737 Max compared to Airbus NEO

Derg said:
Usually it's when they dick with he VS knob trying to "smooth out" the level off, when I'm not looking, and they're near ALT* (capture), it enters the mode and then the bus say "Eeew K you stupid Eh'merry'CAN" and it blows the altitude.

Remember I'm DTW so I get all the Compass guys with old pre-airline tribal knowledge about the bus and bidding, isn't that right @ClarkGriswold? :)
Click to expand...
I know nothing about the bus and no Endeavor guys doing that?
 
mshunter said:
There are certain missions that only the 75 can do. IMO, getting rid of the tooling to produce it is the biggest mistake Boeing has ever made. With the advances in engine technology, just re-engining it and giving it an all glass cockpit would have made it an instant success.

757-NEO

Instead, companies are stuck pulling old airframes out of the desert, and making do. There simply isn't anything on the market right now, that's new, that'll do what a 75 does.
Click to expand...

There's nothing out there that will do what the Concord did either. It's about the $ and clearly the 757 wasn't cutting it.
 
Derg said:
Usually it's when they dick with he VS knob trying to "smooth out" the level off, when I'm not looking, and they're near ALT* (capture), it enters the mode and then the bus say "Eeew K you stupid Eh'merry'CAN" and it blows the altitude.

Remember I'm DTW so I get all the Compass guys with old pre-airline tribal knowledge about the bus and bidding, isn't that right @ClarkGriswold? :)
Click to expand...

Where does this come from? The people in the back do not notice the autopilot leveling off. Stop trying to be smarter than the system.

If you change the MCP, make damn sure the autopilot is still doing what you want. This isn't hard, stop making this job hard....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Cptnchia said:
Yet, the plane is such a money maker, Delta is im the process of pulling 10 out of the desert and spending the money on heavy checks because the 321s and 737-900 just can't deliver the numbers promised.
Click to expand...
DAL obviously thinks their crystal ball is accurate and that our economic conditions will continue or get better and gas prices will remain low for whatever the pay back period is for those airplanes.
 
mshunter said:
There are certain missions that only the 75 can do. IMO, getting rid of the tooling to produce it is the biggest mistake Boeing has ever made. With the advances in engine technology, just re-engining it and giving it an all glass cockpit would have made it an instant success.

757-NEO

Instead, companies are stuck pulling old airframes out of the desert, and making do. There simply isn't anything on the market right now, that's new, that'll do what a 75 does.
Click to expand...
Yes there are certain places the 757 makes a whole lotta sense. The issue is they tend to be few and far between and aren't on a large scale. The 321 can sorta-kinda make due in those situations and the ones that it can't have 757s on them.

Also after ~15 years the airframe mx costs on the 757 really starts to go nuts, vs. a composite airframe.

A 757 with LEAP engines does sound interesting. Maybe a composite 757 with those engines would work well. Just keep the same design and rebuild it using composites saving weight.

From a business perspective you're going to sell a whole lot more airplanes selling one that can be a jack of all trades (A320, 737) vs. a specialized one with limited production run.
 
Last edited:
Cptnchia said:
Yet, the plane is such a money maker, Delta is im the process of pulling 10 out of the desert and spending the money on heavy checks because the 321s and 737-900 just can't deliver the numbers promised.
Click to expand...

And we bought some more from China.
 
Derg said:
Usually it's when they dick with he VS knob trying to "smooth out" the level off, when I'm not looking, and they're near ALT* (capture), it enters the mode and then the bus say "Eeew K you stupid Eh'merry'CAN" and it blows the altitude.

Remember I'm DTW so I get all the Compass guys with old pre-airline tribal knowledge about the bus and bidding, isn't that right @ClarkGriswold? :)
Click to expand...

Hence the Vol 1 procedural requirement to "verbalize all pilot induced changes to the FCU/FMA... that way the other guy can verify what you got and more importantly say "you didn't get it" or "bad idea, bruh!" Most planes it's a bad idea to f with them when capturing an altitude.

Derg said:
And we bought some more from China.
Click to expand...

Yep! Those were the last 757s built.
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
Hence the Vol 1 procedural requirement to "verbalize all pilot induced changes to the FCU/FMA... that way the other guy can verify what you got and more importantly say "you didn't get it" or "bad idea, bruh!" Most planes it's a bad idea to f with them when capturing an altitude.



Yep! Those were the last 757s built.
Click to expand...

Sadly, some guys will do that crap when you're glaring out the window and simultaneously twist/pull/verbalize right as it's hitting ALT*.

Then you turn around, look at the FMA and HOLY CRAP man, STOPPIT!!
 
Baronman said:
There's nothing out there that will do what the Concord did either. It's about the $ and clearly the 757 wasn't cutting it.
Click to expand...

The Concord was done in because of the accident, and it was a luxury, not a necessity. The 757 is being pulled out of the desert because there are certain places that only it has the performance and range, that it's the only airplane that will do it, and there are quite a few of those places, so it still makes sense. If it didn't, Delta wouldn't be looking to buy up just about every 757 out there, and pull some out of the desert. I was on a DL jump seat about a year or so ago when the crew was talking about Delta buying up the last 75's to come off the production line from a defunct Chinese airline.


wheelsup said:
Yes there are certain places the 757 makes a whole lotta sense. The issue is they tend to be few and far between and aren't on a large scale. The 321 can sorta-kinda make due in those situations and the ones that it can't have 757s on them.

Also after ~15 years the airframe mx costs on the 757 really starts to go nuts, vs. a composite air frame.

A 757 with LEAP engines does sound interesting. Maybe a composite 757 with those engines would work well. Just keep the same design and rebuild it using composites saving weight.

From a business perspective you're going to sell a whole lot more airplanes selling one that can be a jack of all trades (A320, 737) vs. a specialized one with limited production run.
Click to expand...

Kinda-sorta doesn't cut it into a lot of places. Kinda-sorta not being able to make it out of EGE if you fail an engine, with a full load of people. American either uses the 757, or a 319. There is a reason they are using hot rods, not sleds. Sure, there are a lot of airplanes that can also do it. But when you are weight restricted in a 321 from LAX to DFW because you need enough fuel to get to an alternate, and you are having to bump passengers when a 757 can be filled up, and still haul a boat load of mail in the belly.......

Point being, there is a reason that the 757 is still so popular. And the bean counters have it figured out, not you and me. You can still be a jack of all trades, and a master of none. As far as a 321 that can do something a 75 can't? I'm not aware of anything a 321 can do that a 75 can't do better, even if it does come at a slightly higher cost. The 75 will carry more, father, higher, faster and with better performance than a 321. The side by side comparison makes a 321, well, look pretty silly.

I'd like to see what it costs for a 321 vs a 757 to go from say, LAX to ORD with the same amount of passengers, and the same amount of cargo in the belly, at the same mach, and same altitude. I'd bet that it's a pretty close comparison. Now, put some newer engines that are more efficient on the 757, and it would probably be even closer, but the 75 would still be able to get in and out of EGE, with a full load of self loading meat bags, and all their crap plus some more in the belly. They should have never destroyed to tooling. The 321 is it's replacement, and it's no comparison. It just can't do what the 757 can.
 
The 321 and 757 run around at the same mach (.78 day in day out), passengers and payload, just the 321 does it 3 or 4000 feet lower in altitude while still burning less gas. Throw in a short runway plus longer legs and that's when the 757 just eats the 321 and 739 (which is significantly smaller than a 321) alive.
 
wheelsup said:
Yes there are certain places the 757 makes a whole lotta sense. The issue is they tend to be few and far between and aren't on a large scale. The 321 can sorta-kinda make due in those situations and the ones that it can't have 757s on them.
Click to expand...

This.

There's two missions I can think of that a 757 can do that an A321 can't - transatlantic and certain hot and/or high places like TGU. Of course, how many 757s worldwide are flying transatlantic across the ocean every day? 40-50? That's a pretty niche market to develop an entirely new aircraft for when an A321 can do 99% of what a 757 can do.

mshunter said:
Point being, there is a reason that the 757 is still so popular. And the bean counters have it figured out, not you and me. You can still be a jack of all trades, and a master of none. As far as a 321 that can do something a 75 can't? I'm not aware of anything a 321 can do that a 75 can't do better, even if it does come at a slightly higher cost. The 75 will carry more, father, higher, faster and with better performance than a 321. The side by side comparison makes a 321, well, look pretty silly.
Click to expand...

Higher performance doesn't mean it has superior economics, it just means it's more capable. Your Camaro SS might do a lot of things better than my Prius, but doing them more economically isn't the case. (I don't actually own a Prius, btw...)

I'd like to see what it costs for a 321 vs a 757 to go from say, LAX to ORD with the same amount of passengers, and the same amount of cargo in the belly, at the same mach, and same altitude. I'd bet that it's a pretty close comparison. Now, put some newer engines that are more efficient on the 757, and it would probably be even closer, but the 75 would still be able to get in and out of EGE, with a full load of self loading meat bags, and all their crap plus some more in the belly. They should have never destroyed to tooling. The 321 is it's replacement, and it's no comparison. It just can't do what the 757 can.
Click to expand...

How many flights/day does AA have out of EGE? 3?

Is DL reclaiming those 757s out of the desert because they need the lift in general or is it because of the 757’s unique capabilities?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top