Calling all 757 pilots..
03-30-2009, 07:53 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,723
Calling all 757 pilots..
Im having to write a term paper for my aviation history class. Were able to write about any aircraft that we want to. Since the 757 is my favorite plane ever i decided to write about it. Anyway, what i need is some quotes from some 757 pilots. Just write anything you wish about the plane, why you enjoy flying it, your favorite thing about it, anything. Thanks to anyone who helps me out. Also if some of you dont fly the 757 but are friends with some if you wouldn't mind mentioning this that would be awesome! Thanks folks.
03-31-2009, 03:21 AM
#3
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: A320-B
Posts: 66
In reference to a quote about 75's or women... she'll slow down or go down but not both together. Get's fast in the descent so most times you are required to use the speedbrakes to make altitude / airspeed restrictions on the arrivals.
03-31-2009, 04:58 AM
#5
Looking for a laugh
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by aa73
Big tits, long legs and great brains... 
Originally Posted by satchip
keep talking about my wife and I will punch you in the nose! 
(I keed, I keed!)
03-31-2009, 06:20 AM
#6
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Fly Sooner:
The 757 remains the most efficient aircraft in the world on a cost per seat mile basis.(1) Pilots like its pleasant handling characteristics, excellent control coordination, generous lift and power, as well as vice free operation that allows pilots to focus their attention on flying the jet.
Others have already commented on the fact the 757 barely slows down and descends with the power at idle. The 767 that ran out of fuel and glided to a landing in Gimli, Manitoba, demonstrated a glide ratio of about 23:1. The 757 is more efficient and an educated guess is that the 757’s glide ratio exceeds 25:1 and is even better with the Aviation Partners blended winglets installed. It is not unusual to look at the EICAS and see EPR’s at 1.0 or .99 in level flight at lower flight levels. Technically, the engines have to producing some thrust, but the power required to maintain level flight is so minimal as to not be detectable on the EPR gauges.
The aircraft has very little difficulty going straight to its maximum certified altitude of 42,000 feet. Most aircraft lack the power and the wing to achieve this feat unless the OAT and the aircraft’s weight are both low. The reason for the 757’s altitude limitation is the time it would take for the jet to make a rapid descent to 10,000 feet in the event of depressurization.
This extra power and wing also provides excellent operational flexibility, allowing the 757 to serve high altitude airports. The jet was never designed for trans-oceanic operations, but with a nearly 5,000 mile range, the aircraft have been modified to serve ETOPS missions allowing point to point service and increased frequency, covering 95% of the Earth’s surface.
From a pure pilot’s perspective, I doubt there is any better flying commercial jet. Boeing designed the systems to beat any criticism skeptics of two man crew operations might level against the concept, resulting in very easy day to day operation. It is just nice to know everything “works.” The brakes work well, there is plenty of control authority and if there are surprises hidden deep in the aircraft’s handling, I’ve not found them. In training the 767 and 757 handle single engine operations and wind shear beautifully, with much less drama than other transport jets. It is a very confidence inspiring jet.
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.
The 757 and its larger sister, the 767, are on the short list of my favorite airplanes. I lost my seat on the 757 in a recent displacement at my airline, but have my reinstatement bid in and will return at the earliest opportunity.
I missed the L1011 by a few years... you need to hurry up and get to the majors before the 757 is replaced by some tupperware tube, or an ETOPS certified RJ. These airplanes are getting some age on them ....
(1) DOT BTS form 41 data, 757-300 as operated by Northwest Airlines.
The 757 remains the most efficient aircraft in the world on a cost per seat mile basis.(1) Pilots like its pleasant handling characteristics, excellent control coordination, generous lift and power, as well as vice free operation that allows pilots to focus their attention on flying the jet.
Others have already commented on the fact the 757 barely slows down and descends with the power at idle. The 767 that ran out of fuel and glided to a landing in Gimli, Manitoba, demonstrated a glide ratio of about 23:1. The 757 is more efficient and an educated guess is that the 757’s glide ratio exceeds 25:1 and is even better with the Aviation Partners blended winglets installed. It is not unusual to look at the EICAS and see EPR’s at 1.0 or .99 in level flight at lower flight levels. Technically, the engines have to producing some thrust, but the power required to maintain level flight is so minimal as to not be detectable on the EPR gauges.
The aircraft has very little difficulty going straight to its maximum certified altitude of 42,000 feet. Most aircraft lack the power and the wing to achieve this feat unless the OAT and the aircraft’s weight are both low. The reason for the 757’s altitude limitation is the time it would take for the jet to make a rapid descent to 10,000 feet in the event of depressurization.
This extra power and wing also provides excellent operational flexibility, allowing the 757 to serve high altitude airports. The jet was never designed for trans-oceanic operations, but with a nearly 5,000 mile range, the aircraft have been modified to serve ETOPS missions allowing point to point service and increased frequency, covering 95% of the Earth’s surface.
From a pure pilot’s perspective, I doubt there is any better flying commercial jet. Boeing designed the systems to beat any criticism skeptics of two man crew operations might level against the concept, resulting in very easy day to day operation. It is just nice to know everything “works.” The brakes work well, there is plenty of control authority and if there are surprises hidden deep in the aircraft’s handling, I’ve not found them. In training the 767 and 757 handle single engine operations and wind shear beautifully, with much less drama than other transport jets. It is a very confidence inspiring jet.
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.
The 757 and its larger sister, the 767, are on the short list of my favorite airplanes. I lost my seat on the 757 in a recent displacement at my airline, but have my reinstatement bid in and will return at the earliest opportunity.
I missed the L1011 by a few years... you need to hurry up and get to the majors before the 757 is replaced by some tupperware tube, or an ETOPS certified RJ. These airplanes are getting some age on them ....
(1) DOT BTS form 41 data, 757-300 as operated by Northwest Airlines.
03-31-2009, 10:21 AM
#7
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Nice post Bar.
The 757 is just an awesome airplane. Lands well, climbs well, and handles well. I really have no complaints about its day to day operation. (Well except the seats could be a little more comfortable for the 5+ hr flights) That says a lot about the jet.
Burns about 7K an hr in cruise.
The 757 is just an awesome airplane. Lands well, climbs well, and handles well. I really have no complaints about its day to day operation. (Well except the seats could be a little more comfortable for the 5+ hr flights) That says a lot about the jet.
Burns about 7K an hr in cruise.
03-31-2009, 11:28 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: B-777 left
Posts: 1,415
I have to agree the 757/767 is a great airplane. With one type rating you have a 757 that flys in and out of 5600 feet or 7000 feet runways like sna and lga or west coast to the islands trans cons or legs like ord anc for 6.5 hours. With the same rating the 767 across the pond to europe or all the way down to south america. As far as flying just shoot the river approach into dca and notice the smile on your face as you wind your way in for the landing.
03-31-2009, 01:22 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
The 757 just feels right, from taxiing to the runway to shooting a Cat III approach. The engines have a lot of power so you never feel like you are nursing an elephant up to altitude. Giant brakes that stop on a dime. The autopilot is very smoothly integrated in the system and rarely surprises you. Overall, the most thoughtfully designed aircraft I have ever flown.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
