Boeing, Airbus Can't Replace the 757

[usa1]

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (TheStreet) -- When Boeing halted production of the 757 seven years ago, it left a gap that US Airways CFO Derek Kerr says needs to be filled.

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/11222384/1/boeing-airbus-cant-replace-the-757.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

 

[nycbusdriver]

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (TheStreet) -- When Boeing halted production of the 757 seven years ago, it left a gap that US Airways CFO Derek Kerr says needs to be filled.

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/11222384/1/boeing-airbus-cant-replace-the-757.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

Yup. The 757 is definitely one of a kind, and nothing produced now quite adequately fills that niche. The A321 has almost the seats, but is woefully underpowered with range that pales in comparison with the 757.

But the 757 was never designed to do what airlines are asking of it now, i.e. fly transatlantic and transpacific. It can do an adequate job moving the folks, but it is relatively uncomfortable compared to aircraft designed for that mission. i.e. dual-aisle wide bodies. But, the Kettles don't know the difference and the business travelers are gone to other carriers, so why should Tempe care?

 

[BoeingBoy]

In the zeal to blame production costs for the 757, the article leaves out an important fact - there were only 7 757's ordered after 2001, all in 2003. Boeing produced planes to fill all the orders it had. I suppose that the writer of the article thinks Boeing should have kept the assembly line going and producing airplanes that nobody wanted at that time.

The reason is as NY said - at the time the 757 wasn't meant or used as a longish-haul international airplane. Prior to 911, many of the major transcon routes in the US were operated with widebodies like the 767 and larger. The 757 was a niche plane from the beginning - ATL-LGA and the like - where it replaced planes like the 727 but with lower operating cost (excluding acquisition cost).

Jim

 

[necigrad]

I thought Boeing said at the time that a large part of the decision to end the 757 was that the 737-900 was a comparable aircraft. I don't know enough to make a serious comparison, but range and seating of the 739 is similar or better. I don't know about takeoff performance, but I did also see that the "useful load" (nah, I'm not a GA guy 🙂) of the 757 is substantially more. How much that plays into the situations I don't know because I don't know about the fuel efficiencies.

 

[BoeingBoy]

For the routes the 757 was predominately used on at the time, the 737-900 was a near replacement. Less range, not as good hot and high performance, but close enough. The changing role of the 757 since Boeing announced the end of production has made the 737-900 less of a replacement. As the article correctly pointed out, at under 3300 mile range the -900 can't do the trans-Atlantic routes the 757 can with it's 3700+ range.

Jim

 

[mikey60]

In the zeal to blame production costs for the 757, the article leaves out an important fact - there were only 7 757's ordered after 2001, all in 2003. Boeing produced planes to fill all the orders it had. I suppose that the writer of the article thinks Boeing should have kept the assembly line going and producing airplanes that nobody wanted at that time.

The reason is as NY said - at the time the 757 wasn't meant or used as a longish-haul international airplane. Prior to 911, many of the major transcon routes in the US were operated with widebodies like the 767 and larger. The 757 was a niche plane from the beginning - ATL-LGA and the like - where it replaced planes like the 727 but with lower operating cost (excluding acquisition cost).

Jim

EA went to Boeing and told them they wanted a aircraft that could fly out of the islands( STX.etc) and also be able to fly MIA-SEA nonstop. And thus the 757 was born. I have a article on it if I can find it I'll post it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The 757 was a high performance, low CASM, higher capacity replacement to the 727 and it was designed to have transcon range as well as serve airports such as in the islands is precisely why the plane has been able to adapt to so many types of roles and do them all quite effectively. Few other airplanes have been as versatile as the 757.
.
Given that the 9 hr flights the 757 can do are only a couple hours longer than transcon routes, the 757 really has not been pushed dramatically beyond its original design. The fact that the same model of engines are used on the "domestic" and "int'l" versions of the 757 speaks to how well powered the aircraft was from the start.
.
The fact that the 787 doesn't address the small transoceanic airliner market which the 762 was also unable to effectively serve makes it all the more imperative - and quite likely - that Boeing will design a narrowbody replacement that includes the capabilities of the 757.
.
At the same time, a "new 757" will have to have more global appeal than the 757 had; part of the reason orders dried up very quickly is because the majority of 757s were built for US airlines - a far higher percentage than for just about any other airliner model. The fact that DL and EA, IIRC, were the launch customers for the 757 shows how important it was for the east coast. As DL has shifted its 767s to intercontinental operations, the 757 has become the backbone of the DL domestic fleet and the ATL hub with more 757s flying for DL than any other type, making DL the largest operator of both the 757 and 767. CO believed in the 757s longhaul capabilities so much that their entire fleet was converted for that purpose.
Although few airlines were interested in a 225 seat narrowbody, the 753 is the lowest CASM aircraft flying.
.
Yes the 739ER comes close to the capacity and performance for most North American routes, which will allow the 757 fleet will shrink as some of the original build jets are retired but the 739 will never come close to delivering the thrill the 757 can deliver, even on transatlantic takeoffs.

 

[700UW]

Eastern was the launch customer, not DL, why does everything have to be about DL with you?

EA got the first 10 of the assembly line because at US after EAL when out of business we bought/leased a bunch of them.

A/C 600US was the first Production Flying 757, of course it entered service with EAL.

Like I said Read and learn:

Eastern Air Lines placed the 757 into commercial service on January 1, 1983, followed by British Airways on February 9, 1983. Monarch Airlines and lease customer Air Europe also began 757 operations later that year.The aircraft's debut was relatively smooth, with greater reliability than previous jetliners and quieter airport operations. Early pilots underwent specialized training to transition to the two-person cockpit with CRT displays. Eastern Air Lines, the first 727 operator to take delivery of 757s, found that the aircraft demonstrated greater payload capability than its predecessor with reduced fuel burn and fewer crew requirements. Compared to the 707 and 727, the new twinjet burned 42 and 40 percent less fuel per seat, respectively, on typical medium-haul flights.

 

[BoeingBoy]

The 757 was a high performance, low CASM, higher capacity replacement to the 727 and it was designed to have transcon range as well as serve airports such as in the islands is precisely why the plane has been able to adapt to so many types of roles and do them all quite effectively. Few other airplanes have been as versatile as the 757.

Actually, the changes Boeing made through the years have made many of the newer roles possible.
.

the 757 really has not been pushed dramatically beyond its original design. The fact that the same model of engines are used on the "domestic" and "int'l" versions of the 757 speaks to how well powered the aircraft was from the start.

While well powered from the start, the newer versions gained from increased thrust engines over the years. The original design couldn't fill the longer-haul role the airplane is now doing.
.

Yes the 739ER comes close to the capacity and performance for most North American routes, which will allow the 757 fleet will shrink as some of the original build jets are retired but the 739 will never come close to delivering the thrill the 757 can deliver, even on transatlantic takeoffs.

I'd be surprised if many of the "original build" ones are still flying, at least anywhere except the 3rd world.

Jim

 

[700UW]

DL did not receive their first 757 till 1984, two years after its first commercial flight.

Guess you need to put your DL pom poms down.

Jim,

Believe it or not according to the list, some of the original builds are flying as converted to cargo and are in europe and the rest are in the desert, I guess waiting for FedEx to scoop them up.

 

[WorldTraveler]

yet somehow DL has managed to build the world's largest 757 fleet - and is still flying some of its original 757s apparently safely and without smoke and fuselage separations as well. The earliest 757s that are in service are in the US and Europe.
I believe DL was the launch customer for the Pratt powered 757; the RR version came first which perhaps explains why DL did not receive the first 757s delivered. Goes to show how good maintenance of an aircraft can make it last for 25-30 years, not unlike we saw with the DC9. I believe DL operates the oldest 757 delivered to the original customer. DL also operates some of the last 757s which were produced.
.
The 757 is flying TATL with the same engine type that powered the original domestic versions. The only significant change to the 757 has been the winglets - but the 757 was flying TATL scheduled routes esp. with TWA and later CO longer before winglets were available. The MTOW has been increased but the modifications to the plane to do so were minimal; the 757 was designed to be capable of 9 hr flights from the inception.

 

[A320 Driver]

yet somehow DL has managed to build the world's largest 757 fleet - and is still flying some of its original 757s apparently safely and without smoke and fuselage separations as well. The earliest 757s that are in service are in the US and Europe.
I believe DL was the launch customer for the Pratt powered 757; the RR version came first which perhaps explains why DL did not receive the first 757s delivered. Goes to show how good maintenance of an aircraft can make it last for 25-30 years, not unlike we saw with the DC9. I believe DL operates the oldest 757 delivered to the original customer. DL also operates some of the last 757s which were produced.
.
The 757 is flying TATL with the same engine type that powered the original domestic versions. The only significant change to the 757 has been the winglets - but the 757 was flying TATL scheduled routes esp. with TWA and later CO longer before winglets were available. The MTOW has been increased but the modifications to the plane to do so were minimal; the 757 was designed to be capable of 9 hr flights from the inception.

Maybe DL does their own maintenance... I think the A330-200 that had fumes was engine related. It had to be ferried back from TLV. I can't speak to the 767.

Driver B)

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,

Believe it or not according to the list, some of the original builds are flying as converted to cargo and are in europe and the rest are in the desert, I guess waiting for FedEx to scoop them up.

You're right - for some reason I had tunnel vision on passenger carriers.

Jim

 

[AstroLounge]

DL did not receive their first 757 till 1984, two years after its first commercial flight.

Guess you need to put your DL pom poms down.

Jim,

Believe it or not according to the list, some of the original builds are flying as converted to cargo and are in europe and the rest are in the desert, I guess waiting for FedEx to scoop them up.

Oh My, putting His PomPoms down and shutting His "Whole Truth" dissertation? NOT a Chance. Probably so distraught, He split his tights doing a Cartwheel squealing "Delta!Delta!Delta!". He has been a Certifiable Idiot over the years..........FACT! And Spare Me the CornField Lecture.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The only pom poms are for the 757, which the thread notes is now being seen as an irreplacable aircraft for the carriers that use it despite the lack of new orders a decade or so ago.
It only stands to reason that the 757 forms the largest fleet type for the airline which carries more RPMs and more revenue on its domestic operation than any other US airline. Perhaps it is the 757's low CASM and extraordinary flexibility which have allowed DL to do with the 757 what no one else has done.
As Jim I'm sure knows, US flew some of the 757s which formed the beginnings of EA's 757 fleet, only to be replaced later. AA and UA both started adding the 757 later than DL or EA but still have significant -sized fleets which will be around for a good long time.
.
I never said that DL has never had mechanical problems with its 757s... just that they clearly are not related to flying 27 year old aircraft which were some of the first delivered.
Given that DL's CEO has said that DL intends to change the paradigm from expecting aircraft to last for 20 years to instead 30 years says that there will be a lot of 757s around for quite some time, esp. since some of DL's 757s - as well as some at other US carriers - are mere "children" in terms of age by comparison.
.
Astro,
that would be certifiably dead on accurate about the industry.