FD AU 3

[Wikipedia & Universe]

From the neer built FD thread:

Current CFM LEAP engines would not have the sufficent power rating (they do 23/32lbf or 104/140k) for a 757-sized airplane. the former RR and PW engines generate much more thrust (37/43lbf or 166/192k).

You know, I was kind of assuming that since the 727 shared a fuselage cross-section with the 737, the 737's powerplant would work there, but now that I put the drawings side-by-side, I can see how much larger and heavier this airframe is.

An AU more powerful hypothetical LEAP-1D would be needed for the job.

You know you want to take a crack at it now.

And, so.......

727-MAX-3 is a simple CFM+winglets addition (and cokpit without eyebrows windows as to suggest a 2-crew flight deck similar to that of the 737NGs and 737MAXs.
727-MAX-5 is a full on mix between a 727-300, a 757 and the 737MAX, featuring split winglets, 757 nose and doors and 737MAX APU.

Beautiful! With the new engines and winglets, plus I imagine some other features/technologies that are standard on newer aircraft, what do you think the hypothetical ranges on these things would be? Would they have any notable advantages over anything on the RL market?

[BB1987]

Beautiful! With the new engines and winglets, plus I imagine some other features/technologies that are standard on newer aircraft, what do you think the hypothetical ranges on these things would be? Would they have any notable advantages over anything on the RL market?

Well, calculations would be really rough since one would have to consider fuel capacity and airframe weights and aerodynamics, but a guesstimate might not be impossile to figure out.
Given the 16% fuel consuption advantage of the CFM-LEAP engines and the fact that this aircraft would be almost the size of a 757-300 (so i'm gonna start calculating range from its 6.295km figure) I'd say range would be at least 7.302km. Plus blended winglets could increase range by another 4%, and split winglets by another 1%, plus some more 0,5% through weight reduction and ther improvements, so this would possibly give up a figure of some 7.708km. A 450km or so advantage over the 757-200, of wich it would share the passenger capacity. Or 300km more than an A321neo.

Still, a real "game changer" would be this:

Using the same rough calculations (16% for CFM, 5% for split winglets and 0,5% for other tweaks) we obtain a range of 8.874km for the 757-MAX-2 and 7.705km for the 757-MAX-3.
If this data is even remotely believable they would made up an impressive pair of transcontinental and transatlantic narrowbodies.

[odysseus1980]

Seem reasonable, Boeing could have done this in B757.

[BB1987]

Seem reasonable, Boeing could have done this in B757.

Only if they had not stopped production in 2004 however, and they had little chance to do otherwise. If one goes checking, the 757 averaged some 30/40ish orders each year until 2001, then, in the next three years it allotted only 7. Demand for a 757-sized narrowbody literaly evaporated after 9/11. Now demand for such plane seems to have resurfaced (partially also because 757s themselves are approaching retirement age) and the only plane that could realistically be upgraded to somewhat fill that market is the A321 in the form of the A321neoLR. The new 737-MAX-10 can match it by capacity but not for range.
For what I've understood it would not viable for Boeing to restart 757 production after 13 years for logistic, budgetary a possibly even market reasons. The only thing thery can currently do is take the bitter pill and keep working on their new MoM (middle-of-the-market) project.

[Clonecommander6454]

AFAIK the toolings for 757s are all gone, and it makes no economic sense to rebuild all the machineries to build a 1980s airframe. They may as well build a new 757 replacement based on the 787.

[DeadRight]

What if Canada got a little radioactive with there weaponry back in the cold war? They need to deliver it somehow...


And an alternative to the CF18 Hornet we know today, the CF15 Strike Eagle. As we, don't know today.

[RaspingLeech]

I like the Arrow-esque livery on that CB-58, though the text looks like it may have aliasing on.

[odysseus1980]

I think I have seen AU Canadian B58 somewhere else. The CF-15 would be a good but expensive choice.

[eswube]

Nice additions.

@RaspingLeech
Actually that zig-zag ("Fuselage Flash") was a standard feature on RCAF transport and maritime aircraft from late 1940s at least until 1980s, but it seems that F-101 had them too, at least for a while.

[Wikipedia & Universe]

One more from Ethereal Connection is the Embraer ERJ-145XR. This is the last of the Ethereal narrowbodies on my worklist in standard livery. I might do a legacy A320 in a special livery, but I don't know if I can get what I'm envisioning to work. After that, the rest of the Ethereal jets on my list are all widebodies (A380, A340, B777). Those should be fun.