A little tribute to the 757: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g548C4I9M_Q

nice video

Renton airport. Lots of hours spent working there.

 

Unfortunately for an aircraft of it size it has the tiniest cockpit!

^ Are you implying is she's a bit snug it's a bad thing :Silly:

The guys up front aren't paying customers! I know three guys that used to fly these. They all spoke of the plane like an old favorite girlfriend.

It is the best tubeliner ever produced. The 757 and 767 had a common flight deck to cut down on cross training but the 757 is just a little more snug due to being a narrower jet.

 

Being narrower is what gives it outstanding performance, and choice for some air forces as it can get in and out of a lot of places for its size, like Antarctica:

 

^ Are you implying is she's a bit snug it's a bad thing :Silly:

 

You have to sit sideways in the jumpseat. I did one jumpseat on a 75 and that will be the last. Only Boeing widebodies or Airbus for my commute!

I've asked this numerous times, so I will do it again.

 

Why isn't there a real replacement for the 757? You can have long-ish 737 and A320, but they all don't seem to offer that profile the 757 offered with the small airport, big plane landing and taking off capability. So which plane handles the hot&high stuff with the short runways for example?

So which plane handles the hot&high stuff with the short runways for example?

 

I know the 777 can handle much shorter runways then it is spec'd out for. They have landed them at Wellington Airport on occasion for photo ops and that runway is only 6,827 feet, ANZ said it can land even shorter then that but all you are doing is excessive braking. I bet the 777 could do a lot more then what it is spec'd for considering its engine performance and braking capabilities.

AFAIK the published figures are 'net performance', that is everything doesn't work out IRL like in the movies.