Calling all 757 pilots.. - Page 4 - Airline Pilot Central Forums

#31

Phantom Flyer , 04-03-2009 01:33 PM

Snakes & Nape

Right On

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwag

Okay - someone needs to bring this up. The 757 is about the worst airplane for a passenger to ride on. The fuselage is the same narrow-body that Boeing has been building since 1958. It is just too narrow for six across seating in the main cabin. If you have three men in a row of three seats, they are shoulder to shoulder - not comfortable. If you are near the back of the plane, it will be a long time after gate arrival that you get off the plane. Good luck making your tight connecting flight. Then there are the damn TV screens in the aisle. What genius thought that up? A short one, I'd bet. I am constantly hitting my head on those things. The interior materials do not hold up well, and the inside of the airplane always looks kind of trashed. All in all, I'd rather ride on an MD-80 - the seats are wider, there are fewer middle seats, there is more overhead space per passenger, and it is quieter.
The 757 is great for the pilots, but not good for the passengers.

The B-757 is not "about the worst airplane for a passenger to ride on" it IS the worst aircraft anyone could ride on for more than about 45 minutes. It's not even a bargin in First Class. The gate agents LOVE to put deadheading pilots in the center seat of Coach...makes their day.

Everything else you said is true. After 1,700 hours in the front, I enjoyed flying it as it handles like a sports car but there isn't a 757 anywhere that approaches the B-777 in EVERY department.

Just my two cents Mates

#32

Vito , 04-06-2009 04:08 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Big tits, long legs and great brains

You missed one more description associated with the 757,

SKINNY BODY, big tits, long legs, great brains

#33

aeromike49 , 05-07-2009 04:09 AM

Line Holder

757 heavy

Not all 757's are alike - including such things as interiors, gross weight, etc. I flew the newest 757's including the -300 - and the 757 is a good plane - at high gross weights - single engine performance is - like all other planes loaded to the max - climbs very slowly - Vegas on a warm day - would be difficult ! I think of them (757) as a Chevy as compared to a Caddy - it does the job but not as advanced as it could be - - I also flew the L-1011 -a true "caddy" and that plane had it all - with the technology from 1970 ! The 757 does well on short runways but the landing weight has to be kept to a minimum and the landing charts always checked. Approach speed control is critical especially the last 100 feet - exta speed will "kill".

#34

tortue , 06-13-2009 04:01 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

I’ve wondered why more were not sold and why they did not remain in production. The answer seems to be that the 757 was always just a little too good. It offered much more capacity than the 727 it replaced and its size and systems come with higher acquisition and maintenance costs. A 737 NG accomplishes much of the 757’s mission at less cost. Unless you need the extra capability of the 757, that capability is wasted.

(Sorry to reply to an old post, but its a good thread)

My understanding is that Boeing simply over-engineered the aircraft. Nothing wrong with that, but to be a B727 replacement, it needs to have near B727 prices...which it did not. The only carriers to first latch onto it in a big way were domestic US carriers and friendly overseas carriers who are tight politically with Boeing (see BAW). To me, the B757 is the F-15 of the air transport world. Built with design goals far beyond what was probably needed at the time (F-15 to meet MiG-25 rumors). The A321 is a poor competitor to the B757. Engines arent as strong and I think its poor success is shown by the few operators who use it (ACA and USAir in the domestic US only I think).

In the end, the B727 stayed in service for quite awhile and it was not a direct replacement. However, I got to say it was amazing seeing B757s come in and out of Midway. Too bad those days are over and MDW is just 737s and jungle jets.

I do concur with the posts about it being rough for PAX who get stuck in the middle seat of a long 4-5hr flight in the middle of two large people. As for handling chop...I'm not sure the 757 is all that great. The A320/B737 to me always felt like a pudgy fat kid who could take a whallop where the B757 wobbled to-and-fro when going over the rockies...maybe thats just me. Oh yeah, the old monitors have got to go but that was probably a nice amenity in the 1980s in comparison to nothing else being out there.