Boeing, Airbus Can't Replace the 757

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

The only pom poms are for the 757, which the thread notes is now being seen as an irreplacable aircraft for the carriers that use it despite the lack of new orders a decade or so ago.

DL to English translation: DL is the smartest 757 operator.

It only stands to reason that the 757 forms the largest fleet type for the airline which carries more RPMs and more revenue on its domestic operation than any other US airline. Perhaps it is the 757's low CASM and extraordinary flexibility which have allowed DL to do with the 757 what no one else has done.

DL to English translation: DL is the most efficient 757 operator in the world!

As Jim I'm sure knows, US flew some of the 757s which formed the beginnings of EA's 757 fleet, only to be replaced later. AA and UA both started adding the 757 later than DL or EA but still have significant -sized fleets which will be around for a good long time.

DL to English translation: DL rules, US, AA, UA suck!

I never said that DL has never had mechanical problems with its 757s... just that they clearly are not related to flying 27 year old aircraft which were some of the first delivered.
Given that DL's CEO has said that DL intends to change the paradigm from expecting aircraft to last for 20 years to instead 30 years says that there will be a lot of 757s around for quite some time, esp. since some of DL's 757s - as well as some at other US carriers - are mere "children" in terms of age by comparison.

DL to English translation: DL is the best! Yeah DL!!!!

 

[700UW]

Maybe DL needs to send their pilots to Airplane Ground Driving School, they seem to lead the industry this year in on the ground collisions.

And DL outsources a lot of their own planes and in-sources other airlines planes.

EA didnt replace their 757 fleet with other planes, they flew them up until the day they stopped flying, US scooped up 10 former EAL 757s from Boeing Capital.

A/C #'s 600-609 and A/C 618, were all former EAL birds.

DL just added within a few years, some of TWA's former 757s and fly them T/A.

DL didnt recieve their 757s until two years or so after the first commercial flight.

Between DL and NW they currently fly 182 including the -300s and have 14 in storage and have 6 that were returned and being flown by other carriers.

 

[Move2CLT]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-17/us-airways-in-early-talks-with-airbus-for-boeing-757-replacement.html

 

[BoeingBoy]

The problem with talks with any manufacturer about a replacement for the 757-200 is that you can only talk about paper airplanes at this point. Airbus will extoll the virtues of a 321neo and make claims but there isn't any way to verify those claims and won't be for a while. The same with Boeing and a re-engined 737. So all you can do is wait or put performance guarantees in the order contract (normal, BTW). The problem with performance guarantees is that if not met the airline may get a one time cost benefit but have to put up with the lower performance for 20-30 years or get out of the contract and start shopping all over again.

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL to English translation: DL is the smartest 757 operator.



DL to English translation: DL is the most efficient 757 operator in the world!



DL to English translation: DL rules, US, AA, UA suck!



DL to English translation: DL is the best! Yeah DL!!!!

Forums translation:
WT can come up w/ a cogent argument on the subject while SOME others are left fumbling with facts or worse have to resort to slander in order to be able to contribute anything to the discussion.
.
700,
thanks for your collection of facts.... all of which I can agree with except for that DL received its first 757 14 months after the 757 entered service with EA which was the launch customer for the 757 using the RR engine, which DL, UA, and NW among others chose not to acquire.
Yes, the EA asset auction also provided DL with some cheap L1011s which they flew for about 10 years as well.
What airplane driving school has to do with the 757, I'm not sure anyone knows... but it would appear that DL's mechanics are having to divert their attention from other activities to mend wounded jets. I recently saw the 333 that was reportedly damaged by a lift truck still in the same hangar in ATL where it apparently went right after the damage was done.

Jim,
you are correct that performance guarantees are only good if you want to take credits for future orders which is almost always what airlines have to accept from manufacturers. It is also very possible that the reason why DL is reluctant to replace its 757s is because they aren't going to buy anything additional from Boeing in light of Boeing's refusal to provide real compensation to DL as a result of the 787s inability to deliver what was promised when NW ordered the aircraft.
Plus, Delta recognizes that the costs of a replacement for the 757 can't cover the small increase in fuel efficiency over new models compared to the costs of taking on new debt/lease charges compared to maintenance costs.
Thus, the DL 757 fleet will likely only be reduced as specific airframes are deemed too damaged - perhaps because of structural failure - to be repaired. Given that other airlines have at least some relatively new 757s and there is no viable replacement, the type will likely still be in service well into the 2020s.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,
It is also very possible that the reason why DL is reluctant to replace its 757s is because they aren't going to buy anything additional from Boeing in light of Boeing's refusal to provide real compensation to DL as a result of the 787s inability to deliver what was promised when NW ordered the aircraft.

I may have phrased something badly. To me, airlines looking for a 757 narrow-body replacement would be foolish to order planes now - not enough is known about the potential replacement aircraft. I haven't tracked the neo orders by carrier and AMR is the first to order a re-engined 737, but I doubt that anyone is ordering either for longest haul missions the 757 is doing daily. More likely is the desire for the fuel savings on routes those aircraft fly today.

Jim

 

[700UW]

Yes UA didnt order any 757s at first, but as you see in their fleet, as NW, DL, CO, US, ATA, North American and many US based airlines ordered plenty of 757s.

Funny you say NW, UA and AA didnt want them, funny how there are plenty still flying and driving the increase in price for a used is is FedEx snapping up plenty of 757s to convert them into cargo planes.

AA has currently has 124 active 757s with a total of 153 at one time.

UA has currently currently has 124 active including CO's fleet, with a total of 140 at one time.

So thats not chump change in total aircraft.

There is life beyond Delta GOOD, everyone else BAD....

US didnt order any till EA went out of business and ordered new builds in the early 90s and with HP had a total of 83 at one time.

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, Jim, airlines have not committed to 757 replacements both because there aren't any real replacements other than for those routes largely flown w/in the continental US and because the fuel savings on the replacements aren't that much better than for the 757. Fuel burn is about 13% lower according to airline provided data to the DOT but the 757 CASM is still well within the range for other narrowbody aircraft , meaning that the benefit of taking on a bunch of debt isn't there when the 757 can still effectively be used. Replacing a bunch of 757s now also takes alot of pressure off of Boeing esp. to develop the next generation narrowbody - which airlines want.
There are also a lot of other aircraft types that need to be replaced first.
DL's CEO's comments about keeping aircraft longer than they used to be kept also indicates that DL's yardstick for whether to replace a fleet type is being less driven by whether there is a lower cost aircraft available but whether the existing fleet can be used to profitably generate revenue. Sure, DL could replace its entire M80 fleet first and cut costs but they are indicating that the 320s will be replaced first because the 320s cannot continue to fly for a whole lot longer - whereas the M80 can continue to fly and also is heavily used on high yielding business markets to/from DL hubs.
Other airlines have different philosophies for fleet replacement but the idea that aircraft have to be replaced as often as they were under deregulation will have to change to reflect the realities of weaker balance sheets today.
.
I didn't say that anyone else didn't want the 757 just that DL and EA ordered the type and were the first to put it in service... not unlike AA and UA ordered the D10 about the same time.
Once again, DL's position as the largest 757 operator has more to do with the fact that DL is the largest generator of revenue and traffic in the US - and its use of the 757 reflects that position. In reality, AA and UA's - and NW before - percent of 757s isn't that different from the percentage seen in DL's domestic fleet.
.
And you do reinforce my point that the 757 was largely used by US airlines - which is partly why once the US carriers had bought all they needed, the market dried up.

 

[700UW]

WN carries more passengers domestically than any other airline.

And a large chunk of DL's 757s are from the Northwest merger, not DL ordering them or leasing them.

 

[FWAAA]

And a large chunk of DL's 757s are from the Northwest merger, not DL ordering them or leasing them.

That's right, NW ordered and took delivery of 56 757-200s and 16 757-300s.

 

[BoeingBoy]

yes, Jim, airlines have not committed to 757 replacements both because there aren't any real replacements other than for those routes largely flown w/in the continental US and because the fuel savings on the replacements aren't that much better than for the 757.

But airlines have committed to Airbus' neo and AMR committed to Boeing's re-engined 737, both of which may be 757 replacements. Plus it's way too early to tell if the fuel savings on those two potential replacements will make them more fuel efficient than the 757 - the new engines have the potential to be the next leap in transport engine design, like the turbine engine was a leap from the recips (or 3 leaps if you break it down to turboprops then turbojets then turbofans)). There's talk of 15% reductions in fuel burn for the engines and that's a lot.

Like I said, my money is on the airlines waiting for more facts on the neo and whatever Boeing calls their equivalent 737 before they commit to replacing their 757's (if the Airbus and/or Boeing turn out to be suitable replacements for the routes we're talking about). DL may be an exception, keeping their 757-200's till they have 30 or more years of service but so far no one else is saying that (at least that I've read). Plus I doubt any airline has a crystal ball so good as to accurately predict what the market will need in 2020-2030. Given the limited TA routes the 757-200 can do it may not be the plane to service those routes by then.

Jim

 

[700UW]

US Airways in Early Talks With Airbus to Replace Boeing 757

 

[BoeingBoy]

I think someone posted the link to thestreet.com article that was almost identical. I think the problem US has re: the 757 is that they're slowly going back to the leasors and particularly the West ones I'm led to believe. They had to find one to lease due to the last one that went back. With the HI service the West flies, the day is coming when it's either get a handful of 737NG's (as they're getting rid of the -300/-400) or drop some service. Obviously, with the emphasis on an Airbus fleet, they'd like to know if the 321neo will be able to do the HI mission at least.

Note that I don't think anyone has said that the 757 can't be replaced for some routes - the current 321 can do that (but not HI). It's the longest routes that are the problem. I know that I wouldn't want to be the one signing the order for the 321neo today only to find out in a year or two that it won't quite make Europe. I tried to find out and couldn't without poring over media reports of orders, so does anyone know of an airline in the world that's ordered 321neo's at all, never mind as a 757 replacement for intercontinental routes?

Jim

 

[700UW]

Jim,

Dont you remember the original first US Airbus order contained the A321, when it failed its range and performance US cancelled them. Airbus added extra fuel tanks, eliminating cargo space and US then placed a new order for the A321.

 

[luvn737s]

Couldn't an Airbus CJ (basically what BA operates between London and JFK) operate PHX-HNL? I'd think fewer seats would bring higher yields on a route like that.