Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Boeing 757

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

i fly boxes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
848
In my opinion this plane is one of the best ever built. Why did Boeing not create a next gen version of this? The 737900 is such a dog and will never live up to the 757. It seems like a 757 with new engines would be a great plane
 
I think you answered your own question. When they shut the 75 line down, they had already made the decision to just grow the 737. You would have had basically 2 of the same aircraft on two seperate production lines.
 
IMHO I think Boeing pulled the plug too early on this airplane, in the post 9/11 downturn. It is great for mid-range, thin or leisure routes. East coast to secondary western European markets, west coast to Hawaii, etc. I have heard the -300 still has one of the lowest fuel burn/seats out there, making it great for high density/low yield markets like MCO or LAS. It seems like a 757NG would be a sure fire winner.
 
I think you answered your own question. When they shut the 75 line down, they had already made the decision to just grow the 737. You would have had basically 2 of the same aircraft on two seperate production lines.

That is the point he is getting at though, the 737-900 is no where close to what the 757 is capable of. Certainly is a step up from the 737-800, but falls well short of the 757.
 
In my opinion this plane is one of the best ever built. Why did Boeing not create a next gen version of this? The 737900 is such a dog and will never live up to the 757. It seems like a 757 with new engines would be a great plane

An excellent question that I'm sure the engineers at Boeing ask themselves. The 757 would have been the airframe to keep as it has the height and undercarriage for the larger fans required on NG engines. That and the fact most everybody liked the 757.
Most likely a decision made by the accountants.
 
The 757-300 is supposedly the biggest money-maker at Delta on a per seat basis (RASM-CASM.)

My only complaint about the airplane is that, as with all Boeings, the cockpit is just too damn loud. Oh, and there's a yoke. Other than it's a pilot's airplane.
 
The 757-300 is supposedly the biggest money-maker at Delta on a per seat basis (RASM-CASM.)

My only complaint about the airplane is that, as with all Boeings, the cockpit is just too damn loud. Oh, and there's a yoke. Other than it's a pilot's airplane.

Ding! Definitely a pilot's airplane. A passenger's airplane? Not so much....
 
The 757-300 is supposedly the biggest money-maker at Delta on a per seat basis (RASM-CASM.)

My only complaint about the airplane is that, as with all Boeings, the cockpit is just too damn loud. Oh, and there's a yoke. Other than it's a pilot's airplane.
You need a yoke to actually FLY the airplane.
 
You need a yoke to actually FLY the airplane.

I assume you are making a slight at Airbus. The 777 and 787 are fly-by-wire. Do pilots "fly" them?

If I'm in cruise for 10+ hrs, I couldn't give a rats ass about being Chuck Yeager. It's all about quiet and comfort.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top