We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
As far as the U.S. domestic market goes, the 757 replacement market appears to be dominated so far by a split between the Boeing 737-900ER and the Airbus A321-200. Because of its extra cabin length, which allows four cabin classes, the latter type appears to have gained a slight edge to date for the prime transcontinental routes on which the Boeing 757 has been used heavily for many years. However, the 737-900ER, the 737 MAX 9 and the A321 ? whether CEO or NEO ? are not true replacements for the Boeing 757-200, because none of them have its thrust (which allows U.S. transcontinental non-stop operations from pretty short runways such as Orange County) or its true transatlantic capability. U.S. carriers use 757s to fly non-stop to most Western European nations and the Nordic counties from the Eastern U.S., and fairly far into South America from southern U.S. cities. I can’t see the A321neo or the 737 MAX 9 replicating that network capability completely.