A321NEOs for shorter flights.... you might have to use 787-8s or something and replace them manually for >3500mi routes however
Good 757-200/200M Replacement?
#21
Posted 26 December 2017 - 04:40 AM
#22
Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:46 AM
Name Speed MaxPax RngFul MaxRng TurTim TORA Price MthLea Intro FuelFl MthMnt Flgt20 Boeing 757-200M 529 239 3815 4488 45 6.54 82.000 0.911 1988 - 2005 25.98 4.09 Boeing 757-200 529 239 4695 5524 45 6.54 78.500 0.872 1983 - 2005 27.90 3.92 Airbus A321-100 514 220 2592 3049 35 5.35 54.500 0.605 1994 - 9999 21.00 2.72 Airbus A321-200 514 230 3248 3821 35 6.03 55.500 0.616 1996 - 9999 23.04 2.77 Boeing 737-900ER 528 220 3716 4372 40 7.19 70.500 0.783 2006 - 9999 19.98 3.52
__________________++
__________________.Eo
___________________zEE;_________________________:
____________________EEEn_____________________:oS;
_____________________EEEE:__:-_____-lcneEg+.*EE--
_____________________*EEOEOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-oOEV
____________:;;--+++-oEEOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
__.:::::::.______::::__*CEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEglCS
_.:-+++++++oEECgr**ll*VEECCJJogOEEE::EE__:E
____________;nEE:_______+*El+E-.
Carlos "SUJETO" Vargas Sánchez.
#23
Posted 05 January 2018 - 05:04 AM
tu-204 is actually pretty good. it does not have quite the long range, but it is cheap as f and it is very efficient. Although there is no true replacement to 757 yet.
#24
Posted 12 April 2023 - 09:39 PM
Old thread but had to chime in:
A310-300
2 more years of production (ends in 2007)
40 more pax than the 752, so not perfect but probably your best option until like A321NEO.
#25
Posted 13 April 2023 - 12:25 AM
and idk if they have the LR and XLR implemented yet ingame, but i would imagine those would be just about perfect
#26
Posted 13 April 2023 - 09:51 AM
and idk if they have the LR and XLR implemented yet ingame, but i would imagine those would be just about perfect
The game currently has four of the Airbus A321 variants, the -100, -200, NEO, and LR that starts production 2018-present. The XLR is yet to make its debut.
Returning to the question, it is important to note that the A321 falls short in comparison to the range capabilities of the Boeing 757. As a result, I would recommend employing the A321 on routes that are on the short and medium haul. For longer routes, the Boeing 767-200ER is a viable alternative, even offering superior range when compared to the 757. However, it is worth noting that the lease cost for the Boeing 767-200ER is twice that of the 757, so it is advisable to use them only on routes where the 757 is stretched thin and profitability is high.
In addition, the Boeing 737-900ER is another suitable option to consider.
I'm not familiar with Russian or Chinese airlines so I wouldn't know of what they have to offer.
#27
Posted 17 April 2023 - 08:46 AM
Since the demand increases over time now, I'm replacing my 753s with 788s. (yes, 788s work pretty well on ~1000mi routes). Most of the time, the capacity increase isn't big enough to adjust for the inflated demand, so I imagine the 788 can replace the 752 just as capably.
Keep in mind, my aircraft are outfitted for 70+ legroom rating, so all of them have less capacity than yours may have.
#28
Posted 09 June 2023 - 10:35 PM
The best 757 replacement in the game so far is probably the A321LR with a 3995 mile range and 240 PAX exit limit. It falls short on range, but capacity is basically a perfect match. It comes out in 2018 though, so you'll have a bit of a wait for your older 757s.
#29
Posted 15 June 2023 - 03:34 AM
The only advantages of the 757-200M over the 757-200 is that it can use shorter runways, and you can get one every two weeks instead of every three weeks. By every other metric it's an inferior product.
Whether or not something is a "replacement" for the 752 depends on your needs. In terms of raw profitability, the 757-300 with PW2037s is unmatched. Its primary disadvantage is runway length; when compared to the similarly profitable (but lower capacity) 737-400, 737 MAX 8, C919, and A320 series, it needs much longer runways. This can limit its usefulness somewhat, but that's why mixed fleets exist.
There is another thing to consider, and that is maintenance costs. Maintenance fees increase quadratically, not linearly, with the base cost being 0.3% of the retail price. That means expensive planes age "worse" than less expensive ones. a 20-year-old 757-300 is less profitable than a 20-year-old 717, because its maintenance costs stack up much more harshly.
Now... let's not delude ourselves into thinking that these extra maintenance fees will break the bank. A sufficiently profitable IFE will pay the entirety of an aircraft's maintenance bills well into its 30s, but for airlines with razor-thin margins it is something worth considering; higher sticker price means higher maintenance fees down the line. Much higher.
#30
Posted 21 August 2023 - 06:58 PM
On the shorter 757-200 flights, you could go with the A321-100, -200, NEO, LR, 737-900ER, MAX9, or MAX10. For the long range flights, the most viable replacement is probably the 767-200ER with a low density configuration.
#31
Posted 29 October 2023 - 05:45 PM
There is nothing. Even in 2017, there is nothing. The 797 is due to be out in 2025, so you'll seriously have to wait until then.
this comment did not age well
#32
Posted 06 November 2023 - 10:45 PM
There is nothing. Even in 2017, there is nothing. The 797 is due to be out in 2025, so you'll seriously have to wait until then.
this aged poorly
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users