Todos
← Back to Squawk list
The Next Boeing Clean-Sheet Will Probably Be a 757 Replacement
A total of 1,050 757s were produced from 1981 to 2004, with the last aircraft delivered to Shanghai Airlines in November of 2005. The secondary market for the 757 has shown considerable strength, especially amongst cargo operators thanks to the aircraft’s capabilities. But passenger operators have steadily replaced the type with the Boeing 737-900ER and Airbus A321. (airchive.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Loved the ascent on the 757. Am not a pilot, so do not know the reason (other than pure power)why the 757 leaped off the runway and was at 3000 feet in 20 sec.
Having flown the 757 for 5 or 6 years I find myself liking it to driving my wife's Mini Cooper Clubman. It is quick, and responsive, but the ride was the worst in of any airplane I am type rated in; well, until I got in the 777. The 767 is so much nicer, it is hard to figure just what Boeing did to those two. Don't get me wrong, I loved flying them all as well as the "DCs" and in less than a week will be my last trip and I already miss it. To all of you will still be flying airliners enjoy it, it is the best work you can get.
One more quick story concerning the 75. At SXM, we would purposely line up as close to the end as possible. Then I'd do a static MAX power takeoff (tailwind of course). Most of my F/Os were not familiar with the Air Force term of "static takeoff". Basically stand on the brakes, run up the engines to about 80%, then let go and hang on. Probably ended up with quite a few spectators tumbling across the sand on the beach and into the drink!!! Really impressed my F/Os with this static takeoff thing. If you like to see what SXM is all about go to St Maartin Sunset Beach website.. One of the best Caribbean layover spots in the system.....or it used to be anyway......
why not use the 787-3?
Boeing decided against making the 787-3. Not enough interest.
Guess, they could dust off the plans if there was sufficient interest down the line.
A narrower gauge fuselage might be more efficient than a widebody. So there may be a market for a narrowbody with better efficiency for the thinner longer routes.
But yes, the two options are:
1. A shorter 787, eg . 787-3
3. A longer and more powerful 737 with more range, eg. a 757 replacement.
Guess, they could dust off the plans if there was sufficient interest down the line.
A narrower gauge fuselage might be more efficient than a widebody. So there may be a market for a narrowbody with better efficiency for the thinner longer routes.
But yes, the two options are:
1. A shorter 787, eg . 787-3
3. A longer and more powerful 737 with more range, eg. a 757 replacement.
why not use the 787-3 ?
I have flown all the Boeing from 727-777 except the 737. By far, the most fun airline to pilot was the 757-200 with the RR engines. Excellent performer out of the ski airports and the shorter fields like SNA and LGA. The brakes were excellent. I t was/is a sports car with wings. Sad to see such a fine bird go away.