Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

757-300 vs 767

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

shon7

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
423
Between the 757-300 and 767 which is more fuel efficient? Is the type rating for the 757-200 common with the -300 and the 767.

Wondering why NWA went for the 300 rather than the 767.
 
The 757/767 Type is common to both, which means the 757-200 & 300 as well as the 767-200, 400 and whatever other models there are. The 757 is also considered a narrow-body while the 767's are wide-bodies. Looking forward to going back to them in the fall.
 
Ahh my first post on flightinfo. The 767-400 cockpit is almost identical to the 777 I would think this would be a seperate rating. Yeah?
 
It's a common type. Look at all of the different 737 configurations and they make that a common type.
 
The type does cover the 767-400, but not all airlines allow their pilots to fly both. At Delta they fly it as a seperate fleet, Continental flies all the different aircraft as one fleet.

The 757-300 is a great airplane on domestic leisure markets. With low operating costs it will make some money on these markets. The two major disadvantages that the 757-300 has are range and the ability to carry freight, when compared to any of the 767 models.
 
SeanD said:
Ahh my first post on flightinfo. The 767-400 cockpit is almost identical to the 777 I would think this would be a seperate rating. Yeah?

I retired from DAL off of the 767-400:bawling: and it falls under the B- 767/757 type rating. The -400 from the eyebrow up resembled the typical 767ER and from the eyebrow down the 777 (without the electronic checklist that Delta didn't opt for). Oh, and no tiller for the F/O.
 
From what I've learned at Continental the 767-200 has 50 fewer seats than the 757-300. Another difference is that the 767-200 has great range so it's good on thinner but long range routes. The 757-300 is for domestic competition against low cost carriers using high loads with lower yields on shorter ranges (i.e. used for Florida and Las Vegas).

The 767-400 has less range than the 767-200 but more capacity. As fas as I know Continental and Delta are the only ones using the 767-400. The cockpits of the 757-200, 757-300, 767-200, and 767-300 are all similar being kind of half glass with EICAS and the 767-400 being full glass like the 777.
 
Last edited:
I see the DAL 764s flying into/out of KLAS daily and never get sick of seeing them, amazing looking airplane. Is DAL using them on international routes yet? I would love to retire on one, what a way to go
 
DAL has been sending it to Lima, Peru for some time now (about 1.5 yrs). Also to Hawaii but this isn´t international...It will start trans atlantic soon but can´t remember cities.
Cheers
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top