Early in my airline career, I said to my captain, “I don’t know why, but I find that jet so good looking.” “I know why you do.” “Why?” “Thin waist, long legs, big cans.” I was never unable to unsee it. He was 100% right.
American Airlines flight attendant here. 25 years. My heart belongs to the 757 and we have said goodbye at American. Fast AF airplane. Loved EVERY take off. However, a nightmare to work on in the back. This was when we were serving full meals in the economy. The passengers in front are done with their meals and want the trash collected and we are still in the long aisle serving AND the need to use the restroom as well because we are in the aisle. That's why the 767 was ideal for passengers as a "heavy" aircraft. So glad to see the old girls flying around still with UA and Delta. AND YES, pilots love flying this plane. Like a sportscars in the air.
I'm currently in training on the 75/76 for Delta, and after my first day in the sim, I understand why every pilot loves this aircraft. It will be a sad day when the last one is gone, but thankfully it sounds like that day isn't any time soon
I think the 757 was the best narrow body airplane ever built. It's abandonment by Boeing as a plane that could have been developed further has always mystified me.
@j700jam4 What a shame. I remember my first flight on a 757. I was looking at the plane and kept thinking, those engines seem awfully big for an airplane of that size(it's all relative, I guess). Well, I've been on jets many times but I was startled at how hard I was pushed back into my seat as we accelerated down the runway. It.Was.Incredible. I thought, where can I get one of these ... lol
@@palindrome1959airlines didn’t want the 757 anymore. It was old and out dated. Too much to operate. Being “pushed back in the seat” means nothing. Everybody uses a significant derated take off, so you haven’t felt the full power of engines on other types.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183It wasn't necessarily that. The ETOPS rules changed after the 757 was out of production. If that had happened before production stop it stould a very good chance of getting a new aircraft
@@kylecampbell1444 I don’t believe so. The empty weight was simply too high to redesign around it. It’s empty weight is 17,000 lbs higher than the A321xlr. That’s a lot of extra weight to be hauling around everywhere.
This weekend I flew on a Delta 757 from Atlanta to Florida. It was a nice experience to fly on this "old" bird. I'm glad that Delta is keeping them going.
I agree. I've flown Delta's 757s on several transcon routes. Those old birds fly beautifully. I always joke when the pilot comes on warning us of turbulence and has us fasten our seatbelts. Then, a few minutes later, the seatbelts light goes off, and we ask each other, "did you feel anything?" Of course I always comply with crew instructions, but the point is that nine times out of ten, we could barely feel a single bump. On a newer plane, that would be an entirely different story.
The only real replacement on the market currently is the Airbus321XLR. The obvious problem is that Airbus' backlog would mean it would take years for any new orders to be delivered.
It won’t take years. There is a whole market for delivery slots. When some airline orders 100 aircraft, they don’t want them all in the same year. They want them spread out. So they are willing to swap delivery dates, especially if they get money for it.
@@TrentonThomas627 it doesn’t have to carry the same load. It cost $6500 per hour to operate. The 757 cost $11000 per hour. So you can fly 2 a321s for almost the same cost as 1 B757. So technically, the a321 can carry more passengers for the same cost. Almost double the passengers compared to the 757. And if the market only supports 150 passengers, tickets would be twice as high in a 757, compared to a single A321, just to cover the cost. Also, the 321 can fly further. So in that case, it has a better performance.
@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 For Delta the performance isn't there for them on the XLR. The XLR cant do the California to Atlanta market out of the smaller airports. The only replacement is the A220 or a 319 right now.
@@kylecampbell1444 why would you use an XLR for that, when a regular 321NEO has the range? That makes no sense. And which airports are you talking about? Whichever A321 you use (NEO, LR or XLR), it won’t need full fuel, so it should be able to get out of pretty short runways. Give me an example of what Delta flight you are talking about.
It's always a pleasure to hop on a Delta 757. Took one the other day from Atlanta to Baltimore. Obviously they have renovated all the cabins for the 21st century (really nicely). A smooth, classy flight.
At the time, the 737 did sell. The 757 did NOT sell. Furthermore, the A320 line did sell too - more and more! And ONE major talking point of the A320 family was "FAMILY". The A320 family included a certain member with a capacity close to the 757 and a range that (back then) was slightly smaller than that of the 757 but still sufficient for most applications. One of the disadvantages of Boeing was that there was NO 757 (downwards) family. It is interesting to note that Airbus achieved the first really big breakthrough deals NOT with traditional Boeing customers but with those of McDonnell Douglas. Purpose was to replace large DC-9 and MD-80/90 fleets, and because there was NO suitable MDD offering at the time, their users had the choice to invest ONE huge effort to introduce EITHER 737s OR A319/A320s. Furthermore, they had the choice to either invest ONE ADDITIONAL huge effort to bring in the more capable 757 too, or get the equally suited A321 at (nearly) NO additional transition cost. The rest is history. The Airbus line thrived, and the 757 was slain by its owners.
This is hard to explain but there’s currently no engine that would properly replace the 757. The engine is either the same engines used for the 73 max or a320neo or something too big for the 757, like the GENx, which wouldn’t fit under the wings. What made the 757 special was that the engines weren’t made for the a320 or 737 but made for the wide bodies. If Boeing made a 757 max, GE would have to develop new engines for it because if they used the leaps, it would just be a downgraded a321neo
The Pratt & Whitney 2000 series was not made for widebodies, it was a stand alone design produced for this airplane. The RR RB211 used was indeed a clipped-fan version of the engine used on the L1011 and some 747's.
@@Flies2FLL my point was that the engines were capable for being used on wide bodies. For example, The CFM 56 is tailored for narrow bodies (yes the a340 uses it but it’s extremely underpowered) and it could’ve been used on the 75 but they chose a more powerful option. If Boeing really wants to recreate a 757, using leaps or pw used on the max and 320neo, that would be a waste of time and money. it would just be a downgraded a321neo and there wouldn’t be much of a reason for an airline to chose that plane over the 321neo
@@owenklein1917 Good points, but Boeing doesn't want to/cannot build another 757. No, what they may eventually do is produce a composite aircraft of approximately the same size as the 757, and there is quite a market for it. The engines would need to produce around 40,000 of thrust, which is completely possible with uprated versions of the LEAP or similar. Right now Boeing is in too much trouble to do much of anything, but you can bet they are looking seriously at a 737/757 replacement.
@@Flies2FLL yep, I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out if they did want too, a new engine would be needed. It really sucks though. I want to live in a fantasy world where the 757 is flying for another 50 years. And from my knowledge, when Boeing was having serious 797 plans a while ago, it was going to be a 757 replacement but it would’ve probably looked like a mini 787, which kinda sucks because the 757 is so iconic.
@@owenklein1917 I agree with the aesthetics! They grafted a 767 nose onto the fuselage of a 727 and to make it work they had to narrow the L2/R2 windows and lower the cockpit, hence the powerful look. Another cool feature is the fact that the nose gear is 12.5 feet behind the pilot seats, whereas on the 767 it is 7.5 feet aft.
Flew on the 757 on several occasions. In terms of performance - if airliners were fighter planes, the 757 is the F-15 of airliners. Still holds the unlimited climb record for airliners.
The 757 is an iconic workhorse which serves as the backbone of major US carriers such as Delta. Its versatility and dynamism is instrumental in successfully operating in niche markets.
Reality or myth? Spend a few hours with FlightRadar or RadarBox and analyze the FACTUAL 757 utilization of DELTA. There is NO HINT to a certain requirement of "versatility and dynamism". DELTA operates the 757 mostly on surprisingly short routes within the continental US and into the Caribean. No flights to Europe, no (or very few) to Hawaii, very few coast-to-coast. There is ONE flight from Atlanta to Quito (Ecuador) right now, spanning 3,800 km to an airport with an elevation of 2,400m. But Quito has a 4,100m runway, and NO South American airline serving that city does use a single 757.
@@RaymondEABos That's an unfair assessment. Boeing is absolutely facing problems, and there's no sugar-coating that. However, many of these older 757s are from the glory days of Boeing and they run beautifully.
Delta has 108 757 in service, but over 600 737 and equivalent Airbus aircraft, with hundreds more on order. United has only 61 757 and 500+ 737 and Airbuses, also with hundreds more on order. American has ZERO 757s, but around 900 737s and Airbuses, and hundreds more on order. That is hardly a backbone of US airlines. The backbone of the world airline fleet is the 737 and A320 family, full stop. The remaining 757s are still flying because they are paid for, so the added operating expense is fine for the moment, since new airplanes are so hard to get and very expensive. But their days are numbered.
@@KlausErmecke Spot on. Nearly every airport with "hot and high" issues has lengthened their runways such that the 757 is no longer needed. It's mission is long gone. But the fanboys will fanboy, I guess. They certainly are cool airplanes, but they cost too much to fly.
Loved flying the 757. Especially in the summer when you needed more power for takeoff or even altitude. It was the next thing to a rocket ship in the airline business. Airbuses lack the power but are more comfortable both in back and in the cockpit
Have flown over a million miles on American, 750k on Delta and my favorite was the 757 followed by the ever reliable Mad Dog 80. Two great airplanes to be a passenger on. All great airplanes must come to end of life, unless of course you’re a B-52😊
I wouldn't be surprised that Delta is looking at a large A321neo order to replace the entire 757 fleet. And that includes the A321XLR for longer-distance flights across the Atlantic from Atlanta and New York City. Adding 100 A321neo Family planes is now very viable.
Absolutely. Their shift towards Airbus is pretty obvious. But then, Airbus' success is also their currently biggest problem - they just can't build them as fast as customers want to buy them.
A321neo or 737 MAX 9/10 is going to replace these unfortunately. Boeing originally built the 757 to share a type rating with the 767, minimizing differences so airlines could have both types share a pool of pilots. However, Middle of Market Aircraft are getting squeezed from both ends, the 787-8 is only slightly bigger than a 767-400. Meanwhile the 737MAX 9/10 have the seating capacity of the 767s smaller variants. While Airlines might see a use for a Purpose built Mid-Sized Aircraft, I don’t think Boeing or Airbus see it as worth the investment.
@@Joshuamd80why would an airline care about climb performance? How about this: the Max can carry the same amount of passengers at an operating cost of $6500 per hour versus the 757’s $11,000 an hour.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183climb performance is important when operating out of airfields at higher altitudes and extremely hot environments. The trust to weight ratio is unmatched to the 757.
@@scottcohen1776 thrust to weight ratio only really counts at MTOW. At lower weights (less fuel or payload) most airplanes are relatively equal. Most airlines don’t fly into high altitude airports where this is an issue anyway. The B757 has great performance, but it’s not as amazing as some people make it out to be. A 757 cost around $11,000 per hour to operate. A B737 or A321 can operate at around $6,500 per hour. So an airline can almost send 2 737s/321s for the same cost as a single 757. So even at high elevation airports, they can simply take less payload per airplane and still sell more tickets than a single 757 flight.
The NHL used Air Canada's A320s and later 757s (Delta) to shuttle the Panthers and Oilers between Ft. Lauderdale and Edmonton. The A320s needed to make a fuel stop in Kansas City flying westbound, but the 757s flew the route nonstop.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Sure, but Air Canada has a dedicated fleet of A320s customized just for professional hockey teams. The airline does not have A321s for that.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 You can when the 737-800 is "good enough". There will always be niche use cases but there needs to be enough of them for it to make sense to acquire and fly a different aircraft that is very much NOT optimized for the common use cases of today. The MAX and the NEOs are simply "good enough" the vast majority of the time. Production of the 757 stopped because there were no orders for them. 757s are cool airplanes that pilots love, but pilots don't run airlines, accountants do. The pilot-run airlines are all long out of business.
@@Kevin_Rhodes I’m with you on this. All I was saying is that saying th 757 can do that trip but not the a320, is not a valid comparison. The 757 is uneconomical. That’s why airlines didn’t want them anymore. Bigger engines than really needed, means it’s even less economical.
They already replaced them with the A321ceo on almost all the domestic routes I fly. The 757 range is great, but there's a lot of traditional 757 routes that don't actually need its full range. They'll probably keep their newest/lowest cycle count 757s for the few routes that need the range but can't fill a 767/A330 until there's a better option on the market.
as I am old...I recall a trip I made in the late 1980's.....EWR-SFO on Eastern Airlines.....pilot happily described the 757 aircraft as a 21 century airliner.....EAL on a 757....Eastern disappeared(a tiny re start might be out there)......and as for the 757 being a 21 century airliner???.....as a note.... desperate as Eastern was... they launched so call Eastern transcon...coast to coast non stop....it did not last long....good video
Boeing’s 757 is my all time favorite airframe. I did most of my flying when Northwest was in business. Actively sought out flights with this aircraft. Powerful, quiet, and high flying. The favorite comment I’ve heard from passengers is that it seems to fall UP when taking off because it has such a high climb rate. IMHO Boeing should build a replacement for this marvelous aircraft.
Didn't hear it or see it mentioned - Delta uses the 757 for their NBA charters. There is a "75C" configuration they have and this could be what they are using. That would be tough to find another type.
When the Airbus 320/321 series was introduced, Boeing responded with the 737NG, which encroached upon the niche previously held by the 757. The NG didn't match the range, versatility, or advanced technology of the 757, but it was significantly cheaper to operate on short and some mid-range routes. The 737-800 struggled with short runways, hot and high airfields, or ETOPS sectors. Some airlines opted for the 737-500 for operations into small airports, where the 757's superb performance had no issues. Performance, however, comes at a cost. The empty weight (DOW) of the 757 is close to 60 tons, whereas the -800NG (carrying up to 186 passengers) is 43 tons. This means each passenger effectively pays for about 32 kg more of empty weight, which increases fuel consumption, landing fees, and ATC route charges. The 737, in its basic systems, is a derivative of the Dash-80 (the prototype of the 707) from the 1950s. The fuselage retains the same 148-inch barrel, and the flight deck still resembles that of the 707 and 727, though it has been shortened to accommodate only two pilots and designed for one-hour hops. The 757 was a revolutionary design of the early 1980s, conceived for auto-landing with three autopilots at 0/0 ceiling and visibility. The last 757 rolled off the production line in November 2004, it still flies for Delta.
Looking at basic numbers, the A321XLR isn’t Deltas or anyone’s full replacement of the 757’s, the XLR will give Delta and other airlines more of the 767 feel and 757 that went from the US to Europe. A lot of the domestic 757’s will be replaced by the Max 10. You can look at the order numbers to see. Delta has over 125 757s but only ordered around 70 XLR’s and 100 (with option to purchase 30 more) Max 10’s. I would love to fly in a XLR especially with it’s first class configuration but most likely would end up on a Max 10
"Delta has over 125 757s but only ordered around 70 XLR’s" Delta has, as of yet, not ordered any XLRs. They have 155 A321neos on order or delivered (approx. 50-60 delivered so far I believe). Whether DL will eventually order the XLR, given their other fairly extensive Airbus orders, has been a much-discussed topic for some time.
Ive flown on a few 757's British Airways, Thompson ,First Choice and very recently with Delta in March this year. It may be old but it was comfortable and fine for cabin noise. I guess the A 321 LR will replace it with its 4000 mile range vs 3900 for the Boeing 757.
Absolutely Love the 757 having flown on them with TUI (and its predecessors) and Jet2. Unfortunately, there are only around half a dozen lying out of the UK and they are with Jet2. These are slowly being retired as they are around 30+ years old. They will be sadly missed by everybody who love this type. Jet2 have made the easy decision to replace them with the A321NEO as there isn't an off the shelf replacement available from BOEING. BOEING really have dropped the ball and let Airbus rule the roost in this area of the market. They only have themselves to blame!
The NZ airforce is struggling to find a decent replacement because the speed, capacity, and oddly enough is the high wheel structure, which is prefect for runways in antarctic. It needs its aircraft to be able to able to switch between freighter and passenger modes easily but doesn't need constant maintenance.
@@Greatdome99 yeah, the fuselage does have a finite life, but for the airlines, the biggest worry is fuel efficiency. They could upgrade the cockpit avionics - that has actually probably been done already to some extent.
@@winstonchurchill3597 true, however re-engine is something that has been done for fuel savings. Changing the wing isn't feasible. If the goal is to keep the 75 flying, re-engine is the easiest, cheapest way to increase efficiency
Now its too late because the production lines and equipment are gone. All of the aircraft produced today weigh much less when empty therefore requiring less fuel, so they would need to redesign all of it as well as find the engines to match the power of the 757.
The Boeing 797 was meant to address this. It was going to combine the 737 and 757 into one family where you can have commonality and efficiency of the 737 and the performance and capacity of the 757. But Boeing decided to update the 737 instead and make MAX versions
That takeoff in the beginning was jaw dropping !!🤪 The 757 was a near perfect jet and I loved how many pilots called it the sports car of the skies.❤❤❤
I've flown a zillion miles on Delta 757s both as a pilot and as a frequent flyer. There are 757-200s and the even longer 757-300s. As a passenger in the very last row of tourist, the time to embark and disembark passengers is extremely long and arduous. I hope whatever eventually replaces the 757 has TWIN AISLES! If flight time is 2 hours, but it takes 40 minutes to load and 20 minutes to unload, that route time is actually 3 hours. TWIN AISLES, please.
That’s actually something of a myth. Aluminum airframes will last practically forever. Think Douglas DC-3 and Boeing B-52.It’s the manufacturing of the teeny-tiny supporting parts that will doom an otherwise perfectly good airframe. Obviously, cracks in wing spars is something of a deal-killer, but for the most part, if parts are available, the airplane can be kept flying.
The reason why Boeing won’t upgrade the 757 now is that when they stopped making it they sold all the equipment for it so and they can’t upgrade it. But they will upgrade the 767 passenger planes because they still have make 767 cargo plane and they have equipment to upgrade the plane completely which is completely new technology and new engines and everything could be used from the 787 but the only thing that will be different is that Boeing is looking at using more fuel efficient engines for the 767 than what is currently used on the 787
Lots of 757 routes now have longer runways & new 737/320s have longer range anyway. Probably only a market for 2-300 replacements now. It's never going to happen
Love my giraffes!!!!! Script suggestion: You kind of got stuck in a loop saying the same thing about three times. Not sure this really needed to be 8 minutes long. Probably could have been a 1:30 - 2 minute pack tops.
The Airbus 321neo compelled Boeing to push the limits of the analog 737 design with the MAX, incorporating even larger fan engines onto its wings. The new placement of these engines created significant aerodynamic challenges, which were mitigated by the controversial digital MCAS system. Similarly, the 321XLR, with its small wings and flaps, and its ill-fitting four-wheel main landing gear (MLG), may prove to be Airbus's own version stretched to its limits. Regulators have expressed concerns about the rear center tank (RCT) solution, causing certification to lag behind schedule. Performance limitations at hot and high airports (like Madrid), contaminated runways (such as those found during winter on the US east coast), or short runways (like those in the Hawaiian islands) may prevent it from being a true substitute for the 757.
757 will always be my favorite and most comfortable jet out there. The A321 sux for endless reasons as does the 737. Why can't Boeing just update the 757??
Imagine if Ford stopped making the F150 and then tried to convince its loyal corporate fleet customers that a long bed Ranger or a bigger F250 is perfectly suited for their needs despite what they say or have been asking for.
The 757 has a narrower cabin then the 737 although the 757 has more capacity. This makes the 3-3 seat configuration more cramped feeling then it would be on a 737-800.
I may be naive here really down know all that much about airliners. But if it’s such a good aircraft model and still so widely used and is so versatile then why not just build new ones and continue the legacy? Surly they could load them up with all the modern amenities.
Nowadays the 757 is just as bland as the more visible 737. As far as ranking it, I would place it above the MD-80 but below the 727. When it debuted over 40 years ago, I saw it as a 707 with two engines. Four years ago my wife and I returned from Iceland and Ireland and were supposed to fly KEF-JFK on a 767. I was disappointed to be placed on a 757, given that due to the start of the COVID pandemic, they would want to get as many passengers back to the US as possible--necessitating the use of a 767.
Delta might want to order more Airbus A321neo’s to add to their growing fleet since it carries about the same number of passengers as their Boeing 757-200’s do.
Delta still has 127 757s in use. United has 77 757s, so Delta is the biggest in the world. Probably will move to the Airbus 320neo and 321neo planes in some kind of mix of those two planes since Boeing has nothing that fits the bill at all.
I enjoyed many flights on the 757. It is an awesome aircraft and so distinguishable. I wish that Boeing had continued developing the 757 instead of the horrible 737 Max.
I flew on a 20 year old ex NW 757 and it was old inside and dirty. Come on Delta upgrade the passenger compartment of your planes. I understand how great they. Typically I fly Alaska, Airlines maybe I'm spoiled.
Actually the A321-XLR has a longer range than the 757-200 but yes it won’t match the seating capacity of the 757-300 but it will definitely be a better option than the 757-200 and the reason being is that the XLR has two seating capacity options one is 250 passengers or the other is 285 passengers and the flight range is 4000 800 miles more than any of the 757S will manage
Great, how soon til Delta can replace all 129 of theirs? Your facts are correct. The point most people make is why did Boeing not upgrade the 757 the way Airbus did with the A321. The A321 has been around just as long, Boeing should have been able to transfer the technolgy of the 737 and 787 for the 757/767 families.
Boeing should have upgraded the 757 and the 767 with the technology that they have already developed on the 787-900 and from the 1000 version because it’s the newest version so it could be used on the 767-300 and the 400 . And quite possibly upgrade the 757-300 to fly for another 20 years or more and quite possibly the same with both versions of the 767
Just to let you know that Boeing is looking 👀 into upgrading the 767 with the technology for 787 but using even more fuel efficient engines than what the 787 has already. There’s nothing to say that they will do the same with 757 so they are maybe only interested in doing the 767-300 and 400 because it will be easier to upgrade them and a lot airlines still fly 767 not just airlines in America but airlines in Europe are still flying them as passenger planes
..Being could have don it has they not cancelled what would have been it's replacement in 2011. Instead the post McD&D management decided tp put a; their eggs in the 737 basket, at the time a nearly half century old concept. They revived the MMA which would have been the "follow on" and then cancelled that. The 757 was mpre in the the 707-320 / D20 O51B market. being as large (asd the former with the performance of hte latter. At the time of its entry into service it actually surpassed the efficiency projections. In spite of hte -200s range what hurt it were the more strict ETOPs regulations of the day. Maybe it's time for the 757-X.
Not this again! The A321neo along with it's LR and XLR variants easily do 95% of the routes that the 757 can! Infact 100% of DL 757-200 routes can be replaced one on one with A321neo and LR. DL doesn't even need the XLR! The 757-300 can be easily replaced by either A321neo or A330. 757 was a superb aircraft but it's days are marked now! Time to make our peace with it! Boeing missed their chance to create something for this market with the NMA - that window finally slammed on their face once the LR variant was launched!
@@RaymondEABos To be fair, the 757 can lift a lot more weight off a hot/high runway and fly it farther. For a LOT more money in operating costs. The problem is that is very much a niche use case today.
@@winstonchurchill3597 Which is lovely - but you only need those capabilities on rare occasions. The rest of the time, you are just setting money on fire to have them. Which is why only 1050 757s were sold vs. 20K+ 737s and Airbus A320 family aircraft. With orders for 10K+ more on the books between Boeing and Airbus. They are "good enough" to get the job done 99% of the time. If there was a market for a direct 757 replacement, *Airbus* would have built one even if Boeing didn't. But there isn't. And they already learned their lesson with the A380, another airplane that the fanboys adore but was a financial disaster.
Why not retrofitting the existing 757s with modern-class engines? This may not be as efficient as an all-new aircraft, but it should come pretty close, and be cheaper to acquire.
The last 757, which Delta has in its fleet, was built in 2005, or 19 years ago. The majority of these airframes will be timing out in the coming years, so a re-engine is way too late in its lifecycle.
The wing is the problem and the wing is the plane. Doesn't matter what engine they hang off of it, the fuel savings wouldn't be there to cover the cost of the re-engine.
I’ve heard that the 757 is every airline pilot’s secret crush.
No secret! I flew it for 8 years and still miss it.
Early in my airline career, I said to my captain, “I don’t know why, but I find that jet so good looking.”
“I know why you do.”
“Why?”
“Thin waist, long legs, big cans.”
I was never unable to unsee it. He was 100% right.
Every parcel delivery man prefers driving a Mercedes over his professional vehicle
And every long-haul passenger’s nightmare
Power and performance are the reasons. The thrust to weight ratio is better than anything else-military aircraft excluded, of course.
The 757 is one of the safest and most efficient and versatile planes ever built. It’s insane that it may be going the way of MD80s.
Not until around 2030 for Delta. Love the MD-80 very much.
@@Joshuamd80Same as they did with the MD-80
American Airlines flight attendant here. 25 years. My heart belongs to the 757 and we have said goodbye at American. Fast AF airplane. Loved EVERY take off. However, a nightmare to work on in the back. This was when we were serving full meals in the economy. The passengers in front are done with their meals and want the trash collected and we are still in the long aisle serving AND the need to use the restroom as well because we are in the aisle. That's why the 767 was ideal for passengers as a "heavy" aircraft. So glad to see the old girls flying around still with UA and Delta. AND YES, pilots love flying this plane. Like a sportscars in the air.
Love hearing your perspective. Nobody ever think of the crew in such instances.
I'm a Delta loyalist. I love the B757. Delta pilots told me they love the B757. I will miss it.
I'm currently in training on the 75/76 for Delta, and after my first day in the sim, I understand why every pilot loves this aircraft. It will be a sad day when the last one is gone, but thankfully it sounds like that day isn't any time soon
I think the 757 was the best narrow body airplane ever built. It's abandonment by Boeing as a plane that could have been developed further has always mystified me.
The orders dried up
@j700jam4 What a shame. I remember my first flight on a 757. I was looking at the plane and kept thinking, those engines seem awfully big for an airplane of that size(it's all relative, I guess). Well, I've been on jets many times but I was startled at how hard I was pushed back into my seat as we accelerated down the runway. It.Was.Incredible. I thought, where can I get one of these ... lol
@@palindrome1959airlines didn’t want the 757 anymore. It was old and out dated. Too much to operate.
Being “pushed back in the seat” means nothing. Everybody uses a significant derated take off, so you haven’t felt the full power of engines on other types.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183It wasn't necessarily that. The ETOPS rules changed after the 757 was out of production. If that had happened before production stop it stould a very good chance of getting a new aircraft
@@kylecampbell1444 I don’t believe so. The empty weight was simply too high to redesign around it. It’s empty weight is 17,000 lbs higher than the A321xlr. That’s a lot of extra weight to be hauling around everywhere.
This weekend I flew on a Delta 757 from Atlanta to Florida. It was a nice experience to fly on this "old" bird. I'm glad that Delta is keeping them going.
I agree. I've flown Delta's 757s on several transcon routes. Those old birds fly beautifully. I always joke when the pilot comes on warning us of turbulence and has us fasten our seatbelts. Then, a few minutes later, the seatbelts light goes off, and we ask each other, "did you feel anything?" Of course I always comply with crew instructions, but the point is that nine times out of ten, we could barely feel a single bump. On a newer plane, that would be an entirely different story.
The only real replacement on the market currently is the Airbus321XLR. The obvious problem is that Airbus' backlog would mean it would take years for any new orders to be delivered.
It won’t take years. There is a whole market for delivery slots. When some airline orders 100 aircraft, they don’t want them all in the same year. They want them spread out. So they are willing to swap delivery dates, especially if they get money for it.
A321 xlr doesn’t perform the same and can’t carry the same load
@@TrentonThomas627 it doesn’t have to carry the same load. It cost $6500 per hour to operate. The 757 cost $11000 per hour. So you can fly 2 a321s for almost the same cost as 1 B757. So technically, the a321 can carry more passengers for the same cost. Almost double the passengers compared to the 757.
And if the market only supports 150 passengers, tickets would be twice as high in a 757, compared to a single A321, just to cover the cost.
Also, the 321 can fly further. So in that case, it has a better performance.
@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 For Delta the performance isn't there for them on the XLR. The XLR cant do the California to Atlanta market out of the smaller airports. The only replacement is the A220 or a 319 right now.
@@kylecampbell1444 why would you use an XLR for that, when a regular 321NEO has the range? That makes no sense.
And which airports are you talking about? Whichever A321 you use (NEO, LR or XLR), it won’t need full fuel, so it should be able to get out of pretty short runways.
Give me an example of what Delta flight you are talking about.
It's always a pleasure to hop on a Delta 757. Took one the other day from Atlanta to Baltimore. Obviously they have renovated all the cabins for the 21st century (really nicely). A smooth, classy flight.
Atl to BWI is exclusively 757 route. Very popular.
The biggest mistake Boeing has ever made was choosing to end the production of the 757 in favor of the 737.
I 100% agree. So many airlines have hung on to them as long as possible. They thought the 737-900ER and 900 MAX would replace it.
Airlines weren't ordering it when Boeing discontinued it.
The 757 wasn’t selling well towards the end of its production. Boeing only builds what airlines want.
A shame that Boeing focused on the 737 rather than the 757
At the time, the 737 did sell. The 757 did NOT sell.
Furthermore, the A320 line did sell too - more and more! And ONE major talking point of the A320 family was "FAMILY". The A320 family included a certain member with a capacity close to the 757 and a range that (back then) was slightly smaller than that of the 757 but still sufficient for most applications. One of the disadvantages of Boeing was that there was NO 757 (downwards) family.
It is interesting to note that Airbus achieved the first really big breakthrough deals NOT with traditional Boeing customers but with those of McDonnell Douglas. Purpose was to replace large DC-9 and MD-80/90 fleets, and because there was NO suitable MDD offering at the time, their users had the choice to invest ONE huge effort to introduce EITHER 737s OR A319/A320s. Furthermore, they had the choice to either invest ONE ADDITIONAL huge effort to bring in the more capable 757 too, or get the equally suited A321 at (nearly) NO additional transition cost.
The rest is history. The Airbus line thrived, and the 757 was slain by its owners.
This is hard to explain but there’s currently no engine that would properly replace the 757. The engine is either the same engines used for the 73 max or a320neo or something too big for the 757, like the GENx, which wouldn’t fit under the wings. What made the 757 special was that the engines weren’t made for the a320 or 737 but made for the wide bodies. If Boeing made a 757 max, GE would have to develop new engines for it because if they used the leaps, it would just be a downgraded a321neo
The Pratt & Whitney 2000 series was not made for widebodies, it was a stand alone design produced for this airplane. The RR RB211 used was indeed a clipped-fan version of the engine used on the L1011 and some 747's.
@@Flies2FLL my point was that the engines were capable for being used on wide bodies. For example, The CFM 56 is tailored for narrow bodies (yes the a340 uses it but it’s extremely underpowered) and it could’ve been used on the 75 but they chose a more powerful option. If Boeing really wants to recreate a 757, using leaps or pw used on the max and 320neo, that would be a waste of time and money. it would just be a downgraded a321neo and there wouldn’t be much of a reason for an airline to chose that plane over the 321neo
@@owenklein1917 Good points, but Boeing doesn't want to/cannot build another 757. No, what they may eventually do is produce a composite aircraft of approximately the same size as the 757, and there is quite a market for it. The engines would need to produce around 40,000 of thrust, which is completely possible with uprated versions of the LEAP or similar. Right now Boeing is in too much trouble to do much of anything, but you can bet they are looking seriously at a 737/757 replacement.
@@Flies2FLL yep, I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out if they did want too, a new engine would be needed. It really sucks though. I want to live in a fantasy world where the 757 is flying for another 50 years. And from my knowledge, when Boeing was having serious 797 plans a while ago, it was going to be a 757 replacement but it would’ve probably looked like a mini 787, which kinda sucks because the 757 is so iconic.
@@owenklein1917 I agree with the aesthetics! They grafted a 767 nose onto the fuselage of a 727 and to make it work they had to narrow the L2/R2 windows and lower the cockpit, hence the powerful look. Another cool feature is the fact that the nose gear is 12.5 feet behind the pilot seats, whereas on the 767 it is 7.5 feet aft.
Flew on the 757 on several occasions. In terms of performance - if airliners were fighter planes, the 757 is the F-15 of airliners. Still holds the unlimited climb record for airliners.
Coolest Narrow body jet still operating. The A321 XLR and 737-10 MAX don't come close to replacing it
The 757 is an iconic workhorse which serves as the backbone of major US carriers such as Delta. Its versatility and dynamism is instrumental in successfully operating in niche markets.
workhorse and Boeing are TWO words which CANNOT be seen in the same sentence
Reality or myth?
Spend a few hours with FlightRadar or RadarBox and analyze the FACTUAL 757 utilization of DELTA.
There is NO HINT to a certain requirement of "versatility and dynamism". DELTA operates the 757 mostly on surprisingly short routes within the continental US and into the Caribean. No flights to Europe, no (or very few) to Hawaii, very few coast-to-coast. There is ONE flight from Atlanta to Quito (Ecuador) right now, spanning 3,800 km to an airport with an elevation of 2,400m. But Quito has a 4,100m runway, and NO South American airline serving that city does use a single 757.
@@RaymondEABos That's an unfair assessment. Boeing is absolutely facing problems, and there's no sugar-coating that. However, many of these older 757s are from the glory days of Boeing and they run beautifully.
Delta has 108 757 in service, but over 600 737 and equivalent Airbus aircraft, with hundreds more on order. United has only 61 757 and 500+ 737 and Airbuses, also with hundreds more on order. American has ZERO 757s, but around 900 737s and Airbuses, and hundreds more on order. That is hardly a backbone of US airlines. The backbone of the world airline fleet is the 737 and A320 family, full stop.
The remaining 757s are still flying because they are paid for, so the added operating expense is fine for the moment, since new airplanes are so hard to get and very expensive. But their days are numbered.
@@KlausErmecke Spot on. Nearly every airport with "hot and high" issues has lengthened their runways such that the 757 is no longer needed. It's mission is long gone. But the fanboys will fanboy, I guess. They certainly are cool airplanes, but they cost too much to fly.
Loved flying the 757. Especially in the summer when you needed more power for takeoff or even altitude. It was the next thing to a rocket ship in the airline business. Airbuses lack the power but are more comfortable both in back and in the cockpit
Have flown over a million miles on American, 750k on Delta and my favorite was the 757 followed by the ever reliable Mad Dog 80. Two great airplanes to be a passenger on. All great airplanes must come to end of life, unless of course you’re a B-52😊
I liked flying on the 757 to Vegas. Omni Air, back in the day.
I wouldn't be surprised that Delta is looking at a large A321neo order to replace the entire 757 fleet. And that includes the A321XLR for longer-distance flights across the Atlantic from Atlanta and New York City. Adding 100 A321neo Family planes is now very viable.
They already have 60 A321neo in the fleet & another 90 currently on order.
Absolutely. Their shift towards Airbus is pretty obvious.
But then, Airbus' success is also their currently biggest problem - they just can't build them as fast as customers want to buy them.
good luck for the airline if they get them within 7 years
Delta will buy bankrupt airlines delivery slots like they always do.
Doesn't have the takeoff/climb performance.
A321neo or 737 MAX 9/10 is going to replace these unfortunately.
Boeing originally built the 757 to share a type rating with the 767, minimizing differences so airlines could have both types share a pool of pilots. However, Middle of Market Aircraft are getting squeezed from both ends, the 787-8 is only slightly bigger than a 767-400. Meanwhile the 737MAX 9/10 have the seating capacity of the 767s smaller variants. While Airlines might see a use for a Purpose built Mid-Sized Aircraft, I don’t think Boeing or Airbus see it as worth the investment.
The max as a replacement? Not nearly as powerful or capable as the 757s climb performance.
This is as good a sum-up as I've seen.
@@Joshuamd80why would an airline care about climb performance? How about this: the Max can carry the same amount of passengers at an operating cost of $6500 per hour versus the 757’s $11,000 an hour.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183climb performance is important when operating out of airfields at higher altitudes and extremely hot environments. The trust to weight ratio is unmatched to the 757.
@@scottcohen1776 thrust to weight ratio only really counts at MTOW. At lower weights (less fuel or payload) most airplanes are relatively equal.
Most airlines don’t fly into high altitude airports where this is an issue anyway.
The B757 has great performance, but it’s not as amazing as some people make it out to be.
A 757 cost around $11,000 per hour to operate. A B737 or A321 can operate at around $6,500 per hour. So an airline can almost send 2 737s/321s for the same cost as a single 757. So even at high elevation airports, they can simply take less payload per airplane and still sell more tickets than a single 757 flight.
The NHL used Air Canada's A320s and later 757s (Delta) to shuttle the Panthers and Oilers between Ft. Lauderdale and Edmonton. The A320s needed to make a fuel stop in Kansas City flying westbound, but the 757s flew the route nonstop.
Not comparable though. The 321LR can do it non stop.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Sure, but Air Canada has a dedicated fleet of A320s customized just for professional hockey teams. The airline does not have A321s for that.
@@alooga555 right. But you can’t compare an A320 with a B757. The same way you can’t compare a B737-800 with the B757.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 You can when the 737-800 is "good enough". There will always be niche use cases but there needs to be enough of them for it to make sense to acquire and fly a different aircraft that is very much NOT optimized for the common use cases of today. The MAX and the NEOs are simply "good enough" the vast majority of the time. Production of the 757 stopped because there were no orders for them. 757s are cool airplanes that pilots love, but pilots don't run airlines, accountants do. The pilot-run airlines are all long out of business.
@@Kevin_Rhodes I’m with you on this. All I was saying is that saying th 757 can do that trip but not the a320, is not a valid comparison.
The 757 is uneconomical. That’s why airlines didn’t want them anymore. Bigger engines than really needed, means it’s even less economical.
The first time I flew on the 757 was in 1987 on the Spirit of Delta from Atlanta to Ontario and to San Diego. What a very nice plane.
They are obviously replacing it with the Airbus A321neo, fuel burn alone is 27% less. no brainer
They already replaced them with the A321ceo on almost all the domestic routes I fly. The 757 range is great, but there's a lot of traditional 757 routes that don't actually need its full range. They'll probably keep their newest/lowest cycle count 757s for the few routes that need the range but can't fill a 767/A330 until there's a better option on the market.
Nice u showed a trans world 757 TWA tail number 😅
Thanks for the wonderful video DJ, and congratulations on 48,000 subscribers
Congrats on 48,000 Dj thanks for this vid and info!!
I think of EASTERN! They introduced it!
Gorgeous, gorgeous, unbelievably performing jet
as I am old...I recall a trip I made in the late 1980's.....EWR-SFO on Eastern Airlines.....pilot happily described the 757 aircraft as a 21 century airliner.....EAL on a 757....Eastern disappeared(a tiny re start might be out there)......and as for the 757 being a 21 century airliner???.....as a note.... desperate as Eastern was... they launched so call Eastern transcon...coast to coast non stop....it did not last long....good video
The 757, from the days when Boeing knew the way to product great financial results was to produce great aircraft.
Boeing’s 757 is my all time favorite airframe. I did most of my flying when Northwest was in business. Actively sought out flights with this aircraft.
Powerful, quiet, and high flying. The favorite comment I’ve heard from passengers is that it seems to fall UP when taking off because it has such a high climb rate.
IMHO Boeing should build a replacement for this marvelous aircraft.
Didn't hear it or see it mentioned - Delta uses the 757 for their NBA charters. There is a "75C" configuration they have and this could be what they are using. That would be tough to find another type.
The 757 was definitely ahead of its time
Sad, would’ve loved to see an ER and MAX version for the 757. Disappointing it can’t be revived that easily as we think
When the Airbus 320/321 series was introduced, Boeing responded with the 737NG, which encroached upon the niche previously held by the 757. The NG didn't match the range, versatility, or advanced technology of the 757, but it was significantly cheaper to operate on short and some mid-range routes. The 737-800 struggled with short runways, hot and high airfields, or ETOPS sectors. Some airlines opted for the 737-500 for operations into small airports, where the 757's superb performance had no issues. Performance, however, comes at a cost. The empty weight (DOW) of the 757 is close to 60 tons, whereas the -800NG (carrying up to 186 passengers) is 43 tons. This means each passenger effectively pays for about 32 kg more of empty weight, which increases fuel consumption, landing fees, and ATC route charges.
The 737, in its basic systems, is a derivative of the Dash-80 (the prototype of the 707) from the 1950s. The fuselage retains the same 148-inch barrel, and the flight deck still resembles that of the 707 and 727, though it has been shortened to accommodate only two pilots and designed for one-hour hops.
The 757 was a revolutionary design of the early 1980s, conceived for auto-landing with three autopilots at 0/0 ceiling and visibility. The last 757 rolled off the production line in November 2004, it still flies for Delta.
The replacement for 757 should be either 787 or 767. They could go Airbus which would be the A321XLR or the A350
Looking at basic numbers, the A321XLR isn’t Deltas or anyone’s full replacement of the 757’s, the XLR will give Delta and other airlines more of the 767 feel and 757 that went from the US to Europe. A lot of the domestic 757’s will be replaced by the Max 10. You can look at the order numbers to see. Delta has over 125 757s but only ordered around 70 XLR’s and 100 (with option to purchase 30 more) Max 10’s. I would love to fly in a XLR especially with it’s first class configuration but most likely would end up on a Max 10
"Delta has over 125 757s but only ordered around 70 XLR’s"
Delta has, as of yet, not ordered any XLRs. They have 155 A321neos on order or delivered (approx. 50-60 delivered so far I believe). Whether DL will eventually order the XLR, given their other fairly extensive Airbus orders, has been a much-discussed topic for some time.
Ive flown on a few 757's British Airways, Thompson ,First Choice and very recently with Delta in March this year. It may be old but it was comfortable and fine for cabin noise. I guess the A 321 LR will replace it with its 4000 mile range vs 3900 for the Boeing 757.
Absolutely Love the 757 having flown on them with TUI (and its predecessors) and Jet2. Unfortunately, there are only around half a dozen lying out of the UK and they are with Jet2. These are slowly being retired as they are around 30+ years old. They will be sadly missed by everybody who love this type. Jet2 have made the easy decision to replace them with the A321NEO as there isn't an off the shelf replacement available from BOEING. BOEING really have dropped the ball and let Airbus rule the roost in this area of the market. They only have themselves to blame!
The NZ airforce is struggling to find a decent replacement because the speed, capacity, and oddly enough is the high wheel structure, which is prefect for runways in antarctic. It needs its aircraft to be able to able to switch between freighter and passenger modes easily but doesn't need constant maintenance.
Flying on this bird to Los Angeles from Boston July 31st!
Hope you had a good flight 👍
@@Clipper1094 live tv didn’t work during the whole flight + limited movie options 😬😬 but other than that it was good
Over the past 30 years I’ve had countless cross country flights in 757s, never a problem always a great flight.
Probably the best passenger plane ever. Best I have flown on.
The 757 is a workhorse. It's a large aircraft that can handle short field takeoffs and landings. Its a very versatile bird
The Air Force re-engined the KC135 (707). Perhaps UA and DL should push a re-engine on the 75?
It's not the engines, it's the systems (old school and maintenance-intensive) and structure, which cannot fly forever.
@@Greatdome99 yeah, the fuselage does have a finite life, but for the airlines, the biggest worry is fuel efficiency. They could upgrade the cockpit avionics - that has actually probably been done already to some extent.
It's not only the engine that creates fuel savings, it's also the wing.
@@winstonchurchill3597 true, however re-engine is something that has been done for fuel savings. Changing the wing isn't feasible. If the goal is to keep the 75 flying, re-engine is the easiest, cheapest way to increase efficiency
@@RabbahDocRona True, but I don’t see that happening. Just don’t think the return on the investment would be there.
I would like to have heard more details about why one of the B737 variants wouldn't work and what is it about the A321neo that make it not ideal.
Best looking jetliner ever.
Why is it so difficult to make an "update" version of the 757? What am I missing?
Now its too late because the production lines and equipment are gone. All of the aircraft produced today weigh much less when empty therefore requiring less fuel, so they would need to redesign all of it as well as find the engines to match the power of the 757.
happy spotting mister
The Boeing 797 was meant to address this. It was going to combine the 737 and 757 into one family where you can have commonality and efficiency of the 737 and the performance and capacity of the 757. But Boeing decided to update the 737 instead and make MAX versions
That takeoff in the beginning was jaw dropping !!🤪 The 757 was a near perfect jet and I loved how many pilots called it the sports car of the skies.❤❤❤
Many piltos ????? Must be only American ones as in Europe NOBODY wants it.........explain that one to us
Sportscars are fun, but a lot of the time you really just need a boring station wagon to get the job done.
I've flown a zillion miles on Delta 757s both as a pilot and as a frequent flyer. There are 757-200s and the even longer 757-300s. As a passenger in the very last row of tourist, the time to embark and disembark passengers is extremely long and arduous. I hope whatever eventually replaces the 757 has TWIN AISLES! If flight time is 2 hours, but it takes 40 minutes to load and 20 minutes to unload, that route time is actually 3 hours. TWIN AISLES, please.
Type rating on 767/757 saved on training costs.
There’s 6 Delta 757 at BHM 2 are scrapped and the others being parted out in preparation for scrap ping at Kaiser aviation
Why can't they just keep making the 757 with new more fuel efficient engines?
Nows the perfect time to ditch the Max-7 and re-engine the 757 lol
You really made this a lot longer than it had to be.
The airframes only last for so many cycles and they become infeasible to maintain.
That’s actually something of a myth. Aluminum airframes will last practically forever. Think Douglas DC-3 and Boeing B-52.It’s the manufacturing of the teeny-tiny supporting parts that will doom an otherwise perfectly good airframe. Obviously, cracks in wing spars is something of a deal-killer, but for the most part, if parts are available, the airplane can be kept flying.
I wonder if Delta is still waiting for 797 to come out to replace 757???
The reason why Boeing won’t upgrade the 757 now is that when they stopped making it they sold all the equipment for it so and they can’t upgrade it. But they will upgrade the 767 passenger planes because they still have make 767 cargo plane and they have equipment to upgrade the plane completely which is completely new technology and new engines and everything could be used from the 787 but the only thing that will be different is that Boeing is looking at using more fuel efficient engines for the 767 than what is currently used on the 787
I hate flying, but I’d still be excited to fly on a 757 again.
Flew from Detroit to JFK on the 757 and I gotta say it’s a sexy airplane
Embraer could do the funniest thing right now
Used to like flying canada3000 who had 757 😊
Lots of 757 routes now have longer runways & new 737/320s have longer range anyway. Probably only a market for 2-300 replacements now. It's never going to happen
Love my giraffes!!!!!
Script suggestion: You kind of got stuck in a loop saying the same thing about three times. Not sure this really needed to be 8 minutes long. Probably could have been a 1:30 - 2 minute pack tops.
My favorite plane of all time.....she rides so smooth
75 and 76 are awesome aircraft. Not replaceable after all these years.
The Airbus 321neo compelled Boeing to push the limits of the analog 737 design with the MAX, incorporating even larger fan engines onto its wings. The new placement of these engines created significant aerodynamic challenges, which were mitigated by the controversial digital MCAS system.
Similarly, the 321XLR, with its small wings and flaps, and its ill-fitting four-wheel main landing gear (MLG), may prove to be Airbus's own version stretched to its limits. Regulators have expressed concerns about the rear center tank (RCT) solution, causing certification to lag behind schedule.
Performance limitations at hot and high airports (like Madrid), contaminated runways (such as those found during winter on the US east coast), or short runways (like those in the Hawaiian islands) may prevent it from being a true substitute for the 757.
Still my favorite of all the airline planes I flew!
I bet Airbus is talking to Delta about the 330-800.
757 will always be my favorite and most comfortable jet out there. The A321 sux for endless reasons as does the 737. Why can't Boeing just update the 757??
Imagine if Ford stopped making the F150 and then tried to convince its loyal corporate fleet customers that a long bed Ranger or a bigger F250 is perfectly suited for their needs despite what they say or have been asking for.
The 757 has a narrower cabin then the 737 although the 757 has more capacity. This makes the 3-3 seat configuration more cramped feeling then it would be on a 737-800.
I may be naive here really down know all that much about airliners. But if it’s such a good aircraft model and still so widely used and is so versatile then why not just build new ones and continue the legacy? Surly they could load them up with all the modern amenities.
Love the 757!
757 is the Corvette of the airliner.
Delta/NW drove the 747 into the ground prior to retirement..Expect the same here..Why fix what's not broken..
A321-XLR isn't an option ?
It is - in a number of years. Airbus has a huge order backlog, so deliveries will take a while
Nowadays the 757 is just as bland as the more visible 737. As far as ranking it, I would place it above the MD-80 but below the 727. When it debuted over 40 years ago, I saw it as a 707 with two engines. Four years ago my wife and I returned from Iceland and Ireland and were supposed to fly KEF-JFK on a 767. I was disappointed to be placed on a 757, given that due to the start of the COVID pandemic, they would want to get as many passengers back to the US as possible--necessitating the use of a 767.
Boeing not bringing back the 757 still amazes me. They would sell thousands of them.
Delta might want to order more Airbus A321neo’s to add to their growing fleet since it carries about the same number of passengers as their Boeing 757-200’s do.
Delta still has 127 757s in use. United has 77 757s, so Delta is the biggest in the world. Probably will move to the Airbus 320neo and 321neo planes in some kind of mix of those two planes since Boeing has nothing that fits the bill at all.
If they replace the 757, what is the NBA and MLB going to do?????
I enjoyed many flights on the 757. It is an awesome aircraft and so distinguishable. I wish that Boeing had continued developing the 757 instead of the horrible 737 Max.
I flew on a 20 year old ex NW 757 and it was old inside and dirty. Come on Delta upgrade the passenger compartment of your planes. I understand how great they. Typically I fly Alaska, Airlines maybe I'm spoiled.
Boeing needs to make a 757 Ultra!
Actually the A321-XLR has a longer range than the 757-200 but yes it won’t match the seating capacity of the 757-300 but it will definitely be a better option than the 757-200 and the reason being is that the XLR has two seating capacity options one is 250 passengers or the other is 285 passengers and the flight range is 4000 800 miles more than any of the 757S will manage
Great, how soon til Delta can replace all 129 of theirs? Your facts are correct. The point most people make is why did Boeing not upgrade the 757 the way Airbus did with the A321. The A321 has been around just as long, Boeing should have been able to transfer the technolgy of the 737 and 787 for the 757/767 families.
Boeing should have upgraded the 757 and the 767 with the technology that they have already developed on the 787-900 and from the 1000 version because it’s the newest version so it could be used on the 767-300 and the 400 . And quite possibly upgrade the 757-300 to fly for another 20 years or more and quite possibly the same with both versions of the 767
Just to let you know that Boeing is looking 👀 into upgrading the 767 with the technology for 787 but using even more fuel efficient engines than what the 787 has already. There’s nothing to say that they will do the same with 757 so they are maybe only interested in doing the 767-300 and 400 because it will be easier to upgrade them and a lot airlines still fly 767 not just airlines in America but airlines in Europe are still flying them as passenger planes
Limited need for its special capabilities ergo tons of them sitting in the desert with plenty of usable life.
..Being could have don it has they not cancelled what would have been it's replacement in 2011. Instead the post McD&D management decided tp put a; their eggs in the 737 basket, at the time a nearly half century old concept. They revived the MMA which would have been the "follow on" and then cancelled that.
The 757 was mpre in the the 707-320 / D20 O51B market. being as large (asd the former with the performance of hte latter. At the time of its entry into service it actually surpassed the efficiency projections. In spite of hte -200s range what hurt it were the more strict ETOPs regulations of the day.
Maybe it's time for the 757-X.
Not this again! The A321neo along with it's LR and XLR variants easily do 95% of the routes that the 757 can!
Infact 100% of DL 757-200 routes can be replaced one on one with A321neo and LR. DL doesn't even need the XLR! The 757-300 can be easily replaced by either A321neo or A330.
757 was a superb aircraft but it's days are marked now! Time to make our peace with it!
Boeing missed their chance to create something for this market with the NMA - that window finally slammed on their face once the LR variant was launched!
Boeing bet on the wrong narrow body.
very comfortable plane, unlike the Airbus seats which turn into wood benches after 2 flights.
What advantages does the 757 have over the A321 series?
NONE
@@RaymondEABos To be fair, the 757 can lift a lot more weight off a hot/high runway and fly it farther. For a LOT more money in operating costs. The problem is that is very much a niche use case today.
Higher cruise altitude to get above some of the weather, faster climb rate (a lot faster), better short field performance.
@@winstonchurchill3597 Which is lovely - but you only need those capabilities on rare occasions. The rest of the time, you are just setting money on fire to have them. Which is why only 1050 757s were sold vs. 20K+ 737s and Airbus A320 family aircraft. With orders for 10K+ more on the books between Boeing and Airbus. They are "good enough" to get the job done 99% of the time. If there was a market for a direct 757 replacement, *Airbus* would have built one even if Boeing didn't. But there isn't. And they already learned their lesson with the A380, another airplane that the fanboys adore but was a financial disaster.
Stupid Boeing management should have updated and continued building this great aircraft! Another reason to clean house at Boeing.
Why not retrofitting the existing 757s with modern-class engines? This may not be as efficient as an all-new aircraft, but it should come pretty close, and be cheaper to acquire.
The last 757, which Delta has in its fleet, was built in 2005, or 19 years ago. The majority of these airframes will be timing out in the coming years, so a re-engine is way too late in its lifecycle.
The wing is the problem and the wing is the plane. Doesn't matter what engine they hang off of it, the fuel savings wouldn't be there to cover the cost of the re-engine.
I’ll save you some time since this video repeats itself a lot: versatility, capacity, and delays for the 321 LR/XLR. You’re welcome!
The only replacement for the B-757 is a B-757. Boeing should've built a B-757 Max.
Wonderful airplane
I am going to miss the 757 dearly. It is a very successful narrow-body airplane that impressed airlines from the get-go.
impressed maybe the USa airlines BUT they are the only ones........explain this one, please