757 with a touch wider fuselage...spun barrel for weight...new wings...and great motors....but that's another thread often repeated here.  
 
blacksoviet
Topic Author
Posts: 1646
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:41 am

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 53):

I didnt say anything about bringing back the 757. All I asked was if it was a mistake for Boeing to destroy the tooling?, and it sounds like the answer to that question is yes.

The cost of reconstructing the tooling would be so high that Boeing might as well spend a little bit more and go with a clean-sheet design. I think everyone here understands that.
 
User avatar
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3634
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:04 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
Nope.

The tooling would only be the tip of the iceberg in terms of restarting 757 production.

You'd have to get GE/Pratt/RR to come up with a modern engine otherwise LEAP/GTF will kick its butt.

And you'd have to get all the supply chain ramped up again otherwise those tools don't have anything going into them.

And you'd have to find customers that are willing to pay for the capabilities it would provide beyond the A320/737 families because it simply is not as efficient as A320/737 for the missions they can do.

And build all new factories since the ones that built the 757 in Renton are all gone or re-purposed now.

This sums most of it up. It's not like Boeing destroying the tooling was the final nail in the coffin for 757 production...there's a very long laundry list of decade-old pulled plugs that would have to be sorted out for that airplane to go back to market. Anyone paying attention to the program back when the lights were shut off in 2004 knows that it was sputtering...airlines simply weren't buying the plane in significant numbers (hadn't been for a few years, at that) and any Boeing executive worth their salt would have pulled the plug on it.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
The factories are either now shopping malls or 737 final assembly lines, and both of those things brought Boeing more cash than making more 757s would.

Not to nitpick, but none of Boeing's RNT factories have been torn down for shopping malls...they just happen to be surrounded by them. The 757 final assembly line is dedicated to 737 work now.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
Too be competitive, so much of the 757 would be re-engineered that it would be better to start from scratch.

The thing that most confounds me about these recurring "destroyed 757 tooling" threads is the idea that Boeing would still be selling a late '70s design like hotcakes today if they'd just held on a little longer. While the 757 does fit some unique mission profiles, most of what its missions (as many have pointed out) can be done by an A32X/B737, especially with the most current generations. Used 757s have been hot-sellers in recent years, but the key word there is USED. What airline wouldn't want to snap up a capable aircraft with a few thousand cycles left in it at a great price? I doubt we'd see the same enthusiasm for a 2016 new-build 757, especially with the A321NEO on offer...

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 38):
Anybody else tired of this subject? The horse is dead; stop beating it.

The horse will be beaten until the destroyed tooling is repatriated!
Picked a hell of a week to quit sniffing glue.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:52 pm

No. By today's standards (ie, A321, A321NEO, 739, 739MAX), you are too heavy and too draggy.

You'd need a new, lighter and more efficient wing. And that would likely lead to a new THS. Maybe, just maybe you could keep the fin.

Then you'd go out and look for a new, state-of-the art engine in your thrust class to power the thing and realise that...there are none...


Faro
The chalice not my son
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8600
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:57 pm

OMG...another the 757 is greater than Elvis thread.

I am SHOCKED  Wow!

Let it go, people.
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 3:29 pm

Would the old 757 tooling even have been applicable at all for the composite materials that would comprise a hull of a newer aircraft? What even comprises tooling for aircraft, anyways?

Do the 737 Max and 777 X's even use the same tooling as their predecessors?
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:58 pm

Airliners.net should make an exception:

Re-instate all old archived/locked "757 Tooling / 757 Restart" threads about every 5 months so that folks can continue to discuss the topic ad nauseum , instead of constantly starting new threads.
learning never stops.
 
Max Q
Posts: 8172
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 12:53 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 43):
From January 2002-2004, the aircraft sold a grand total of 7 (seven!) units.... and you call that a "temporary slump?"

I do, Boeing is currently manufacturing the 748 at the rate of .5 frames per month or just 6 a year, just a little greater rate than the 757 at the end of its production, they're not going to make the same mistake they did again by shutting down the 747 line and then watch demand increase.

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 43):
I'm surprised that the shareholders didn't flay the executives alive, for allowing it to even get *that* far.

I'm surprised they allowed them to be that shortsighted, ending production of an aircraft whose capability and future potential had and still has no match.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
Max Q
Posts: 8172
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 12:58 am

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 51):
Do you have any idea of the costs involved in keeping a line open ?

What's the cost of developing a replacement ?



It will seem like chump change !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6919
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 1:36 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):
they're not going to make the same mistake they did again by shutting down the 747 line and then watch demand increase.

God forbid    or else, we'd be subjected to endless threads clamoring for their return long after the replacement AF1s will have been delivered and 748F orders have dried up. Admittedly though, many (yours truly included) derive much fun taking part in them.   
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
alyusuph
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:38 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 1:56 am

Quoting TheRedBAron (Reply 36):
I bet there is echo in A net, since these 757 revival threads pop up every month or so... One of my favorite Aircraft, but sadly there were no customers and even today there would be no customers since the 739 and A321 can do 95% of th emissions for a lot le$$.

Just like the constant popping up of discussions around the A380 or B748 production being a mistake -and for the former, EK is having a very good time with them -and the B787 teething problems; -ignoring that it is a huge leap in aircraft innovation for decades, and the current iteration of the 737 being an archaic ugly design, when it is not.

Some Anetters just love to see and discuss what we love.

[Edited 2016-04-29 19:01:16]
I am not an Airbus or Boeing fan, just an aircraft fan
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:22 am

Quoting alyusuph (Reply 64):
Some Anetters just love to see and discuss what we love.

Agree but after like 23 threads on the same topic it gets boring, I really like the 757 and I miss it since it seldom is used in MEX, but its dead, its gone it will never be built again, but thankfully DELTA will fly them till 2040...LOL

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:55 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):

I'm surprised they allowed them to be that shortsighted, ending production of an aircraft whose capability and future potential had and still has no match.

The 757 was developed before the 737NG, by the time its time had come it was about the right time to go. The 737 was just the plane that airlines would build entire fleets out of, the 757 wasn't.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 62):

What's the cost of developing a replacement ?

Whatever the cost is of developing the 737 replacement, because that is what it will be as well.


It still begs the question if the 757 tooling would even have any relevance at all for a composite and new generation aircraft.
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 12:17 pm

If the 757 was going to have had a reincarnation then it should have been in the 1990s.

After the 757/767 launched Boeing essentially switched its focus along these lines: -
> 737 Classic relaunch - 737-300, -400, -500
> 747-400
> 777-200/-300
> 737NG (-600, -700, -800, -900)
> 747-500/-600 - never got off the ground
> Sonic Cruiser
> 777-200LR/777-300ER
> 787
> 737MAX

My personal view is that after the launch of the 737NG Boeing should have looked at a 757NG/767NG and refreshed both product lines. I guess that Boeing thought the 757/767 were still selling well enough in the mid and late 1990s to ignore this route, but it meant by the 2000s both aircraft were struggling. Heck, Boeing could have even got RR and PW to pitch for engine exclusvity in the 757NG (like happened on the 77L/77W). In my head you could have had: -
> 757-300 (757-200 length - assume the -300 was never built as is)
> 757-400 (757-300 length)
> 767-400 (767-300 length - assume the -400 was never built as is)
> 767-500 (767-400 length)

By the 2000s the 757/767 as a family of products had reached the natural end of life. The 767 only hung on as some carriers were happy to add more, plus now Boeing has got the Tanker contract it wanted from the platform. A bit like I fully expect the 747 line to finally end once the USAF has acquired frames it wants to replace AF1 and other specialist missions.
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5602
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:53 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 11):
It needs to be built strong enough to do its most demanding mission. That means a lot of weight to carry a lot more fuel than most missions need, and a lot stronger landing gear, and perhaps more thrust and/or high lift devices to meet short field requirements, etc.

As I understand it, one major carrier (Eastern?) demanded that it be able to operate out of LGA without restriction, which led to its "hot rod" abilities. However nice this might have been, it made it less efficient than it might have been. Those hot rod abilities have a price.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 40):

Shutting down the 757 line because of a temporary slump was very shortsighted, if they'd kept it ticking over sales would have picked back up, especially with the proposed, revamped version and it would still be in production today saving Boeing billions in development costs for a new version to compete with AB.

It was not selling well enough to justify major investment, and the point is that the major investment would not have led to significantly more orders. The 739ER and A321 had taken too much of its market, and they both still would have been cheaper to buy and to operate.

Quoting Faro (Reply 57):
Then you'd go out and look for a new, state-of-the art engine in your thrust class to power the thing and realise that...there are none...

That is the real problem. There was (and still is not) any other aircraft using these engines. It simply is not economically feasible to design and build a completely new engine (which is what is required) for just this one application, with limited sales potential.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):
I do, Boeing is currently manufacturing the 748 at the rate of .5 frames per month or just 6 a year, just a little greater rate than the 757 at the end of its production, they're not going to make the same mistake they did again by shutting down the 747 line and then watch demand increase.

Boeing is hanging on hoping for an increase in the heavy freighter market, and for the prestige of supplying the new AF1's. If it were not for the AF1's my suspicion is that the 748 would be ended and the space used for the 777X.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23720
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:19 pm

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 67):
My personal view is that after the launch of the 737NG Boeing should have looked at a 757NG/767NG and refreshed both product lines. I guess that Boeing thought the 757/767 were still selling well enough in the mid and late 1990s to ignore this route, but it meant by the 2000s both aircraft were struggling.

I suppose, but in that time frame they had done 767-400 ( how could you fail to list the a.net Boeing cult's other favorite plane? ) and initially the 777 was supposed to be an upgraded 767 but morphed into an all-new plane once they realized the cross section was not competitive with MD-11 et al.

I don't see a good fate for 757NG ( still vulnerable to A32x and 737NG ) or 767NG ( very vulnerable to A330 ) and of course if that meant not doing the 777 it would have been a bad mistake.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Someone83
Posts: 4805
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:47 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:16 pm

Wasn't one issue with the 757 that is was rather expensive to produce and towards the end not that lucrative for Boeing?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10243
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:29 pm

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 51):
Do you have any idea of the costs involved in keeping a line open ?
Firstly there's the bit that everyone sees, the assembly building and its jigs.

.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 62):
What's the cost of developing a replacement ?
It will seem like chump change !

It also seems to be the case that unlike the 737 which got upgrades, the 757 could not, Boeing chose to upgrade another product - 737-900 - versus spend any money making the 757 more competitive.

When you look at Boeing's position now in relation to the A321 which was a response to the 757, and all the smoke and mirrors going up in Boeing land about a MOM, Mad MAX etc, they are all geared around serving the 757 market.

I don't have a crystal ball, but I'm betting if the 757 was still available in some guise or another the Boeing's share of the 737-900 / A321 market would look a lot different.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5602
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:35 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 71):
I don't have a crystal ball, but I'm betting if the 757 was still available in some guise or another the Boeing's share of the 737-900 / A321 market would look a lot different.

I doubt it, because the 757 was much more expensive and significantly more expensive to operate. Had there been a new engine with competitive economics available in 2004 Boeing might have considered a NEO option, but there wasn't and the market was not big enough to develop one.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9302
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:15 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 40):
Biggest mistake Boeing's ever made and they're paying the price now with the dilemma of how to fight the A321N

Shutting down the 757 line because of a temporary slump was very shortsighted, if they'd kept it ticking over sales would have picked back up, especially with the proposed, revamped version and it would still be in production today saving Boeing billions in development costs for a new version to compete with AB.

They may have saved a bit back then but its going to cost them dearly now.

Oh for Pete's sake.... shall we actually look at the numbers instead of throw around uninformed opinions?  

I spent the morning reading through Boeing's annual reports for 2005, 2008, 2012, and 2015. The numbers clearly show that shutting down the 757 line was the correct decision.

Ending the 757 line in 2005 resulted in one-time costs of $620 million due to shutdown expenses, supplier obligations, goodwill impairment, and write-down of fleet assets (e.g., 757s owned by Boeing Capital lost some value).

The benefit of shutting down the 757 line was that Boeing could covert the line to a second 737NG production facility, which started making deliveries in 2006. Based on Boeing's rough production rate per assembly line, I would attribute approximately 1,700 737NG deliveries to the second line out of the 4,000 737NG deliveries since 2005.

Boeing does not split out earnings or revenues by product line, so I took a ratio of earnings by list price and year-to-year delivery mix. In other words, we are assuming that earnings are roughly proportional to list prices. As a result, I would attribute $8 billion dollars of earnings to Boeing's second 737NG production line over the last ten years.

What if Boeing had kept producing the 757? Going with KFLLCFII's assumption that any 737-900ER sale could have been a 757 sale, and attributing a higher price to a 757 sale, Boeing could have delivered another 900 757s over ten years. That would have earned Boeing approximately $1.7 billion.

End results:

Shutdown 757 Line:
($620) Shutdown Expenses
$8000 Earnings from 2nd 737NG line
Total: $7,380 million

Keep 757 Line:
$0 Shutdown Expense
$1,700 Earnings from 757 line
Total: $1,700 million

So, in effect, shutting down the 757 line yielded Boeing a $5.6 billion dollar benefit. By all means, tell me how Boeing would be more competitive today if they were $5.6 billion dollars poorer. Even if Boeing wanted to restart 757 production today, the capital cost of retooling production would be a fraction of that $5.6 billion. Boeing has spent a little over $7 billion on capital cost over the last ten years for all product lines including all of the PP&E cost sunk into the 787, 747-8, and 777X.

This analysis also doesn't consider the depreciation benefits of tooling the second 737NG line, which probably yielded a nice tax benefit that would not have been received had they kept the fully-depreciated 757 line running. It also doesn't consider the adverse customer relations and customer leakage to Airbus if Boeing couldn't have kept up with demand for 737-sized aircraft.

My final conclusion is that shutting down the 757 line was neither a short-sighted nor financially costly decision by Boeing. To the contrary, it had long-term benefits that has kept Boeing more competitive today than it would be otherwise.

Let us please put this issue to rest.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1486
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:19 pm

Some people here talk like the tooling is a bunch of wrenches and drill bits.
I can drive faster than you
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18965
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:22 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):
they're not going to make the same mistake they did again by shutting down the 747 line and then watch demand increase.

Well, the 747 is on life-support. Boeing is desperately trying to keep the line open in the hope the dedicated freighter market picks up. I don't think it will - cargo yields are in the toilet and the big twins are taking away a significant amount of work.

As for the 757, suppose for a moment they'd kept the line running with next to no sales. How many more 757s would they have sold? My guess is very few - the VAST majority of 757 flights can be done with A321s and 737-900s at significantly lower cost. It's too heavy and too thirsty to be competitive on all but a few niche routes. It would not have sold hundreds more. If it was available in 2016, I doubt it would sell any. Just look how many are parked in the desert with nobody interested in them.
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
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:48 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 73):
My final conclusion is that shutting down the 757 line was neither a short-sighted nor financially costly decision by Boeing. To the contrary, it had long-term benefits that has kept Boeing more competitive today than it would be otherwise.

Let us please put this issue to rest.

Very well argued. Great post!  
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sat Apr 30, 2016 7:11 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):
I do, Boeing is currently manufacturing the 748 at the rate of .5 frames per month or just 6 a year, just a little greater rate than the 757 at the end of its production, they're not going to make the same mistake they did again by shutting down the 747 line and then watch demand increase.

The 748F suffers from exactly the same problem as the 757 did, namely it has a feature that is not available on any other aircraft, this feature however is rarely used and adds significantly to production costs. In the case of the 757 it was transatlantic range, for the 748 it is the nose loading door.
The 748 line will not last much longer, Boeing will find better things to use the space for, just as it did for the 757 line.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 61):
I'm surprised they allowed them to be that shortsighted, ending production of an aircraft whose capability and future potential had and still has no match.

Capability and potential is all well and good, if however the customers don't require it whats the point ?
 
Max Q
Posts: 8172
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 12:54 am

Quoting S75752 (Reply 66):
The 757 was developed before the 737NG,

And that airframe made it's first flight in 1967, whereas the 757 first flew in 1982, the 757 was and still is, more advanced than the 737

Quoting S75752 (Reply 66):
Whatever the cost is of developing the 737 replacement, because that is what it will be as well.

But a 737 replacement is not what is being discussed, what is needed is a 757 replacement.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 75):
As for the 757, suppose for a moment they'd kept the line running with next to no sales. How many more 757s would they have sold? My guess is very few - the VAST majority of 757 flights can be done with A321s and 737-900s at significantly lower cost. It's too heavy and too thirsty to be competitive on all but a few niche routes. It would not have sold hundreds more

You have no way of knowing this as the enhanced version of the 757 was never built,while the 737 may be able to fly some of the 757 routes, it couldn't come close to a 757NG with all the improvements Boeing planned and a 5000NM range, it would have opened up a significant number of new routes.



Most of all, if Boeing had persevered with the 757, in addition to hundreds of new sales, it would have dominated the market in that section with the capability it offered, making this new, multi billion investment for Boeing to develop a replacement unecessary until they finally start the much needed clean sheet design for the 737, with modern technology the top end of that design could easily cover the 757 capability.


Shutting down the 757 line was a big mistake, just look at the success of its bigger brother, the 767 since then to see why.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
ER747
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:00 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 3:30 am

I think that it was a mistake for Boeing to stop the 757. They never anticipated, as well as the airlines the feature problems of stretching the 737. Ask Delta and United about the 737-900 tail tipping issues they are having. The money they are having to spend on tail stands or modifying deplaning procedures to avoid tail tipping. How about the persistent issue of having to weight restrict flights, which you rarely ever heard of on the 757. Another big issue for airlines is the preflight first class service issue, that you don't have with the 757. Airlines are having boarding issue because the first class pre departure service is interrupted by boarding. You either do one or the other!!! On the 757 since people boarded through the L2 door, you did not have coach passengers in the flight attendants way to do the pre departure service.
I'm realizing that Boeing just loves to shoot themselves in the foot!!!!! If they didn't offer any stretched versions of the 737, airlines would have had to keep buying 757.
I also believe they themselves are responsible for the demise of the 747, by offering the 777-300.
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 4:48 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
Most of all, if Boeing had persevered with the 757, in addition to hundreds of new sales, it would have dominated the market in that section with the capability it offered,

It would not have. The 737-900ER and A321 would still have been available and would still have covered north of 95% of all 757 missions more efficiently. The 757 thus would have sold a few dozen more at the very best. As has been pointed out: The 757 as a new-built plane simply wasn't selling for years before the line was shut down. Its production line was, as Dfwrevolution pointed out in his excellent post, a very ineffective way of using the space it occupied compared to what replaced it.
Just as a reminder: Boeing and Airbus are not in the business of building nice planes. They want to make money. In 2003/04, the 757 wasn't selling. And God knows Boeing gave it the hard sell to keep the line running a bit longer. They still didn't get any sales. There was no suitable engine for a NEO treatment available at the time, and even assuming the 757 was still being buikt today, NEO-ing it would have required roughly the same investment that MAX required - all just to scrape those 2-5% of missions that MAX/NEO can't do. Sounds like a pretty bad investment to me.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
And that airframe made it's first flight in 1967, whereas the 757 first flew in 1982, the 757 was and still is, more advanced than the 737

Right, by that same line of logic, an A321CEO is more advanced than a 737-9MAX in pretty much every regard. We all know that's only half the story at best.
42
 
phlwok
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 11:41 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 5:25 am

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
I also believe they themselves are responsible for the demise of the 747, by offering the 777-300.

Based on this, I can't tell if you're being serious or not. The 77W is one of the most profitable commercial successes ever for Boeing, and is cheaper to operate and maintain than the 4-engine 747, and effectively killed both the A340 and has caused problems for the 748 while replacing many 744s. So profitable, in fact, that the decrease in coming 77W deliveries will dent Boeing's profits until the 777X starts deliveries.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
I think that it was a mistake for Boeing to stop the 757. They never anticipated, as well as the airlines the feature problems of stretching the 737. Ask Delta and United about the 737-900 tail tipping issues they are having. The money they are having to spend on tail stands or modifying deplaning procedures to avoid tail tipping.

They're learning how to deal with it and no doubt Boeing has refined its operational guidance and may make tweaks to the airframes. It isn't enough of a reason to buy a lot more 757s with greater acquisition and operating costs.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
How about the persistent issue of having to weight restrict flights, which you rarely ever heard of on the 757.

Every aircraft represents a compromise. The greater performance of the 757 - which is not actually needed on most missions - comes with the penalty of a much higher cost per seat mile, which is what doomed it - the 737 and A320 stretches (321) could do *most* 757 missions much cheaper, which has been particularly important with oil prices being high for so long, and still applies even with lower oil costs now. Airlines have clearly concluded that occasional weight restrictions are more profitable than always using a plane that is much more expensive to operate as has been evidenced by what they've been ordering.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
Another big issue for airlines is the preflight first class service issue, that you don't have with the 757. Airlines are having boarding issue because the first class pre departure service is interrupted by boarding. You either do one or the other!!! On the 757 since people boarded through the L2 door, you did not have coach passengers in the flight attendants way to do the pre departure service.

While it's convenient to board coach at the front of the coach cabin rather than ahead of the first row, competent FAs can and do offer beverage service on aircraft where boarding is performed through the front door. It is most certainly not a reason to buy a more expensive fleet.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
I'm realizing that Boeing just loves to shoot themselves in the foot!!!!! If they didn't offer any stretched versions of the 737, airlines would have had to keep buying 757.

Well, they weren't. That's why the line got shut down. And Boeing used the space to build many, many more of what airlines were actually buying - 737s - than a small amount of 757s. If they had not done this, Airbus would have sold more planes than they did, Boeing might have been forced to spend to open another 737 line somewhere else with all the investment costs (and time) involved in doing so, while incurring the costs of preserving the 757 that wasn't selling. None of this makes business sense. Forcing the 757 down airlines' throats, even if they were in a position to do so, would have just incentivized more competition while creating bad will from the airline customer base, which would have hurt Boeing with other orders.

No one argues that the 757 was a great plane, but you all must consider the concept of opportunity costs. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost: "the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative forgone where, given limited resources, a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would have been had by taking the second best available choice."

Boeing made the decision that it was better to use limited resources by shutting down the 757 and add 737 manufacturing capacity, thus their opportunity cost was further 757 sales. In its place they have delivered a very large number of additional, profitable 737s. Had they kept the 757 going and potentially not been able to deliver some or all of those 737s, they calculated that the opportunity cost of not building those 737s was greater. And in hindsight, the numbers appear to bear out that they earned both more revenue and profit by opting for the 737 option and are in a better position against Airbus than they would have been with the 757.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 5:31 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
And that airframe made it's first flight in 1967, whereas the 757 first flew in 1982, the 757 was and still is, more advanced than the 737

How do you figure? The 737NG had a number of improvements incorporated that clearly resonated more with it's customers than the 757. Besides, between 2002 and 2005, only 7 frames were sold. Exactly how it is prudent to stay the course when you have an adequate alternative with the 737-900 is beyond me, particularly given the economic and geopolitic climate.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
Most of all, if Boeing had persevered with the 757, in addition to hundreds of new sales, it would have dominated the market in that section with the capability it offered, making this new, multi billion investment for Boeing to develop a replacement unecessary until they finally start the much needed clean sheet design for the 737, with modern technology the top end of that design could easily cover the 757 capability.

You have no way of knowing that. None. It would not have been offered in a vacuum. The A321 could have easily sold against it in many contests, as could the 737, given the family nature of both of those frames. Additionally, the 757 isn't exactly a sipper when it comes to fuel use compared to it's counterparts.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
Shutting down the 757 line was a big mistake, just look at the success of its bigger brother, the 767 since then to see why.

Apples and oranges. The cargo companies are what have kept the 767 alive, but I'm not convinced that they needed new build 757's when there are literally hundreds of them that could be purchased and converted in the 757-200PF program.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
I'm realizing that Boeing just loves to shoot themselves in the foot!!!!! If they didn't offer any stretched versions of the 737, airlines would have had to keep buying 757.

I'm not really all that hip on some of their decisions and program executions, but I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect them to NOT have a family of 737's when the airlines clearly love the commonality and capability of the airframes. As DFWRevolution laid out above, they likely would have kissed BILLIONS of dollars in sales goodbye had they done what you are suggesting.

Just my opinion. I agree with others, though, that this topic is really overdone at this point. It's been discussed ad nauseum on a.net and I'm not clear what new could come from yet another thread?

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
ER747
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:00 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 6:30 am

I'm just keeping it simple. For all the reasons stated by others and myself. In total, the 757 is a stud!! Pilots love flying it. Flight attendants and crews love working it.
Again keeping it simple!!!! Stretching the 737 killed the 757. The 777 will kill the 747. The 787 will kill the 767 & 777. The 777x will probably fall by the wayside like the 747-8. Boeing's feature portfolio will be the 737 & 787. I guess they better dust off the plans for the sonic cruiser.
To me! Boeing biggest rival is not Airbus, it is Boeing!!!
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 8:45 am

Quoting ER747 (Reply 83):
Stretching the 737 killed the 757.

Which isn't a bad thing.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
hilram
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:12 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 8:57 am

So the RB211 engines for the 757 produces 37 400 lbs thrust.
The prev gen CFM 56 goes up to 34 000 lbs
The current "next gen" PW 1135G series goes up to 35 000 lbs

It really should be possible to just MAX it you know. Get some weight savings in and sell that 752 with the PW 1135G hanging under it. :p
Flown on: A319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343 | B732, 734, 735, 736, 73G, 738, 743, 744, 772, 77W | CRJ9 | BAe-146 | DHC-6, 7, 8 | F50 | E195 | MD DC-9 41, MD-82, MD-87
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18965
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 9:52 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
And that airframe made it's first flight in 1967, whereas the 757 first flew in 1982, the 757 was and still is, more advanced than the 737

The 737NG first flew in 1997, 15 years after the 757. The NG is very different to the 737-100 that rolled out of the factory in 1967.   

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
But a 737 replacement is not what is being discussed, what is needed is a 757 replacement.

For just a few niche routes that the A321 or 737-900 can't do significantly more efficiently? There's a reason why the mythical MOMmy plane is just that. There simply isn't a big enough market to justify a new plane.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 78):
Most of all, if Boeing had persevered with the 757, in addition to hundreds of new sales, it would have dominated the market in that section with the capability it offered

To quote yourself, you have no way of knowing that. The A321 and 737-900 would still be available and still be significantly better than the 757 for the vast majority of routes the 757 was flying.

If the 757 is so great, why are so many now parked in the desert? Why haven't the likes of DL been snatching them up to rush them into service instead of buying 'old generation' A321s?   
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
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 10:33 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 69):
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 67):
My personal view is that after the launch of the 737NG Boeing should have looked at a 757NG/767NG and refreshed both product lines. I guess that Boeing thought the 757/767 were still selling well enough in the mid and late 1990s to ignore this route, but it meant by the 2000s both aircraft were struggling.

I suppose, but in that time frame they had done 767-400 ( how could you fail to list the a.net Boeing cult's other favorite plane? ) and initially the 777 was supposed to be an upgraded 767 but morphed into an all-new plane once they realized the cross section was not competitive with MD-11 et al.

I don't see a good fate for 757NG ( still vulnerable to A32x and 737NG ) or 767NG ( very vulnerable to A330 ) and of course if that meant not doing the 777 it would have been a bad mistake.

Okay, I missed the 764 out but my point was that a 757NG/767NG might have been a better bet to look at for Boeing rather than the 747-500/-600 and Sonic Cruiser. I also missed the 757-300 out of my list. The 753 did better than the 764 becuase it had more commonality with the 752 than the 764 had with the 763. In my view, the 764 was a bit of an orphan because it was an attempt at a NG 767, but done in isolation (i.e. no parallel improvement offered on the 763). I certainly wasn't suggesting Boeing shouldn't have done the 777. I was simply saying that if Boeing was going to do a NG 757 (and 767) then my view was that window existed in the mid-1990s. My view too is that at that point both were selling well enough for Boeing to think why bother, and then by the time they might have looked at it the boat had been missed. I do think that a NG 757/767 combo wouldn't have stopped the A321/A330 getting sales, but it equally could have been enough to keep a number of loyal customers on board for the 767 with enough 757 sales to justify the return, especially if the 757NG allowed new markets to open up with inceased range. Only have to wonder what CO might have done out of EWR with such a bird, and it could equally have appealled to other US carriers if they had an aircraft with the legs to do a range of international routes out of say ORD, DTW, IAD, PHL.

But to answer the OP, I don't think keeping the 757 tooling would have been any good. The 757 ended when it did because Boeing was struggling to generate enough sales against the 737. If it had been modernised ten years earlier who knows, but add that to the huge list of a.net "what ifs"!
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
tomaheath
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:58 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 11:30 am

Could a shorter version of the 757 been a 737 replacement? If Boeings 757 replacement was the 739 could a 757-100 taken the place of a 738?
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 1:10 pm

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 49):
Quoting WIederling (Reply 48):
( and fits in with the "preferably no investments" of the US marketplace.)

Boy, you almost made it through a whole post - then thud. Oh well, there's always tomorrow.

Anything wrong with my observation?
Murphy is an optimist
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9302
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 1:35 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 89):
Anything wrong with my observation?

Like many things you post, it is the opposite of reality.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2332
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 1:42 pm

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
Ask Delta and United about the 737-900 tail tipping issues they are having. The money they are having to spend on tail stands or modifying deplaning procedures to avoid tail tipping.

Oh, geez, the (probably) tens of dollars they have to spend on a stick of wood, and zeroes of dollars they have to spend on having the rampers unload the rear cargo bins before the front ones. I'm sure they're crying all the way to the bank over those costs.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
If they didn't offer any stretched versions of the 737, airlines would have had to keep buying 757.

No. I think there's also another series of planes available, cheaper than the 757, similar to the 737. Starts with A-something. As noted above, if the 757 was still being built, then the production line couldn't be used to build 737s, which would cut 737 production capacity effectively in half, and since the 757 would never have the hope of selling as well as the 737s, it would have (as pointed out by another member above) been a much worse financial situation for Boeing.

Seriously, the 757 was never really that popular. Throughout its entire 28-year history (from launch to end of production), it averaged 37 orders per year. That's less than a month's worth of 737 or A320 production.

Quoting ER747 (Reply 79):
I also believe they themselves are responsible for the demise of the 747, by offering the 777-300.

Better for you to be responsible for the demise of your own product than a competitor doing so. Or, a more sarcastic response: How horrible for Boeing to have offered its customers a choice, and for those customers to have bought the product they preferred.

Quoting tomaheath (Reply 88):

Could a shorter version of the 757 been a 737 replacement? If Boeings 757 replacement was the 739 could a 757-100 taken the place of a 738?

Not if Boeing or the airlines wanted to make money with it. Take a look at how the 737-600 and A318 have sold. That's, at best, what you could expect from a 757-100.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
sv11
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 2:06 pm

Wonder if Boeing can fit the LEAP-1A engine on the A321neo on the 737-9Max to get additional thrust and range. The fan is 8.6 inches bigger in diameter. Not sure if BA can do something to the landing gear.

sv11
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18965
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 2:31 pm

Quoting sv11 (Reply 92):
Wonder if Boeing can fit the LEAP-1A engine on the A321neo on the 737-9Max to get additional thrust and range. The fan is 8.6 inches bigger in diameter. Not sure if BA can do something to the landing gear.

Doesn't matter whether they could do anything with the gear or not - Boeing has an exclusive contract with CFM for powering the 737.
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
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2332
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 3:50 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 93):

The LEAP engine is a CFM product. A different version of the LEAP engine is already powering the 737 MAX.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 4:22 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 90):
Like many things you post, it is the opposite of reality.

aha.
Murphy is an optimist
 
sv11
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 5:50 pm

LEAP-1A on a321neo has 5K pounds thrust extra. If it could be hung on 737-9Max, you could maybe get 4000 miles and 757 replacement. But BA already lengthened the nose gear on 737MAX to accomodate LEAP-1B. Not sure if they can also lengthen the main landing gear.

sv11
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18965
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A Mistake For Boeing To Destroy The 757 Tooling?

Sun May 01, 2016 8:07 pm

Quoting HOMsAr (Reply 94):
The LEAP engine is a CFM product. A different version of the LEAP engine is already powering the 737 MAX.

Yeah sorry, brain-fart on my part. For some reason I thought you were talking about GTF.   
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.

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