Us 757's

[busman]

The A321 will never perform close to what the 75 does. It's a dog and the 75 is amazing!! Like a hot little race car with a lot of lift!!

[post="292356"][/post]​

Acutally the economics of the two planes are very close, and the 757 is a comfortable aircraft, but I and many passengers feel the 321 is more comfortable.

 

[PHX-F/A]

The 757 is a fantastic aircraft, especially when compared to the A321, which is not! Ours just need to be spiffed up a bit since the cabin interiors have fallen into such disrepair. I hope management at the "New U" puts the seats back in F/C and uses the plane on something besides the low yield, high density markets.

Actually the list of things I hope Tempe changes is quite long.

[post="292406"][/post]​

AWA 75's have 14 seats in first. The Easterns had 12 until they yanked out the closets.

 

[PHX-F/A]

It was originally delivered to EAL then went to AWA then to US.
-225 is the original customer.

[post="292410"][/post]​

Still disagree here. I'm going to be a dog with a bone on this one. The only Eastern in posession at HP during the bankrupcty was N907AW. Built on an Eastern order, but originally delivered to HP. Then during the Chap11, it went to Taesa for a few years. Then came back totally dogged out. When it returned it was the PHX Suns theme plane aka "Barney"

The other Easterns (913,914,915) came after Chap 11 exit and none have left the fleet. The 2 75's that did leave were not Easterns. N911AW, was from ILFC and has been in Canada ever since. N916AW is now in Uruguay sublet by Air Holland to Pluna Aero.

I researched this on airfleets.net

 

[StewGuy86]

AWA 75's have 14 seats in first. The Easterns had 12 until they yanked out the closets.

[post="292609"][/post]​

US configured the 757s we got from EAL with 16 seats in F/C. Then a year or so later, when we started getting the shiny new ones straight from Boeing (man, those were beautiful airplanes) they upped it to 24 seats in F/C, gutted the old EAL galleys to make them all match the new ones, added the closet in front of 2R and the lav in front of 2L. That whole area made a nice divider between F/C and coach. Boarding was wonderful. All the F/C passengers walked on at the 2L and turned left, everyone in coach turned right. The A321, however, with 26 seats in F/C (too many if you ask me) boards through the 1L and is a PITA. Trying to do a pre-departure beverage service in F/C is a challenge and requires a good deal of patience on the part of the F/As...not to mention the passengers!

 

[ChrisUS]

they found a good stash of cocaine hiden onboard, a souvenir of EA's South American network.
After a few years, NASA got some money and painted the aircraft white.

Must have sold the cocaine.

 

[PoorPropDriver]

NASA did the same thing with the two B747's they got from American Airlines that Piggy-Back the shuttles between Edwards AFB and the Kennedy Space center.

Those two birds retained the AA-esque theme for a quite some time...now , like the B757 they have been painted white with blue cheat line stripes..and the tail logo is the NASA swoop logo.

[post="290924"][/post]​

One of the Nasa birds is from JAL. My uncle was in charge of those aircraft before retiring.

 

[US1YFARE]

Acutally the economics of the two planes are very close, and the 757 is a comfortable aircraft, but I and many passengers feel the 321 is more comfortable.

[post="292604"][/post]​

I love the 321. Roomy FC. Able to plug in your computer. Cleaner than the 57. The only downside is boarding from the first door with everyone walking through FC.

 

[StewGuy86]

I agree the A321 tends to be a bit more comfortable from a passenger standpoint, especially in F/C. But from a performance standpoint, sitting on a 757 for takeoff is like riding the space shuttle....you can feel the power of those engines and you blast right off the runway. The A321 feels incredibly underpowered and the engines sound like they're straining just to lift the fuselage off the ground. 45 mintues later, you finally make it to cruise altitude.

And where the galleys are concerned, it always amazed me that the aft galley wasn't changed from the 319/320 design. It's as if they said, "Let's stretch the fuselage of the aircraft so it can hold practically as many PAX as a 757, but let's not add any more storage space to the coach galley for all these additional people to serve." It's less of an issue now that all those hot meals aren't taking up space in the galley carts.

 

[700UW]

The 757 outperforms the A321, the 321 cant hold the cargo of the 757 as US put in extra fuel tanks so the plane can reach the west coast.

And if you all remember, under Wolf US ordered the 321 then canceled the order as the plane did not have the range US needed, then airbus added two extra fuel tanks to add the range but took away the cargo space so US took the order.

And the A321 takes forever to climb to altitude on a transcon compared to the 757.

If US took care of the interiors the 757s would be a nice looking clean plane.

But US does not seem to care about clean planes.

The 757s are pigsties.

 

[StewGuy86]

The 757 outperforms the A321, the 321 cant hold the cargo of the 757 as US put in extra fuel tanks so the plane can reach the west coast.

And if you all remember, under Wolf US ordered the 321 then canceled the order as the plane did not have the range US needed, then airbus added two extra fuel tanks to add the range but took away the cargo space so US took the order.

And the A321 takes forever to climb to altitude on a transcon compared to the 757.

If US took care of the interiors the 757s would be a nice looking clean plane.

But US does not seem to care about clean planes.

The 757s are pigsties.

[post="293687"][/post]​

And it's such a shame, too. The 757 is an incredible aircraft for lots of different reasons.

 

[N924PS]

And it's such a shame, too. The 757 is an incredible aircraft for lots of different reasons.

[post="293703"][/post]​

Must not be that incredible. Boeing stopped building them in favor of the B737-900. I bet it performs more like an A321 than B757, but it gets the job done too.

 

[SpinDoc]

The A321 will never perform close to what the 75 does. It's a dog and the 75 is amazing!! Like a hot little race car with a lot of lift!!

[post="292356"][/post]​

Absolutely true. The B757 takes off at 80% of
the available power with the Rolls engines, and
this increases fuel economy. It also gives the
plane a higher margin of safety in abnormal
situations.

 

[US1YFARE]

And the A321 takes forever to climb to altitude on a transcon compared to the 757.

If US took care of the interiors the 757s would be a nice looking clean plane.

But US does not seem to care about clean planes.

The 757s are pigsties.

[post="293687"][/post]​

I thought that was the case, but since I know nothing, I thought maybe it was my immagination. I always think, geez, for such a new plane, it seems like a struggle to get up.

The 757's are absolutely, positively, DISGUSTING.

 

[Mtnman928]

The 757 outperforms the A321, the 321 cant hold the cargo of the 757 as US put in extra fuel tanks so the plane can reach the west coast.

And if you all remember, under Wolf US ordered the 321 then canceled the order as the plane did not have the range US needed, then airbus added two extra fuel tanks to add the range but took away the cargo space so US took the order.

And the A321 takes forever to climb to altitude on a transcon compared to the 757.

If US took care of the interiors the 757s would be a nice looking clean plane.

But US does not seem to care about clean planes.

The 757s are pigsties.

[post="293687"][/post]​

757 v 321

321 can not do the LOOP departure out of LAX

321 can not land at SNA at Max Landing Wt.

A tractor-trailer delivers cargo and bags from LAX to LAS daily since the 321's out of LAX can't take the load. LAS 757's always seem to have he ability to take he extra cargo.

MTNMAN

 

[phllax]

757 v 321

321 can not do the LOOP departure out of LAX

MTNMAN

[post="294164"][/post]​

Actually, I was on a full 321 last year that surprising did the loop departure out of LAX. I was stunned like a deer in headlights. During the flight I saw the Captain in the galley on a lav break and asked him how we did that. He told me that they had a little trouble meeting the altitude minimums needed (10K when crossing back over land for sure and I think 7500 when completing the loop) but they just applied a little extra power. It is the only time I have seen it done. Boy do I miss the 757 and 767 in LAX