757 PROBLEM - United's Fleet Decision
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 чер 2023
- United Airlines is one of the largest operators of the Boeing 757 series and, as such, has a responsibility to one day replace the type. However, a decision to do so has only been made harder as the company believes there is no true replacement for the type and their fleet looks "imperfect." Today, I explore key fleet decisions that have been made throughout the years and how while the intention to replace some 757s is there, a variant still remains a grey area with a lack of new Boeing aircraft to truly replace the iconic workhorse.
🔔 Subscribe to GlobeTrotting: bit.ly/SubscribeGlobeTrotting
🖥️ Visit our website: djsaviation.net
CONNECT WITH US
🐦 Twitter: / djsaviation
👥 Facebook: / djsaviation
💬 Discord: / discord
💻 Patreon: / djsaviation
BUSINESS ENQUIRIES
📧 Email: contactdjsaviation@gmail.com
CHECK OUT THE PODCAST
🎙️ Spotify: bit.ly/DjsAviationPodcast
🎙️ Apple: bit.ly/DjsPodcastApple
SUBMIT VIDEO IDEAS
✍️ Form - bit.ly/SubmitVideoIdeas
===============================
ℹ️ MORE INFORMATION ℹ️
creativecommons.org/
Licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.0
- Airbus Mediaroom
- United Airlines Newsroom
- Flightglobal
-
-
Video was written by Daniel Fowkes.
🎵 OUTRO TRACK 🎵
Krys Talk - Fly Away [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
• Krys Talk - Fly Away |...
Free Download / Stream ncs.io/flyaway
#aviation #news #usa #america #757 #a321 #737 #flight #aircraft #avgeek #airplane #airlines #airport #planespotting #airbus #boeing
I flew the 757-200 for United out of all 3 NYC airports for 15 years before I retired in 2015 at age 65. There is simply no replacement for this wonderful airplane. I can recall taking off from SNA/Orange County, CA on a 5,700 foot long runway with 182 passengers and flying non-stop to Newark landing with 1.4 hours of fuel remaining. Boeing is trying to replace the 757 with longer 737s, and it just does not work.
I worked in the back on just about every type from 1984. My last few years at UAL was flying the 757 in and out of IAH to BOG, and Hawaii flights from the West Coast. The 757 I loved working...the 200 that is. Hated the 300. Once dumb management sent us a 300 to fly out of BOG. After hours of delay, and only half load got clearance. I was oh crap, and in back jumpseat witnessed the end of runway lights as we barely made it off the ground. Geez that was close and after that incident, I made sure not any bid with a 75-300 in the pairing was a no bid line.
Favorite A/C of my career was DC-10/30. Of course flying CAL down under flights out of HNL base.
Not sure if we ever flew together, but I was the tallest F/A ever hired at 6'5" for any airline back in the 80's.
Hang loose colleague🤙
It truly is a special aircraft. It is extremely versatile in range, capacity, and cargo which has made it a pure money maker in its almost 40 years of service.
You couldn’t have explained it better. A super stretched 737 max is NOT a viable option. Boeing screwed up when they abandoned the 757 and in my opinion that was when their downfall began.
@@ryanthomas887 Yep, could take off out of Bogota with full load and cargo in high altitude airport...8,300 ft
Would much rather see the Max with more powerful engines. 757 is much more “spare” power, giving it a much better climb performance and if necessary single engine operation.
The 757 was the commercial aircraft equivalent of dropping a big V8 into an MG, then putting big brakes on it. You get something that literally leaps off the runway, goes a long way, then can land on relatively short runways, all while carrying a respectable number of passengers. FABULOUS aircraft!
agreed. Experienced 757 performance in a fully loaded 757 take off from the short Greek Island runway at Skiathos. Phenomenal power
Boeing made the decision to end the 757 in 2003 and delivered the final one in 2005. It knew an NMA would be needed. It should have designed one concurrently with the 787 in the way the 757/767 were done in the 70s
Ive thought about this too! It could’ve been 757 sized and use versions of the engines on the 787
It thought the max 10 could fill the low end of the 757/767 gap and the 787 the higher end. They messed up 😂
@@deanwood1338 when the 787 was being developed starting in 2004 the MAX was nowhere it sight as it was a response to the A320NEO family that started development in 2014. Most 757s at the time were delivered in the early 90s and had another 10-15 years. I think Boeing thought it would have the 787 being delivered by 2007-2008 but it got delayed 4 years and had issues that diverted resources that could have been put on the NMA. I think Boeing just assumed everything would go perfectly but arrogantly didn’t anticipate issues. Co-development would have flushed out problems for both projects early on. There would still have been delay but Boeing would have been in a position to start delivering NMAs in 2018 had it done so.
@@stilljt2864 exactly. Engine development is 50% of the work. Airframe is easy although I have a feeling the 777X will prove me wrong there. Right before Covid I toured Boeing’s Everett factory and the 777X development lab. I am skeptical the 777X alloys will handle the same stresses and pressurization of the carbon ones. The 777X has MD-11 written all over it.
I could not agree more!
Boeing definitely screwed up by not making a 757 replacement. My second flight ever was on a 757 and the takeoff performance was out of this world. At first i was very scared how powerful the takeoff was and seemed to climb all the way up to cruising altitude instead of climbing in steps as other airliners. Boeing should have made a 757 out of composite materials with larger wings with newer efficient engines and they would be eating Airbuses lunch right now.
Their 757's are great for the baseball and football teams charters. They carry the whole teams in comfort as well as their equipment with ease.
the fact Boeing are rebuilding their house on the airframe of the 737 is quite depressing. That airframe is over 50 years old for gods sake. The Pencil was better than they ever imagined and airlines simply want another one! There doesn't seem to be a replacement for that amazing plane.
exactly! why don’t they make a 757MAX or something, that would fill the gap until they can release a completely new plane.
Boeing is making a lot of money with the B-737. And the A-320 airframe is over 40 years old. Even though,
a replacement for the B-737 should on the drawing board.
@@FrequencyORD Too late for that.
@@fjp3305 yes they’re making a lot of concessions with the air craft indeed.
@@FrequencyORD they won't make a MAX, cause the assembly line for 757's has been disassembled in the early 2000's. Trying to build a 757MAX would literally require to build a whole new assembly line, so it's financially more viable to design and build a new plane altogether.
The 757 was and has always been my favorite plane to work over my 30+ year career. Love the takeoff role and sound and power of the engines!
I've never worked for United, but I always followed their fleet, like other airlines over the years. The 757, and the 767, have been two great airplanes that were built specifically for United at first, and since they've had so much success with the both of them over the years, it's only fitting to perceive this as a whole.
I just flew a 757-300 to DC. It is my favorite airliner of all time. It is perfect.
Lol I remember when Continental used to serve small European cities from Newark using 757s. 😅 I used to fly to Brussels and it was so much convenient over the hassle of connecting in LHR or the trains from CDG or AMS,
@@mrparts Yep, in 2000s i used to fly from Newark directly to Berlin, flight 96/97. Perfect for me and the acceleration down the runway was fenomenal. Very cool airplane.
The thing is, that the only replacement for the B-757 is another B-757.
No the a321 or a330 are good replacements
@@Supremedoge155yeah but let’s say that united is a Boeing customer and they won’t buy a a321
@@Supremedoge155 Not the A330, its a widebody. The A321 is underpowered compared to the B757.
@@jamesyt5856 United already currently has 120 A321 on order.
@fjp3305 The primary benefit realized from more power is often considered to be shorter take-off performance, right? Even with less thrust/weight ratio between the most common engine and MTOW configurations of each model, A321 is actually rated at about 300 ft shorter takeoff performance than 757-200. Although I'm not sure whether those are at MTOW, full pax, or what other weights.
@@fjp3305 you could say 757 is overpowered for what it brings.
Having worked at United, a critical part of the 757 role there actually had nothing to do with passengers and performance. It's the cargo capability (airlines make s surprising amount from cargo transport). Neither the 737 nor A321 can match it in terms of ease of access and versatility to so many destinations.
Exactly. Boeing only looked at the 757 replacements from a passenger capacity perspective. The 757 is the most versatile aircraft in the world when it comes to capacity, range, and cargo. The 737 is so compact that it is useless for cargo. The A321 has sacrificed cargo capacity for fuel tanks to increase range. Airbus would have to build a A322 or A323 to get close but if that was feasible it would have done so by now.
Cargo is on average less that 5% of total UA revenue so it's not a huge factor in aircraft choice.
@@johniii8147 Trust me, 3-5% is important. It accounts for more revenue than the total of charters, bag fees, inflight food, wifi purchases and the like. If you can make up for one empty seat in every three rows, it's worth it at the margins facing the airlines. But besides mail and cargo, these planes also ferry parts and other necessary goods between stations - these do not have an explicit revenue on a financial statement, but mitigate additional cost. There's a reason many airlines like United kept 757s flying during the height of the pandemic, even turning some of them into cargo-only flights.
@@jtsholtod.79 My point was cargo just is not big determining factor in their fleet choices in most situations. It's a passenger focused airline. The pandemic thing doesn't really count here since that was a very unique time where people were not traveling so they had to do anything they could do to generate revenue.
Worked heavy maintenance on 757-200s, and -300s for over 25 years. Worked line maintenance on them also. A very fine airplane and my second favorite to work on next to the 767.
I never understood them not stretching the 757 more than they did. It sits higher off the ground on it's long legs, leaving more room for bigger engines, a problem built into the 737.
I'm not a fan of Airbuses, I find them to be a throw away airplane, which the airline I worked for did with some of the first ones we got after less than 15 years in the fleet.
At that same time we were operating 757s that were 20 plus years old, along with some DC-10s, and DC-9s that had been build in the early 70's, that were still flying and in great shape.
My favorite feature of the 757 is when flying in first class, and boarding is done using the L2 door, first class isn't impeded by all the economy passengers boarding!
I hope the 757 ends up like the A-10 where they want to replace/retire it but never can do it...because I'm an airline pilot trying to get onto the 757 before it dies.
Goes to show how reliable the 757 is when Delta and United with the possiblity of other airlines around the world that run the 757 are struggling to find a replacement. Boeing should be noticing this and kicking themselves.
Updating the 75 line would have been better than endless steroid shots for the 73. The 75 is the best transport category jet I've flown. It's handling, performance and reliability are unmatched. I wonder if Boeing's vapid management will get off of their asses and deliver a jet before I'm dead (or perhaps they die).
I work for AA who retired their 757 fleet a few years ago! I talked to some pilots who now fly the Airbus A321 they hate it in comparison! The 757 was a rocket! they say the Airbus is a dog! No mid range power at all lol
But uses a third less fuel.
@@jon-ie4li i've been type certified on 757/67 and a320s. All I can say is that while I have thoroughly enjoyed flying both 757s and a321s, I can't tell you the number of times I've had to take a detour in the 320 family because I didn't have the power to get over some rough weather in time. Personally I'd take the monstorous overkill thrust of the 757 any day over the fuel efficiency of the a321s. That being said, there is an argument to be made for not having a stick between your legs on a 6+ hour flight :D
Boeing honestly should invest in a 757x. New avionics and wings, and engine, they could easily dominate those a321s business wise with it. Jus don’t know why they don’t see this lol
Neither can I! Why couldn't they have made the Dreamliner out of the 757? An MD-80X would've killed any A321! Airbus comes out with an A380, fine. We'll take a 747 and turn the whole fuselage into a double-decker! (Sorry--triggered)😁
To greatly oversimplify, the problem is that when Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas they let the financial people from MD take over the company instead of the engineers that have always run Boeing. When the 757 was discontinued there was no aircraft on the market in the same capacity/range envelope -- and, really, there still isn't (to my knowledge even the latest Airbus won't have quite the same range as the 757 for the same payload, although it's a lot closer than anything being proposed by Boeing). Boeing blew it and has done nothing to rectify the situation.
Northwest Airlines (later Delta) kept the aging DC-9 fleet for many decades until some of them hit their maximum pressurization cycles. Could this be the case for United's and Delta's 757s?
United could never rebuild airplanes as Good as northwest. northwest could have rebuilt the dc9 again the problem was northwest could rebuild Airplanes better then delta and all the good northwest A&P people retired
@@dknowles60 I agree, but is still comes to maximum pressurization cycles as mentioned. You cant really rebuild a plan when its time is up.
United will keep them in service as long as possible. The old pmUA B752s are all retired. Most of the 41 pmCO B752 are goi g through refurbishment (except for the six in storage and the one that was written off)
@@dmcr9525 wrong you can reskin. North west did it the only reason the dc9 amd md 80 were retired is because they were fuel hogs and all the good Northwest good A&P people retired
Both Northwest and later Delta did/do a remarkable job at maintaining aircraft. The mechanics at MSP, DTW, ATL, and SLC are top notch workers who put a lot of pride into their work.
All Boeing had to do was slap a new fuel efficient powerplant on the 757 and upgrade the technology throughout the entire plane and they'd have a winner. They avoided that on purpose, they always saw the 737-900ER as the replacement of the 757-200 and they doubled down on that belief with the MAX9 and MAX10. They gambled and lost imo.
There are a couple of issues with that logic. Number one the 757 hasn’t been in production for 15 years and the production line is completely dismantled and the tooling is no long there. At this time it would be more cost effective just to make an entirely new airplane that would replace it. Number two is that currently there is no new generation of engine that is the right size for the 757. The current options are either too big or too small. Boeing has its issues but they aren’t stupid. If they could just bring back the 757 they definitely would.
The Airbus plan. Take a brilliant aircraft that they already have (A321), find new engines (check), tinker with a few things (check) and sell like hotcakes (check).
@@DontUputThatEvilOnMe Actually, as has been made clear on a number of aviation sites, the 757 tooling wasn't destroyed and as of a year or two ago, was still extant. Also, the same engine family used on the 748 and 737M could be used on a reengined 757, with few issues. They were both in development at the time. The real problem was that the airlines didn't want a newer 757 in the early 2000s when the line closed down. Southwest and American, in particular, wanted an updated 737, which they got. Boeing couldn't make what wasn't economically viable at the time. And, when Boeing finally realized that a Middle of the Market airliner was required and wanted to replace the 757, it was too seriously mired in the 737MAX debacle to be able to devote funds and engineering talent to it. You're right in that a totally new airplane would have been preferable, but Boeing was in no financial position to undertake such a task. However... A reengined 757 was discussed, as was a so-called 767-MAX by whatever name for the larger end of the market. United, in particular, wanted such an aircraft to bridge the gap, about 10-15 years, from now until EIS of the next generation of airliners with new powerplants, Their CFMs would still have met environmental standards and the plan was for United to pass them on to Fed Ex or UPS after that time - win-win for passenger and cargo carriers. The problem was that Boeing couldn't source interiors in time nor at the right price, so the deal fell through. Note that a major airline was willing to purchase older powerplants and an older, but rugged and reliable aircraft. The 757 would have been no different and likely far more popular.
@@jaysmith1408 The Max aircraft went through the same process.... check. Thousands on back order. Check. What happened to your "clean sheet design" trope. Pull your head out.
@@theswordguy5269 That's not true. They moved on from the 757 years ago now. It was never that big a seller for them and expensive to build. That ship long sailed.
I always liked flying on the 757.
The 757 is still easily my favorite airliner.
757 is my favourite narrow body plane.
I've flown both 737 series and 757.... Boeing did make a goof gamble on 737. Now AirBus has a leg up!
I’m going to miss the 757 as much as the 727. Especially the group of 757’s that are former TWA. I live under the WOZEY waypoint which these particular a/c sometimes fly. I’m usually ready and waiting with my binoculars.
Summer 2005 SEA - SFO on a UAL 757. I've never felt such powerful engines on takeoff. It was turbo deluxe!
Thank you for sharing your video here. Yes, the 757-200s are great aircraft and sharing the ability to fly similarly the 767 for the cockpit crew!!! The 757-300s came over from the Continental Airlines merger. They, Continental, used those 300s series a lot back in their history of flying. I really loved flying on the 757-200s on many flights. I flew on them to Hawaii a few times and I was impressed with the ability to fly that distance from Los Angeles. United also use to fly the "PS" Service on their transcontinental flights when they first started and stayed with for a while configured on the 757-200. The three-class cabin set up was nice to some years ago! I see and hear now a days the "PS" Service on the 757s are more of a two-class cabin design. I am glad I few on the 757s in my former airline years!!!
All of the remaining 757's at UA either 200 or 300 are former CO. UA retired its original 757s some years ago since they dated back to the mid to late 80s
@@johniii8147 I am glad I was flying on my former airline's 757-200s before the the merger with Continental Airlines. I flew in the late 1990s.
Furthermore, all of my friends still flying Flight Attendant and Pilots started with my former before I did so, we all flew on our aircraft before that Continental Airline merger.
The 57 needed an update at the worst possible time. around 2001. Sales were 0, backlog declining, all major US airlines went through restructuring or chapter 11.
Tech was about 25 years old, being designed in the late 70ties, early 80ties.
It`s likely Boeing should have pushed the B757 forward as B737 replacement, but they would have been very early if they started in 03, and would have had an update available around 07, 08.
Also, the 57 was an orphan, you never like single plane families.
A321 replaces the B752 pretty well, and the -300 was just not relevant in numbers.
The very known fact is, is that you just can't replace a legend. The 757 was, and always will be one of the best developed airplanes ever. So that's why it's been tricky trying to replace them.
As a passenger the 757 was not great. I would prefer the 787 any day. But yes it was a moneymaker for the airlines.
They are two different types of aircraft for two different operations. You can’t compare a new and modern wide body to an old and outdated narrow body
Boeing's stopping 757 production without a replacement was as ill-timed as stopping 717 production 7 years before Delta retired DC9. (717 was a direct replacement for DC9). Delta would've bought 100 more.
I bet when United retires them, some of them will become freighters. They are the 'muscle car' of the skies. They were designed in the 1970's for higher volumes of pax than the 737, ability to operate out of short runway airports (like LGA) or high/hot ones (like Denver in the summer), where 'widebodies' were too big to operate or would have too many seats, so had powerful engines.
The moral of all these stories is simple; United, given the right choices, would prefer to operate Boeing aircraft, but they don't have all options available so they're making so with what they have and plugging some holes with Airbus aircraft.
The B757 programme was ended too early in my opinion
I play Airlines Manager by Playrion and I really understand United. About a third of my routes would be ideal with 757-300.
Bigger planes like the 787-8 and A330-800 are too much, they are almost twice as big.
Two aircraft - A220-100 and A220-300 instead of one 757-300 could also fit perfectly, but such a large number of aircraft is more difficult to maintain.
So my choice is A321neo, after all I love Airbus
Should also take a look at American Airlines, and what decisions and fleet changes they made when they retired the 757. How has this impacted their fleet?
They shut a ton of their smaller routes to Europe (Prague, Budapest, Dubrovnik) and now have a ton of A321XLR on order.
Actually, I don't think AAL served those cities with the 757.
'Pocket rocket' has different meanings in different parts of the world.
I was surprised to say the least at hearing the phrase being used, and only after looking up the term and considering your accent, it made some sense.
Vibrator
Will be curious on the price comparison of an economy seat on the 20 hour non stop to a premium economy for more comfort with a stop over.
I can't imagine being in a economy middle seat for a 20 hour flight.
If I may say... You haven't elaborated on what specifically is the A-321 NEO shortcomings?
Or... What is it that the 757 can do better?
757 is not an extension of any aircraft, A321 is and in come some limits...
The 321N has the same wing as the 320 but is significantly heavier. This results in a lower climb rate, lower max altitude, and longer runway required. It also has lower power than the 757 with similar loads which means it is a slow climber as well. The XLR has the extra fuel tanks to help with the transcon range problem of the standard NEO, but you lose a considerable amount of cargo revenue potential as a result. The 757 can fly 7 hours with a full load of passengers, load up a lot of cargo, have an alternate an hour away, and still carry plenty of holding fuel. It can do all of this and still fly above most of the weather in the high 30’s. Then the next leg it can fly a 5 hour leg into a short runway in the mountains again with the full load without a problem. The 321N can do the 7 hour leg from a long runway with a close alternate but none of the rest. Sorry. It’s no comparison.
@@ryanschnitzler7771
Now... That's the details I needed!
Thanks... And makes sense
@@ryanschnitzler7771 Just think Boeing delivered 1050 757's,Airbus A321neo currently has 4700 orders and rising so much for there short comings.
@@terencereeder9830 that’s a very good point. The 321 is the kind of airplane that bean counters love. It is worth pointing out however that the 321 order book was insignificant until 757 production ceased.
Airbus should be looking at a US transcon aircraft for UA, DL, AA, and offering a reduced range, 24 seat stretched version (two rows each fore and aft of the wing) based on the 321XLR.
The things that the 757 does that can’t be replaced represent such a small percentage of an airline’s route network that it does not justify the cost to maintain these aircraft. Delta is literally using theirs to run back and forth to Orlando and Jacksonville 30 times a day vs the 3X weekly seasonal service to Jackson Hole.
WOW, such insights. Where did you get you information from a flight attendant or maybe a Customer Service agent.
I don't think there will ever be a plane that can "replace" the Boeing 757
I wonder if Boeing has considered resurrecting the 787-3 which was originally planned for Japanese domestic operations. It seems like it could be an easy short term fix.
Boeing original plan when ending the 757, was the 787-3, which never ended up happening. Boeing lift the pricepoint to a widebody aircraft from something that could be done with a narrowbody. Due to lack of demand on the 787-3 it was scrapped, and the solution was to try to stretch the 737.
What is the reason why the B787-8 is not a suitable replacement to the B757-300? United's 757-300 seats 234 passengers, the B787-8 248. A difference of 14 doesn't seem all that earth shattering to me.
Weight, 787-8 is 120,000 pounds heavier than a 757-300 empty. That weight costs fuel to fly.
Also Airbus speculated A321 stretch version the A322 look like they are not in a hurry to launch that yet. Thats the model that most likely use the composite wing they are testing.
What happened first? Did Boeing end production of the 757, or did the carriers stop ordering the 757?
One missing opportunity is the A330neo Airbus have done some very cool work on the landing gear to handle a different landing frequency - it’s going to be interesting to see where this goes…. For me Boeing need to get their act together and produce in tandem a new 737 & 767 replacement that matches the capabilities of 757. Seems simple!
Airbus are poised to win some big orders for the A330neo from Delta, Indigo and perhaps Qantas and AF-KLM.
767 is still in production as KC-46, why not 767?
@@akhmetov86 it’s a great aircraft but would definitely need new engines and potentially a new wing to compete with the A330neo. If Boeing were going to do that it would have happened by now…
787 is meant to replace the 767
It's not that big of "problem" as you state. The 321XLR will have roughly the same passenger capacity with even longer range than the 757s on transatlantic, South America. Really the only drawback is less cargo capacity but that won't be a big deal for them. Cargo is not a large part of their operation and and any lost revenue from the cargo will be more than made up for by the 25 to 30% savings in operating costs. The 300 version is a tiny portion of their fleet and they can use the 787's on routes from the hubs that require that capacity given the huge fleet of them they will have
@@scotttild Looking at 2022 which is a more acturate reflection post Covid cargo was less than 5% of UA's revenue. 2.17 billion if cargo on a total revenue for the carrier over over 44 billion.
The 757 is such a great plane, not even considering how beautiful it looks. The -300 was a very poor seller, and by the time production was ended neither variant was selling. As others have mentioned, it was never a particularly strong seller. Sales peaked in the late '80s and only two years saw orders of over 100. Only 44 orders were placed between 2001 and 2005. Airlines don't seem to have considered flying a narrowbody on trans-Atlantic routes until the 757 was long out of production. Unfortunately, Boeing wasn't prescient enough to consider demand for a plane like the 757 would pick up again. Cue the old saying about hindsight.
Well at the end of rhe dsy they are way to old just got back from kuwait on the airbus a321 er very comfortable compared to the 757 of jet 2 which flew on a few weeks ago
The 753 has poor range compared to the 752. Where’s the mention of ETOPS ? The 752 became a narrowbody transatlantic plane for a long time because of its rating
United will probably be placing an A321XLR order in the near future. Most likely the 2021 order for 70 321NEOs will be modified to make some or all of the orders the XLR, and an order for additional XLR's will be placed sometime in the next 2-3 years. The 737 MAX 9 can easily do the North American routes the 752 now does, whilst the XLR's can do the European routes from EWR and IAD the 752 now does.
Delta already has the XLR on order.
Unfortunately, Boeing missed the boat on the 757 replacement. The 737 MAX debacle killed the MoM project, and introducing a direct competitor to the 321XLR would be a fool's errand at this point. What Boeing should do is introduce a 797 as a 767 replacement to fill the gap between the 737 MAX 9 and 787-8. It should have 2 variants: the 797-8 should be between the 762 and 763 in size, with 7 abreast seating and a 5000-6000 NM range. The 797-9 should be between the 763 and 764 in size, again with a 5000-6000 NM range.
It must be a special kind of insanity to not look at rehabbing the 757 fuselage / engine combo or developing a NMA aircraft. It must be nice to not need these customers. The 757 is a wonderful aircraft. It's not as efficient but does things that nothing else perfectly does - as you have correctly pointed out. Boeing need to get hard t work figuring this out to avoid becoming a niche player.
At a Continental “Do” about twelve or so years ago (a “Do” is a weekend event for frequent flyers) a question was asked along the lines of a wish. A member of the senior management team said that he wished they’d ordered twice as many B752s. The type had been out of production for a few years at that point.
Nothing will ever replace the 757
A321 & 737 Max types have similar capacity, far greater economics than 757. Interesting to know why these are less than perfect replacements. Though, the 300 is slightly larger. United is 'all over the place'. They can put their widely respected name on the Boom Overture yet they can't commit to an aircraft to replace one that definitely needs replacing .
They have commited to replacements with the XLR and MAX10. That Boom thing will never happen. They will still be waiting on that in 2040
A330 800
support the pw2000 on ual 757 for about a year, always thought to myself why didnt we acquire more. as a bp8 stand by with low seniority happy to see a757 than a 737. mean i was going to board.
The 757 is better than anything Airbus makes now
No it’s not lol you’re just a fanboy
Like how the 737 max dive into the ocean floor bed?
757 has critical Wing issues, mro facilities are finding multiple stringers cracked in the wings. Aircraft is overpowered and wings are larger for shorter runway access.
Boeing should bring back the 787-3 as a 757-300 replacement.
I wonder if Boeing could have made a smaller variant of the model and retired the 737 instead
Lots of great footage of the world's best jet, mixed in with a bunch of speculation that doesn't really say anything. United knows exactly what it's doing with their 756 fleet. You present it as if they're still somehow waiting to make a decision. That simply isn't the case.
I love your knowledgeable content; may I offer some constructive criticism? Your audio popping is very annoying. Please get a pop filter or cover for your microphone to help eliminate.
Didn’t Boeing forecast this gap when they stopped the program?
could A330R(330pax) replace 757-300(295pax)? looks interesting if price is low enough...
they could just buy more a321XLR and that sould solve the issue.
You would think...
They already have enough with 50 on order to replace the reaming 757-200s
Brevity in narration will be appreciated
Could Airbus make an 322: stretched 321? This could compete.
They would only need that for 757-300s and only 55 of those were sold so not a market they are worried about.
Its the new dc3... The only thing that can replace it is another 757.
The main problem is that nobody makes an engine in that thrust class.
Airbus 321 XLR is the only thing close on the market. They should also start looking at retiring the 767.
The Bendy Bus was a great airplane to fly in
Did you ever get to fly on a DC-8-62, -63, -71, or -73? Talk about your Bendy Bus.....
@@jimwells4240 DC8 and 707
Don't know why the 757-300 is a worry. UA would not even have the plane were it not for acquiring Continental. Why doesn't Airbus take on the 757 problem by stretching the 321 further?
A stretch international 737MAX 10 would be miserable for everyone. Compared to the 321 variants, the space on the 737 is just not practical without several interior modifications. The 737MAX already has a claustrophobic element to it An extended long distance flight would just be uncomfortable. The galleys should also be mentioned. Compared to the 757, 737s just don't have the space or capacity to perform an international service(s), with the smaller frame there isn't space. Secondary galleys in both forward and aft would be needed just to store the amount of food and supplies needed to feed all the passengers. It is possible to make the modifications but I can imagine it would be an aircraft that I would avoid. The current 737 forward galley and aft galley can only house 5 carts each. The 757 could house 10 full sized carts in the forward galley and 8 in the aft galley with much more counter space and storage space available. Another issue would be crew rest. There isn’t one. Flight crews would be likely taking 1st class seats or a row of seats in main cabin to sleep on. That doesn’t sound practical and frankly doesn’t sound comfortable either. Engineering a space to be placed in the cabin/cargo area would essentially eliminate capacity that a stretched 737MAX 10 would offer. Between larger galley space and crew rest, I could argue that would take roughly 15 seats away from revenue, and that’s estimating conservatively.
What's wrong with a combination of 321 XLR and 737 MAX?
capabilities that fall well short of the 757
I think the single aisle planes are tough because they take so long to board, and deplane, and make it harder for the flight attendants do their service.. what about a short body 787? Can that fill the need?
Or a 767 width plane.
So what are these capabitlies that the 757 has that the A321XLR does not?
Wonky British and French design oddities.
Another circumstance where Boeing screws ITSELF by leaving gaps in the market and relying on the 737. Re-build the tools for the 757 and start building the new, modern 757 and take on Airbus A321XLR DIRECTLY. Relying on the 737 is a LOSING PROPOSITION
2 A220 would even more profitable instead of 1 757
The B757 proof them selfs as the best in there series well done to B757
The 757 may have been a great aircraft in its day,, but aren't these old planes just about ready to fall out of the sky? Not sure if I'd want to get on one of them now.
8:30 - Stay pureblooded, dude!
Why can't they replace the 757-300 with 787-8? The capacity is quite the same and even though the 787 range is longer they could just load less fuel. Why is the A321XLR not a good replacement for the 757-200? It has similar range and sitting capacity.
Any choose protectionism or a better built Airbus.
Your comment is so out of date.
Please note the B757 was built before the A320 family. The B757 was built around high density domestic routes and routes where there is shorter runways. Your comment is so out of date. The B757 has proven to be a reliable and safe workhorse.
Issue is here is, there is no good planes to replace the B757. The A321XLR is okay, but it doesn’t have that performance on airports with shorter runways or needs a steeper takeoff. Then there is also the B757-300, who is going to replace that? There are proposals for A322 and other stuff but they need replacing soon.
I know a strong argument can be made that Boeing needs to wait, but 2030’s is going to be too late. Airbus took advantage of Boeings wait and are now pushing through in that market. I believe that the NMA will temp the same fate as the A340. Iconic, but too late to the market and by then better will have come, unless Boeing can pull of something amazing
Boy Boeing stockholders have really been picking some winners for the board of directors in the last few decades.
Their business vision seems to involve handing Airbus slice after slice of market share just so they can avoid hiring competent managment or taking any risks.
When Boeing decided to quit the 757 in the early 2000's without any decent replacement or follow-up United should have just packed their bags. Just go with 321XLR's. Big, really big. Ef perfect options. In order for an option to be perfect it needs to be at least on the table.
Wait for the A220-500.
I’m just not ready to see these planes go man. I really am not. Worse than a breakup ngl
The 757 can carry between 200 to 295 passengers. Its range is 3150 to 4100 nautical miles. The Airbus A321LR comes closest right now with 206 passengers and 4000 nautical miles. Because Boeing won't commit to the 797 which would be a close replacement for the 757 they may not get the opportunity to replace their own plane.
Boeing has made a BIG MISTAKE in not making a replacement aircraft for the great 757.
Sometimes you cant teach the clowns at Boeing New Tricks that is why they are failing. I Prefer Airbus anyway
@@TheAirplanejunkie Same here. Cheers.
And the 757 Max which should have happened, never happened...
How about the Airbus A200 series?
My understanding is the new A321s and 737s when fully loaded have pathetic climb performance at high density altitude compared to the 757. I believe Boeing missed an opportunity several years ago when they could have taken 787 technologies and applied them to a narrow body aircraft. Basically a composite 757 sized fuselage, 787 styled wing and similar cockpit. My guess is the engine manufacturers would have made a smaller version of the 787 engine for this aircraft as well. Boeing’s decision to wait until the 2030’s to first start designing something after the airlines are forced to buy A321s is just dumb.
A330 neo.
The boeing 757 was the 727 replacement but was never popular , Ansett has 757 for a while. It had same engines as the 767 ,a300,747,DC ten ,Tristar.
Yep, despite the fan boys for the 757 it never sold that well outside of the US. Only 1000 were sold after 30 years of sales. It was too heavy and inefficient for a real replacement for the 727.
No. 757s Rolls are RB211-535, a smaller variant of the -524s used elsewhere.
I always thought the 757 was a replacement for the 707 2 engines instead of 4 and you get transatlantic range and the 767 was Boeing s answer to the A300
Just re-engine and refurb the 757-300s. Or buy 787-9s
I wonder how many seats are filled on each flight, maybe a smaller airbus could fill their needs.
This isn't a big issue - 321 and 737-10 will replace the 757's across the board, including the 757-300. There will be no NMA. Airlines have already replaced 767's with 330's and 787's.
United's problem is with the triple seven.