Ron Allen started the project with Boeing. Boeing didn't really want to build it.

I'm not saying you are wrong and I am right. But from the Boeing spec sheet of its design objectives the very first one is a high capacity transcon a/c.

From Boeing:

Configuration Objectives
Transcontinental growth replacement for early widebody twins -- A300, A310, and 767-200.
Intercontinental range replacement for DC-10-30s and L1011-500s.
Maximize commonality with the 767-300ER.
Use existing 767-300 engines, nacelles, and struts.
Provide excellent operating economics.
Maintain 767 comfort advantages.
Same type rating as 767-200 and -300.
Common type rating with 757.
180-min ETOPS at entry into service.

 

Sorry. It may have been Leo's first project. Aside from repainting jets.

 

No kidding. Timed it a couple times. 17 minutes from block in until last pax deplaned. Painful, but I guess it's one of the most efficient we have.

 

Sounds like the average MD90 clown car!

 

With more seats, even more efficient. I remember sitting in the very last row window seat a few times. I just kinda sat there and found my happy place after we parked. 20 minutes later...

I can only imagine how good the numbers are on those things after stuffing more meatballs in there!

Very glad to hear about the late model used 757s and the NBA contract!

I hear there are some used deals being looked for in other fleets as well.

 

As I recall, when Delta bought 21 of them, they were supposed to be replacement jets for the L10-11 domestic jets, and they did fly MCO-LGA quite a bit. They came with no SAT Com installed, since they were never going out of the CONUS....until years later.

Oh and they came with N numbers that ended with MH, we used to joke that stood for "Mullen's Holdings",

I also remember riding the jump seat from ATL-MCO on L10-11's, with a full meal service, on a 1hr. Flight! And also JS'ng on the MD11 and 777 from ATL-MCO.

Our first couple 777's were delivered with no crew rest facility, since the company thought they'd never fly over 12 hours. Frickn' brilliant our Network Guru was back in 1997!

 

You can always pick out the seasoned travelers and DH'ers. They calmly wait to get up. The greenies stand-up before the seat belt is even turned of, even if they're in the last row in economy, and proceed to stand in a hunched-over position for the next 10 minutes. And if they're at a window seat, they give you a dirty look as if to say, "Hey, you're holding me up by remaining calmly seated. Priceline gave me a ten-minute connection in ATL."

 

Does JetBlue or Delta Win With New Long-Haul Rules From New York’s LaGuardia?

Mary Schlangenstein, Bloomberg
Feb 27, 2015 9:04 am

Delta Air Lines Inc. would be the clear winner if a 30-year-old rule restricting direct flights to the West Coast from New York’s LaGuardia airport is lifted. JetBlue Airways Corp. may have the most to lose, aviation consultants said.

The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey is assessing whether to change the so-called perimeter rule, which was put in place in 1984 and restricts flights longer than 1,500 miles (2,414 kilometers) from LaGuardia. The idea was to reduce congestion by encouraging business travel out of LaGuardia and push vacationers to John F. Kennedy International and Liberty airport in Newark, New Jersey.

Lifting the rule would allow airlines to fly nonstop from LaGuardia to Western cities including Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Seattle, which are now only accessible from JFK and Newark. That service would come at the expense of existing flights to smaller, closer cities.

“Delta would be a clear win because it would give them the ability to serve more origination and destination markets, which would aid their connecting service,” said George Hamlin, president of Hamlin Transportation Consulting in Fairfax, Virginia.

American Airlines Group Inc., the second-largest carrier behind Delta at LaGuardia, also would benefit if it could replace shorter flights on smaller planes with long-range routes and bigger jets.

Airlines, including Delta and American, could pick the worst-performing 50-or 70-seat flights at the airport and replace them with 150-seat routes to the West Coast, said Craig Jenks, an aviation consultant with Airline/Aircraft Projects Inc. in New York.

“It’s a no-brainer,” he said in a telephone interview. “It’s an immediate win.”

JetBlue is likely to see some passengers shift from its base at Kennedy to LaGuardia, which is closer to Manhattan, if the longer flights are allowed, said Sandy Rederer, an aviation consultant with Mead & Hunt.

“JetBlue is probably a loser because of its big JFK participation,” he said. The New York-based carrier transports 37 percent of JFK passengers.

United Continental Holdings Inc., which dominates the Newark airport, also could lose some travelers to Delta or American at LaGuardia. While United has 7.5 percent of passengers at LaGuardia, it couldn’t offer as many long-haul options as its rivals at that airport.

“United will almost be forced to put in LaGuardia-Los Angeles service at least, and San Francisco,” Rederer said. “Being the weakest of the big three at LaGuardia, it puts them at a little disadvantage. But these are huge airlines. It’s not going to be a major factor for any of the three.”

JetBlue and Virgin America Inc. may ask the Port Authority, which oversees the New York City area’s three major airports, for additional LaGuardia flight slots now held by bigger network carriers as compensation for a move that would clearly benefit the major airlines, according to Jenks.

“We’re very supportive of the move to lift restrictions at LaGuardia, as long as the process also ensures that smaller and new entrant carriers at that airport have fair access in terms of the potential expansion opportunities,” said Jennifer Thomas, a Virgin America spokeswoman.

American, Delta, JetBlue and Southwest didn’t return calls seeking comment on the possible change.

“We’re reviewing the issue and will work to ensure any potential changes are in the best interest of our customers,” United spokesman Luke Punzenberger said.

The ultimate winner may be consumers, who could take advantage of lower fares, at least initially, as flights are adjusted, and more competition on flights from New York to the West Coast, Rederer said.

 

I wonder if DAL would swap LGA slots/gates with Virgin to get more out of them in DAL?

 

At some point I wonder if we need to stop non-stop service from smaller market to LGA and run multiple leg flights to LGA like SWA. You could turn LGA into an all mainline operation?

How about no more nonstop from LGA to CHO, CHS, SAV, ILM, MYR, AGS, CAE and GSP and instead combine some of those into single 88/717 flights?