American 787s
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
American 787s
Now that American Airlines has finally announced its choice of the 787, a long-standing question rears its head. What will AA do about its livery?
As they have always argued that paint costs fuel, this must cause the bean counters at AA something of a headache - not to mention the marketing chaps. It would be a shame if the airline was forced down the route of spraying silver paint on the fuse. Just look at the mess that is Virgin Atlantic and Jet2 - and that was intentional.
It has been suggested that American 787s might go multi-coloured carbon fuselage and apply paint to the fin only. Brave, but at least they would sticking to their own ground rules.
Your views or expert knowledge on these matters would be welcomed.
As they have always argued that paint costs fuel, this must cause the bean counters at AA something of a headache - not to mention the marketing chaps. It would be a shame if the airline was forced down the route of spraying silver paint on the fuse. Just look at the mess that is Virgin Atlantic and Jet2 - and that was intentional.
It has been suggested that American 787s might go multi-coloured carbon fuselage and apply paint to the fin only. Brave, but at least they would sticking to their own ground rules.
Your views or expert knowledge on these matters would be welcomed.
American's A300-600's were originally delivered painted light gray overall as Airbus's corrosion warranty did not allow bare metal.
Photos: Airbus A300B4-605R Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Photos: Airbus A300B4-605R Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just look at the mess that is Virgin Atlantic and Jet2 - and that was intentional.
Bare Metal finishes also cost core to maintain than paint does, as the special anti-corrosive lacquer has to be frequently re-applied and polished, which then off sets any savings by not being painted. If bare metal was such a good idea and offered a huge cost saving, don't you think more airlines would do it ?.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
American's A300-600
Agreed that AA 'busses' were, as you state, originally delivered with grey paint. However, American soon had them scrubbed down to bear metal. Maybe its paranoia on AA's part.
What does Groundloop think AA will do?
What does Groundloop think AA will do?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply to Leezyjet:
"Please explain what that is supposed to mean"
This is a personal opinion regarding the liveries of Virgin, Jet2, Aeroflot (and the late Silverjet). It reminds me of when I was a boy, building plastic models.
I agree - there are much worse paint schemes out there than I criticise above. It is a very subjective matter. As for Air France goes, they're notorious for cleaning nothing! However, I must state that the QANTAS livery has stood the test of time.
Please understand that I am not making the case for AA, but simply asking the question, "What would you do in American's position?", bearing in mind that this situation leaves the airline between a rock and a hard place - Brand vs technological advancement.
As for the economics of paint, lacquer etc; I remember "Eastern" converting to raw metal, Aeromexico seems to agree with AA, and I believe Air Canada are doing some trials with its fleet of 767s.
You make some welcome and valid points, but put yourself in the chair of AA's decision makers. Over to you!
"Please explain what that is supposed to mean"
This is a personal opinion regarding the liveries of Virgin, Jet2, Aeroflot (and the late Silverjet). It reminds me of when I was a boy, building plastic models.
I agree - there are much worse paint schemes out there than I criticise above. It is a very subjective matter. As for Air France goes, they're notorious for cleaning nothing! However, I must state that the QANTAS livery has stood the test of time.
Please understand that I am not making the case for AA, but simply asking the question, "What would you do in American's position?", bearing in mind that this situation leaves the airline between a rock and a hard place - Brand vs technological advancement.
As for the economics of paint, lacquer etc; I remember "Eastern" converting to raw metal, Aeromexico seems to agree with AA, and I believe Air Canada are doing some trials with its fleet of 767s.
You make some welcome and valid points, but put yourself in the chair of AA's decision makers. Over to you!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it important?
We fly aeroplanes in order to make money, not to please aeroplane spotters.
Apart from of course the blinding obvious, wny on earth would you come into the spotters forum and take a swipe at spotters ??
It was a sensible question in my opinion, AA have always stated that thier choice of livery was down to cost savings from the extra weight of applied paint on the aircraft. As they have now ordered a aircraft that cant have a plain metal colour sheme what will they do to fit these aircraft in with thier global branding.
Its very unlikely that they will operate a different colour scheme for a specific type, i have seen it a thousand times when self loading cargo turns upto a gate to board an aircraft and it isnt in the colour scheme they are used to, it simply confuses them and they think they might not be at the right gate.
Im sure that AA have already thought this one through but it will be interesting to see what they choose, they might simly choose "Invisible Paint" as applied to most of the boeing 787 fleet currently in the sky
We fly aeroplanes in order to make money, not to please aeroplane spotters.
Apart from of course the blinding obvious, wny on earth would you come into the spotters forum and take a swipe at spotters ??
It was a sensible question in my opinion, AA have always stated that thier choice of livery was down to cost savings from the extra weight of applied paint on the aircraft. As they have now ordered a aircraft that cant have a plain metal colour sheme what will they do to fit these aircraft in with thier global branding.
Its very unlikely that they will operate a different colour scheme for a specific type, i have seen it a thousand times when self loading cargo turns upto a gate to board an aircraft and it isnt in the colour scheme they are used to, it simply confuses them and they think they might not be at the right gate.
Im sure that AA have already thought this one through but it will be interesting to see what they choose, they might simly choose "Invisible Paint" as applied to most of the boeing 787 fleet currently in the sky
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As they have always argued that paint costs fuel
Last edited by BOEING777X; 19th Oct 2008 at 10:06.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ManofMan - Thanks for your valid comments regarding passengers. SFCC stated that its all about making money, which is correct. However, its those very passengers you mentioned, who make the money for airlines.
All airlines rely on branding. The bright colours and attention grabbing 'Price-busting' banners used by the low-cost sector - Wham-Bam-Thanks!
Then there is the middle guys, the Charter 'Plus' airlines who aim at the middle clas holiday market with a strong lean on 'Value for money' and the 'You know you can trust us, we've been around for years' message. Think about it - With the recent mergers in this market, its no coincidence that the respected names of Thomson and Thomas Cook will be retained, despite the fact that the parents are German. These airlines colour schemes tend to be fairly neutral and safe, with a touch of style about them.
But the premium carriers are the ones who really need to market themselves. Their money comes from the Business Class punters. Big money spenders, whose loyalty the Airlines want to retain. As you suggest, when a passenger arrives at his/her gate, he/she expects to see their chosen transport sitting on the tarmac looking as it always does.
So - Is it important? Damn right it is.
All airlines rely on branding. The bright colours and attention grabbing 'Price-busting' banners used by the low-cost sector - Wham-Bam-Thanks!
Then there is the middle guys, the Charter 'Plus' airlines who aim at the middle clas holiday market with a strong lean on 'Value for money' and the 'You know you can trust us, we've been around for years' message. Think about it - With the recent mergers in this market, its no coincidence that the respected names of Thomson and Thomas Cook will be retained, despite the fact that the parents are German. These airlines colour schemes tend to be fairly neutral and safe, with a touch of style about them.
But the premium carriers are the ones who really need to market themselves. Their money comes from the Business Class punters. Big money spenders, whose loyalty the Airlines want to retain. As you suggest, when a passenger arrives at his/her gate, he/she expects to see their chosen transport sitting on the tarmac looking as it always does.
So - Is it important? Damn right it is.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOEING777X - Succinct and probably right on the button.
I have heard that there is an emerging technology of applying extremely thin coats of paint. First applying a base colour and then a couple of other layers which give a truly metallic effect.
I have heard that there is an emerging technology of applying extremely thin coats of paint. First applying a base colour and then a couple of other layers which give a truly metallic effect.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 69
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by 11Fan; 26th Oct 2008 at 14:30.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that will be acquiring the most fuel efficient airplane in history, I'm sure they can afford to spend a small sum on a simply grey coating of paint
I couldnt agree more, looking at the figures upto now it has used no fuel whatsoever, even the greenest eco warrior must be pleased with that. A question though....with the continued delays and no end to them in sight, how many airlines are flying round older aircraft that they would have otherwise retired if the 787 would have been on time??
Just a thought.
I couldnt agree more, looking at the figures upto now it has used no fuel whatsoever, even the greenest eco warrior must be pleased with that. A question though....with the continued delays and no end to them in sight, how many airlines are flying round older aircraft that they would have otherwise retired if the 787 would have been on time??
Just a thought.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They'd certainly be snapped up by some freight operators that havent ordered, or are in the waiting list for A330F/777F's.
Equally they could provide a decent solution until the A350-900F emerges too.
Equally they could provide a decent solution until the A350-900F emerges too.
