I ask because they have stretched the 737 so much with the 900 series that it has the capacity (200+ people) of a 757-200. Why? I am not an engineer but it does not make scene to me why you would do so many modifications to an airplane when you already have one that does it stock. Economics?

Southwest

Common type rating and support infrastructure makes it cheaper for the airlines, especially the way Southwest runs, to operate a single airplane type that can carry 140-200 butts. Of course pax comfort/experience is a low priority for most airlines... I sure enjoyed the back of the 757 compared to the 737.

As others have astutely posted, economics. There was a very low demand for 757's in 2004 when they shut down the line.

The operating costs are quite a bit lower and it all comes down to CASM. (Cost per air seat mile.) The 737 is cheaper.

That having been said, Boeing really needs to step in and green-light the MoM (middle of market) airplane, because nothing else can do the mission a 757 can, namely fly 160 people from a 6000 foot runway in Northern Europe, against winter headwinds, to the east coast of the US.

Out of all the airplanes I've ever flown, I love the RB-211 powered 757-300 more than anything. Even the 787. I wish everybody here could could come fly some touch and goes in one.

SWA only flys the -700, -800, and Max8. There are Max7 on order. Max seating is 175 in the 800/max8.

Currently there is no plans for any higher capacity 737s or other airframes on order.
As long as people want to by them, Boeing will be happy to build them.

There is a Max10 in the oven too...

Hopefully the MoM does indeed get launched. Some of us need the work.

Economics, but with a twist: 737 is certified to 1960s rules, plus whatever Boeing decides to bring through the DER channel. It makes the aircraft less expensive vs ‘57 and much less vs new. Example: the birdcage, windows and nose are unchanged in +50 yrs. They won’t pass the impact test the ‘57 was certified too, nor are they as streamlined (drag). Making big changes put the type very at risk.

The 757 is one of my fav. It’s over powered and empty with half fuel climbs like a a fighter (or as close as a commercial jet will).

My favorite Boeing. Climbs straight up. Only been in it as a pax though.

The only thing I am fearfull is when taking off behind one.

Rgs

Patrick

I’d say the 757 flies as just as good as it looks, unfortunately the 737 does so as well.
Best line I heard from a copilot “ lands like a shopping cart being thrown off a bridge”

I second Daniels opinion....Out of all the airplanes I've ever flown, I love the 757 more than anything"....

The 737-700 flies ok, the 800 not as fun to fly and the 900 more like a dump truck compared to the 757. But the 757 is a very costly plane to produce. Wish they bring it back someday. Lots of power, good handling, great brakes, climbs like a bat out of hell.

I agree also of all the planes I've flown the 757 was the one I liked the most. When I was getting ready to check out in it I asked my bud who was flying it at that time what he liked best about it and he replied "Big Engines and Big Brakes" and indeed that about sums it up.

I resurrected this thread because of this post on the Ethiopian crash thread.



Maybe because your BE58 has not been stretched, widened, modified so much over the last 40+years that it needs that little bit of software to behave like the original in order to retain its type certificate and not be re-certified...

Putting Max motors on a B757 would be ideal with no modifications needed, i.e. MCAS, landing gear mods to gain ground clearance, tail skids, etc. But it's all about the $$$$.

Max motors are only #32,000 and the antique 757 engines are #42,000.

Dan

And the 757 factory is now a shopping center and the tooling is gone.