jetcareers - View Single Post

flyover · August 13th, 2004, 09:08

[ QUOTE ]
Well...what about the 757-300. though not a new design or re-design at all they (Boeing engineers) did tinker around with it a bit and gave it superior fuel specifics and a much lower cost per seat mile.

A book I have here says the 757-300 has the lowest fuel cost per mile of any two engined plane in it's class so that would include the NG737 as well as the A320's.

It's a shame to see a great airplane heading into the sunset so early more especially a great plane like the 757.

The 7E7 will have a lot of shoe to fill in my opinion. More especially since it seems to be more of a replacement for the 767 then the seven-five.

Matthew

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know if 757-300 and 737 are in same class or not. Probably.

But the bottom line is Boeing shut the line down because they couldn't sell enough of the airplanes. And they were running into a problem of the 737-800/900 being a viable and more cost effective replacement. They were competing against themselves. Obviously, the 757-300 is another matter. But they couldn't sell them. If anybody had stepped in with a big order, they'd still be making them.

I still believe that maintenance costs were a factor. Going forward the airlines want airplanes designed so that a mechanic can change out a fuel pump in 30 minutes. Modular is a big deal. Simple, no complexity. The 757 was old school in that regard.

Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).

August 13th, 2004, 09:08	#52
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow [ QUOTE ] Well...what about the 757-300. though not a new design or re-design at all they (Boeing engineers) did tinker around with it a bit and gave it superior fuel specifics and a much lower cost per seat mile. A book I have here says the 757-300 has the lowest fuel cost per mile of any two engined plane in it's class so that would include the NG737 as well as the A320's. It's a shame to see a great airplane heading into the sunset so early more especially a great plane like the 757. The 7E7 will have a lot of shoe to fill in my opinion. More especially since it seems to be more of a replacement for the 767 then the seven-five. Matthew [/ QUOTE ] Don't know if 757-300 and 737 are in same class or not. Probably. But the bottom line is Boeing shut the line down because they couldn't sell enough of the airplanes. And they were running into a problem of the 737-800/900 being a viable and more cost effective replacement. They were competing against themselves. Obviously, the 757-300 is another matter. But they couldn't sell them. If anybody had stepped in with a big order, they'd still be making them. I still believe that maintenance costs were a factor. Going forward the airlines want airplanes designed so that a mechanic can change out a fuel pump in 30 minutes. Modular is a big deal. Simple, no complexity. The 757 was old school in that regard. Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).