I think it would be a good decision to do this. Not only because the 757 design in 50 years old, there's no planes Boeing offers that easily substitute for the 757, it would fit well alongside the business direction of the 787 (which has proven itself out quite well), but also because it would be a completely new plane, with few to no band-aids. I would trust a 797 over a 757 refresh, because Boeing would be much more terrified of a new plane with so much invested capital never achieving market acceptance than an older plane that has already been sold with money in the bank.
I would also hope Boeing's sales/marketing department understands planes falling out of the sky is bad for current and future sales growth, and now appreciates the difference between a properly safe plane and an unsafe plane with lots of band-aids.
The 757 production line doesn't exist anymore, so a 757MAX is completely off the table. Boeing even refused to build more passengers 767 even though the line is still running (for freighters and KC-46). The 797 as it is currently showed to prospective airlines is closer to a 767 replacement than a 757 replacement.
The real kicker is: if 737MAX becomes a hard case with lots of cancellations, or Boeing simply cannot sell it any further without cutting the price too much, Boeing will have to build a replacement from scratch sooner rather than later. The nickname for this project is NSA (New Single Aisle, I think). Or Boeing could try to build both at the same time (similar to what they did with 757 and 767).
The 797 is in an interesting situation: I believe Boeing is sitting on an incredible plane from a technical perspective, but the business case is hard to close. Of course the engineers want to build it: it's an incredible plane. But in my completely uninformed opinion it would be a mistake: no matter how great an airliner is from a technical perspective, and how alluring it is to engineers, it should not end up being a perfect solution looking for a problem.
Delta really wants the 797, but the design might be a little bit too US-centric, as if I understand correctly the capacity to haul cargo is sacrificed to keep flying costs low. But that makes it a complete no-go in the asian market, and is arguably not very forward looking (assuming ongoing rise of cargo needs). If the business case is hard to close, Boeing should just move on and build the NSA.
Airbus did that mistake with the A330NEO. They didn't have a clear business case, but a couple of customers and lessors kept pushing because they really wanted it, so eventually Airbus agreed. At least it's a "cheap" mistake, compared to a clean sheet design...
Do you have pointers to A330Neo problems which put it into this fail bucket? I found stuff about delayed delivery, and I found some scuttlebutt about the RR engines, but I can't find something which says its a fundamentally flawed idea. Bearing in mind that the 787 did not exactly have a stellar launch, having an Airbus A330 in the space feels to me logical: Many airlines have pilots trained in the A330.
Oh wait.. Is that what you mean? That there may be lurking differences in the flight envelope in a NEO to any prior experience on 330?
The problem is very simple: the A330NEO is not selling well at all. It was supposed to be a cheap alternative to the 787: not quite as good, but much cheaper. The problem is that Boeing has managed to reduce the manufacturing cost of the 787 so much that you can essentially buy a 787-9 for the same price as an A330-900.
The A350 is also suffering from the cheap price of the 787: it is too expensive, so Airbus has to work hard to lower the manufacturing cost...
This is declaration by fiat. Do you have pointers to back this up?
Web searches are much more equivocal. Many pro Boeing but not all. Observations that by type and training and flexibility an a330 fleet with a mix of ranges can suit.
I think it would be a good decision to do this. Not only because the 757 design in 50 years old, there's no planes Boeing offers that easily substitute for the 757, it would fit well alongside the business direction of the 787 (which has proven itself out quite well), but also because it would be a completely new plane, with few to no band-aids. I would trust a 797 over a 757 refresh, because Boeing would be much more terrified of a new plane with so much invested capital never achieving market acceptance than an older plane that has already been sold with money in the bank.
I would also hope Boeing's sales/marketing department understands planes falling out of the sky is bad for current and future sales growth, and now appreciates the difference between a properly safe plane and an unsafe plane with lots of band-aids.