Posted on 07/18/2005 7:31:29 PM PDT by Righty_McRight
ping
It's a shame they did away with the 757 and decided to stretch the 737.
Why don't they just revive and juice-up the 757?
Seat width and size are totally up to each airline, no the manufacturer.
I thought the same thing. Too bad they can't fly this thing in that config here... only in Asia. I'm 6'4"
Why don't they just revive and juice-up the 757?
Boeing actually did float around the idea of a "757NG" but obviously the airlines said "no thanks".
Also, the 737-900ER really isn't a replacement for the 757 but more a competitor to the A321.
Actually, I wouldn't put it above Alaska Airlines and Southwest Airlines to both place substantial orders for the 737-900ER. That means Alaska Airlines can fly more passengers on longer USA transcon routes and Southwest can use them on nonstops between USA West Coast cites (Seattle, Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Phoenix) US East Coast cities (Providence, Islip, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Orlando, West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale).
The 757 is too heavy for most routes, and it has a different cockpit than the 737NG's. If you don't need the range of a 757 to cross the Atlantic, a 737-900ER has enough range to cross North America while being lighter.
Continental is taking its 757-200's off of domestic routes and putting them on transatlantic routes from the east coast especially from Newark. They are replacing their 757-200's on domestic routes with a combination of 737-800's and 757-300's.
Perhaps Southwest wants to be able to compete against JetBlue for the transcon market. The 737-900ER should have advantages for Southwest compared to JetBlue's A320's. The 737-900ER carries more passengers and will be able to perform transcon service year round without technical stops to refuel. JetBlue sometimes has to refuel on their transcon flights. The 737-900ER should also have better performance at hot and high airports like LAX, Phoenix, Denver, etc. than the A320.
I wonder if Continental will pickup some 757-200's from some of the European charter airlines that switch to the 737-900ER?
If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.
Lion needs them, they fly some really crappy MD80's.
757 also has different avionics, much different composite stucture and all that.
Hey, I pinged you to a thread I did today, classic airliners in the boneyard...
Which means it wouldn't appeal to a low cost carrier with an all 737 fleet. With a different cockpit and avionics, it would be necessary to have different pools of pilots to fly them. By having a longer ranged variant of the 737-900, an airline can expand services while maintaining compatibilty with other 737's in its fleet and minimizing additional maintenance costs associated with adding a different aircraft type to the fleet.
My airline announced Hawaii service last week in our old 757's. We are ETOP'sing them and will be flying to 4 destinations in Hawaii!
How much work does it take to upgrade an existing plane to ETOPS standards? I know there's a lot more paper work to maintain. Will they have to modify the hardware?
Its my former airline, but I have retiree flight bennies. Its about 6-8 months or more of simulated ETOPS180 flights, and then you have to put in a backup APU I believe, rafts, training, etc.
We got halfway through ETOPS twice back in the ugly bankruptcy days, money down the drain. Technically speaking, we could ETOP our A319's, but no one has ever done that, it has the same range as the 737-700, and Aloha runs those to the mainland.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.