Delta orders 45 A321s

Well, I have seen the 707, 727 and now the 757 start and end production. I saw the 747 start production and as you allude, the end is not far. The 767 is not far behind. The 777 and 787 will rise to the top and all else will be obsolete. They may be at or nearing production's end but I'll bet they'll all be flying somewhere for a pretty good while.LOL

Neither Boeing nor Airbus has offered up an adequate replacement for the 757, as far as transoceanic flying goes. Both the A321 and 737-900ER can match the 757 on domestic ranges and seat count, but neither one can come close to the seven five's combination of intercontinental range and payload capacity. I think Boeing and Airbus would simply like to see the 787 and A350 fill that void, but all airlines see is another widebody type they have to buy to put on a route that's too thin to support the use of a widebody. The 757 was never billed as a "transoceanic" type to begin with, it just evolved into one out of airline need (or greed, depending on how you view it). Had the 757 been more popular in international markets much earlier on, I don't think Boeing would've ended production of the type...in fact they probably would have started production of an extended-range type similar to the "ER" modifications airlines have already put some of their 757 fleets through.

I think them and UAL are going to a revenue based FF mile package and I really think that in the next couple of years, everybody will. I never really worried about that much though, not flying as a pax that much. An airline was way to get from A to B and whichever got me there the quickest and most convenient way, and in the most comfortable way, generally got my business.

I believe Air France still flies Boeing between Europe and the US and they are part of sky team. Weird to think airlines like BA and Air France, Norwegian etc are starting to use more Boeing than US airlines!

comfortable? when the new 777X will have 17" seats against Airbus 18.5 " ?
and what is so comfortable about a 787 when it starts to burn: you like fly warm or so?

"
The AAIB bulletin compares the circumstances surrounding the incident on the Ethiopian 787 to certification issues raised last year about lithium-ion batteries on commercial aircraft. The 787 fleet was grounded for more than four months after two lithium-ion battery fires erupted in January 2013. The investigation uncovered deficiencies in the testing the FAA uses to determine if lithium-ion batteries are safe, prompting the US National Transportation Safety Board to recommend that the FAA impose more rigorous testing on such power systems. The lithium-metal batteries involved in the Ethiopian 787 battery fire last year are chemically different than lithium-ion batteries, but the certification standards show similar deficiencies, the AAIB says. The current certificated standards for such lithium-metal batteries are government by a technical standard order (TSO), and therefore do not require manufacturers to test the batteries as integrated with the ELT or as installed on the aircraft, the AAIB says. As a result, the AAIB recommends that the FAA and industry meet to reconsider whether the TSO process is the best way to prove that lithium-metal batteries are safe.

In March, the AAIB performed a more robust test than the TSO process requires on a lithium-metal battery. That showed the Honeywell ELT can overheat and cause a thermal runaway event, the AAIB says.
Boeing and Honeywell were not immediately available to comment on the AAIB report."