became very
 

BV # 61
The colour of large aircraft can be operationally important. The two Tristar K1 aircraft used in Op Granby were originally in the standard white livery flying towlines at 25,000ft not too far from the Iraqi border. They were visible from many miles away, unlike the VC10s in Hemp. When given a coat of pink paint (to become known as Pinky and Perky) they became very difficult to see, for which the crews were very grateful. Also on the ground at Riyadh, along with 100 odd large aircraft in grey or Hemp they were the most obviously visible.

Lost in the Tundra # 93
Most civilian airliners do not have Self Defence capabilities, unlike operational aircraft, or the secure comms required. It would cost a lot of money to have them fitted and authorised for each flight.

If I wanted some cosmetic work on my car - alloys tidying up, few scratches sorting, T cutting etc I’d probably do a bit of internet searching which would give figures, say £100-200. If I went to my normal dealer (called, eg Martials of Oxford) and they quoted £900 I might think of going elsewhere or saying ‘don’t be ridiculous, you’re having a laugh’.

Paint the thing by all means, make it look good, but pay a reasonable price.

I see the Daily Mail has come upwith this:


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5b685ae182.jpg

Indeed, Tengah Type ! When the Pink Pigs turned up at KKIA, I compared the f. stop at 1/500th with a normal white TriStar. It was a whole stop - which IIRC meant that the pink ones reflected half the light of the white aircraft.

During ULAS times, one of our last student syllabus exercises was low level manoeuvring. If Brize was quiet, I would ask to route on the 'Charlie Delta' back to Abingdon via Brize at LL - which was usually OK'd. As we approached, I'd ask the student to count how many VC10s he/she could spot. They usually saw the trucky ones, but rarely the hemp tankers until I pointed them out. This was to show them that even at a sedate 120KIAS / 250 ft visual target acquisition was much more difficult if the target was camouflaged.

However, as BV infers, acquiring the target with the Mk1 eyeball is now a thing of the past - so probably less need for tone down paint schemes these days.

Found a Union Flag liveried aircraft after a brief search . . . . plenty of these sat around, currently. . . .

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....33a9f5d250.jpg

The BA heritage liveries that have been used in the last year or so have been extremely popular, so that might not necessarily be the case.

We've got a national image of being a bit quaint and retro, why not lean into it?

I gather there have been discussions with Norwegian to repaint the entire fleet of Voyagers and put the face of a different minister on each tail. This will be a cost saving on the Boris plane as much will be white, but Hancock is asking for his to also have the NHS rainbow.

Tengah
 

I’m not debating that colour can affect visual acquisition. I’m merely postulating that pretty much everyone has a radar (and other sensors) now. Remember Granby was 30 years ago. Not everyone was radar equipped then.

Anyway, I’m only partially serious and the benefits of easy peacetime visual acquisition are probably still outweighed by the benefits of camouflage. However, the scales are tipping.

BV

I would expect that the person running the UK government Mr. D. Cummings will have submitted a design?

But he won't be paying for it!

More ides
 

Heres a couple more suggestions to mull over.

How about a half and half paint scheme, port side colourful as required for 'showing off' and photo ops, then you ensure you always park with that side towards the cameras. Then the starboard side in camouflage. Then in a hostile environment you always keep the starboard side to the enemy.....

or

there are now plenty of flexible plastic displays being developed. You could coat the entire aircraft in these and change the paint scheme at the click of a mouse. Then it could be rented out or you could sell advertising space on it. You could even have adaptive camouflage for example displaying the ground below on the upper wings and the plane would practically vanish..

Nah, still too boring and understated for my liking. How about we paint Churchill on one side of the fin and Victoria on the other?

How about Cecil Rhodes on either side of the fin.

If thats a Go'er, get Jet2 to paint it. Betcha it'll be a quarter/third the cost.🤔

Can anyone clarify wether it’s
A) already painted in TC colours
B) it needed a repaint anyway

This has a big orientation on arguments wether it’s a waste of money or not.

Sadly also a photo shop as called out on Twitter a few days later.

Someone has already come up with something on similar lines here.......:E

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c5fe3842cf.jpg

For (A) see my earlier post #87, its nothing to do with the ex TC jet.
As to (B) the condition of the current grey, based on the age and other jets suggests it 'probably' wasn't in need of an immediate repaint.

Thanks for clearing that up. My last two questions then:

C) How much is actually being repainted? Is it just a tail fin as I’ve heard some suggestions or is it a complete aircraft repaint in bright red as some papers have suggested.

D) What is the likely extra cost to its planned maintenance to add this extra paint livery?

Then the old VC10 scheme would be the best option, flat the top half down and spray it white, add a cheat line, the wings and all things down would remain as per before.