Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Righty_McRight

It's a shame they did away with the 757 and decided to stretch the 737.


3 posted on 07/18/2005 7:34:26 PM PDT by chet_in_ny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: chet_in_ny; stboz
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?

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.

9 posted on 07/18/2005 7:41:36 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Tom Tancredo- The Republican Party's Very Own Cynthia McKinney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: chet_in_ny; Central Scrutiniser
It's a shame they did away with the 757 and decided to stretch the 737.

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.

11 posted on 07/18/2005 11:13:33 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson