On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:22:16 MST, lewell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Lars
Ewell) wrote:
> I was disappointed to learn that the 757 will no longer be constructed
by Boeing.
>
> I was under the impression that this was one of the most fuel efficient
of all comercial airliners.
>
> Can anybody confirm this?
I don't have specific numbers, but I think you're right, it was fairly
fuel efficient -- when it was new. Airliners that have come out since
thing, particularly the 737 NG and the A320 family have overcome any
advantages the 757 had over its older competition.
> My gut tells me larger airliners would be more
>efficient, similar to how a bus is more efficient than a car.
Look around you; what do you see? Lots of small cars, because people
want to go from Point A to Point B when they want to go. They don't
want to leave a half hour earlier to catch the bus that will stop 17
times between A and B, with one of those stops being a hub where you
have to change busses.
Similarly, airlines have found fairly conclusively that passengers
want more frequent flights so there's one closer to when they want
one, and they want a non-stop flight, not a flight on a larger plane
to a hub to wait for a connecting flight to their destination.
When time zones and landing slots reduce practical choices for when a
flight can take off and arrive, larger planes like 747s and the new
A380 make a lot more sense. But fuel efficiency is less often the only
driving factor fleet composition decisions.
Says me, anyway...
> Lars Ewell
Erosion
|
