Simple Question: Is the 757 still an efficient aircraft?

[OPS1 1]

Im currently studying aviation operations, at an aviation academy. In one of my units i need to describe a social and leisure purpose aircraft. Ive picked to do the 757 over the 737, as the 757 is more interesting. In the unit is asks the efficiency of the aircraft. So in todays world, is the 757 still an efficient aircraft. Im talking; is it still profitible for airlines, is it still popular? As it can seat more passengers than a typical NG 737, fly further and faster than a typical NG 737. Therefore would the 757 be more profitable than the 737 (NG) as it peforms as a bigger aircraft, but is used on the same routes as the 737 such as domestic and short haul. I know airlines are adding winglets to them, however all i want to know is this aircraft still efficient in todays world, with rising taxes and rising fuel prices?

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

ETOPS would make an NG go far.

[Dillon 1,655]

The 757 has it's own nitch. It's a hybrid between a heavy and a small jetliner depending on it's role. It's capable of operating at smaller airfields that comparable aircraft of it's size can not. It's a hard aircraft to replace hence nothing is out there that's taking it's place. It can climb as efficiently as the A320 series and has fuel efficiency comparable to the 737NG. Speaking of the 737NG, it's pretty fuel efficient in it's current incarnation. In short the 757 is vary efficient for airliners to operate. FedEx has just added it to it's fleet. The 757 is a well made aircraft in a class of it's own.

[OPS1 1]

The 757 has it's own nitch. It's a hybrid between a heavy and a small jetliner depending on it's role. It's capable of operating at smaller airfields that comparable aircraft of it's size can not. It's a hard aircraft to replace hence nothing is out there that's taking it's place. It can climb as efficiently as the A320 series and has fuel efficiency comparable to the 737NG. Speaking of the 737NG, it's pretty fuel efficient in it's current incarnation. In short the 757 is vary efficient for airliners to operate. FedEx has just added it to it's fleet. The 757 is a well made aircraft in a class of it's own.

Thanks Dillon, Thats exactly the information i wanted know :)

[Captain_Barfbag 31]

Since this is an academic exercise, it would be a good idea to cite actual references when you present it. Regardless of the quality of the information, "some guy on the AVSIM forum" hardly qualifies as a valid source. I'm trying to anticipate the questions of your instructor here, so please take this as constructive criticism.Dillon, where did your information come from?

[Matthew Kane 1,164]

Let us know how you make out with your report. 757 is my favourite tube ever produced and your paper sounds intriguing. I guess Boeing is putting all the eggs in one basket with the 787 now but the 757 has always been the 'Hot Rod' in their range of products.I also always liked the common flight deck between the 757 and 767 that cuts down on training for pilots. But the 757 is laid out better due to the slightly smaller size of it.Cheers

[tf51d 284]

From a fuel economy standpoint the 737-900ER (The only real comparable model) is more efficient then the 757-200 2.95 gal per nm for the 757-200 vs 2.40 gal per nm for the 737-900ER. By range though the 757-200 carries more fuel so can go 835nm further. 4100nm for the 757-200WL and 3265 for the 737-900ER. Number of passengers is slightly in the 757 favor, 2 class 200, 1 class 228 for the 757, and 2 class 180, 1 class 220 for the 737. Cargo wise though the 737 has the edge, 44,9cu m for the 737, vs 43.3 for the 757. So I would say for short to medium range flights the 737 has the edge, but for longer ETOPS flights I don't think the 737 will be able to take it's place as well.

[TurboTomato 90]

I would ask this question on pprune rather than here.