Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4925 times:
Not likely, its one of the best recognized liveries around and still looks quite up to date.......maybe, possiblily, in the future, AA may adjust the their titles or the logo very slightly, but I think thats about it.
B4real From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2595 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4660 times:
AA's color scheme is timeless, and I did not like it at first, but I have really come to liking it (though I don't like AA).
I did not like the white bottom a/c they had at some point, but in general the scheme is great.
It is great from a marketing standpoint as well, the stripes and chrome are a great identifier.
I really liked the retrojet liveries on the 737 and 738, I would sure like to see them supplement the timeless liveries with special c/s aircraft - like 100th 737 (if they have that many), 25 years of service, DFW ORD JFK MIA theme aircraft, OneWorld partnership, AAdvantage program, all kinds of special color schemes would make for great photograpy, and give us something to talk about!
Captaink From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5093 posts, RR: 13 Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4631 times:
I believe in the following saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." AA's scheme is working for them. People know and recognize it very well. The airline industry including AA is seeing some trying times. It would be a very costly endeavor to try and repaint or change the scheme of the hundreds of airplanes that AA have. It makes absolutely no sense for AA to change right now.
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4486 times:
Looks okay, and is certainly cheap to maintain. Unlike Delta, they don't have a million schemes running around, and the natural metal doesnt show the dirt. I think they should do a tail/logo update though, wouldnt be too too bad on cost. Give the airline a new image. (It's the in thing, dontcha now
COEWR From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 273 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4407 times:
AA's paint scheme is quite cost effective. The reduced weight of all that paint really helps gas savings. I think it is a great, and easily recognizable color scheme and will be here for the long term.
Caribb From Canada, joined Nov 1999, 1627 posts, RR: 9 Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4393 times:
When you have an excellent well known highly recognized brand name and image like American Airlines it's probably dangerous to play around with it. If it were to be changed in any way I'd only do so in a subtle way much like KLM did.. perhaps letting the red cheat line ever so slightly dip below the nose, or adding the eagle logo to the engines. Nothing dramatic or flashy but just a small change to update it. American is a strong conservative airline that's not interested in flashy liveries. That's what works for them.
VRG772 From Brazil, joined Oct 2003, 124 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4375 times:
AA's color scheme should not be changed... It's like a tradition for AA, and even if it wasn't, is very up to date.
Is probably the easiest airline to be recognized by anyone... And I think very nice to keep a livery for many years instead of been changing it many times.
SPLOBKrakow From Poland, joined Sep 2003, 105 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4311 times:
In general I like the paint sheme. But I think there is room for some improvments. First of lets paint the engines the same colour as the rest of the plane. Same goes for the bottom part of the nose cone. I think the tail would look a lot better if it was silver (or metal)also.
Just looking at this picture of the AA 767 the paint scheme looks kind of sloppy. Like they only painted some parts of the plane. Especially when you look at the tail end of the plane just under the tail. And around the main wings.
VS340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4184 times:
The bare metal looks good, very retro, as long as they keep it shiny. But they should consider maybe do something a little different with the tail, spice it up a bit to give it a little more modern look.
What are they going to do when planes like the 7E7 come out, since they will be mostly composite it would be pretty hard to keep the bare metal livery
Nwacrew From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4141 times:
There is a large, very beautiful 1930's-era American Airlines logo depicting an eagle within a circle, mounted on the front of AA's cargo facility at LaGuardia. I've long thought that retro logo would look terrific on the tails of American's fleet...
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2198 posts, RR: 14 Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3968 times:
The parts of the airlplane you say should be painted the same color are all made of composites, ie, there is no metal to be polished and left natural. Composites require paint, hence the gray, I suppose AA could paint those parts with a metalic silver paint, but they simply can't polish them like they can the aluminum skin. You can find in the archive pictures of AA's A300s once painted entirely gray. There was concern from Airbus that simply polishing the fuselage would not provide the anti-corrosion properties you get from paint. The A300s were painted entirely gray until Airbus and AA determined that polishing the fuselage would work just fine.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
Thrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2673 posts, RR: 11 Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3822 times:
I seriously doubt American can come up with a color scheme better than this one. It is, like many of you said, cheap to maintain, is one of the best liveries I have seen in my time, and to change it would be too awkward. However, Dsuairptman, I agree with you that the retrojet liver is gorgeous. It is even shinier than the current one. I really like the American 737 and 757 retrojets, but I think that I am quite satisfied with their current one. It is hard for me to imagine a better livery for American than the current one. It doesn't make sense, anyway, to have to pay for the expenses of repainting their planes. What I would like to see are the American Eagle planes repainted in the silver fuselage colours. I am perfectly satisfied with American's livery now, and I don't expect them to change it anytime soon.
Qantasguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 157 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3767 times:
I especially like the Red White and Blue cheat lines and the tail logo. They're timeless, and very patriotic for the National carrier (at least by name). I would paint the fuselage white, or maybe the engine grey. I know that when you add a coat of paint to the entire aircraft, you add a degree of weight, but other airlines do, and still make money.
Aloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4397 posts, RR: 17 Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3718 times:
I dont think American's scheme should be changed at all. A scheme doesnt have to be less than 5 years old in order to look good. I always wonder why people look at a classic theme that's been around for generations and feel the need to see it changed. Often when an airline changes it's scheme, the new one is worse than the old one, so why mess with a good thing?
AA's scheme is really attractive...as a kid I always noticed the AA jets at the airport more than any others because of how shiny and nice they looked. The red white and blue scheme always made me want to fly them....till I got older and discovered their fares were always too high for me to afford a trip on them. But that's beside the point.
I do, however, love the retro scheme and I like the idea of doing a good portion of the fleet in the retro scheme. Maybe 1/4 of the fleet would suffice. Half would be too much, but, I'd LOVE to see a retro Super 80 or 767 Luxury Liner. Very nice.
Here's a bit of trivia for you:
AA doesnt paint their planes. Except for perhaps the engines.
The red/white/blue stripes, the tail logo, and the "American" titles are all stickers. Very durable stickers....ever see planes parked at Victorville...missing their "Delta Air Lines" titles, but still wearing the rest of the sceme? It's because those titles were stickers.
AA chose to do their entire fleet in stickers. There's very little weight in a sticker compared to paint, and what paint there is on the engines is minimal compared to the weight of an entire plane painted.
The retrojet is also stickers. Thus fitting a 1/4th of the fleet in them wouldnt have much of a weight penalty at all.
25 Upsmd11: It would be nice to put an MD80 in retro at least. Here in SDF we never see the 752 or 738. Only a few of the retro paint scheme would be great as to
26 Luv2fly: I thought the retro schemes were no more?
27 Flyingbronco05: They save money every year on fuel because they don't paint their planes; they just do the three stripes. Smart I think. FB05
28 BR715-A1-30: I think they should paint 2 MD-83s into the Retro Livery that was used on the 757. Or maybe if they get 717-223s, they should have one delivered like
29 EMBQA: It is a classic. One other reason they may not change for some time..if you look closely next time your in the jetway waiting to get on an AA flight,
30 N844AA: I think you'd probably be hard-pressed to name many companies, much less airlines, that have gone nearly 35 years without at least a minor updating of
31 BN747: Heck no! Keep it as is! I hated it when I was a kid...well actually cuz I hated the inflight grub they served..steak,asparagus and adult stuff! Then I
32 Rb211: I does'nt look bad, I just wish they would polish the whole plane. That's one of the things I miss about their 727's with the exception of the radome.
33 Garnetpalmetto: Per an earlier post, Rb, not all of the plane can be polished due to the composite nature of some areas (tail for instance)
34 Bobs89irocz: NO...leave it like it is. I LOVE the AA scheme. Very nice...to me it is flashy, the bird shines like no other in the sun. I will say, there isnt one s
35 JGPH1A: I'm sorry to disagree with all the AA fans out there, but its kind of dated, don't you think. "Timeless" is a good word for "boring and unadventurous"
36 Alpha 1: I'm sorry to disagree with all the AA fans out there, but its kind of dated, don't you think. "Timeless" is a good word for "boring and unadventurous"
37 JGPH1A: Alpha1 - take it easy, it was just a comment. I would hope AA come up with something better than the Song livery, which is not good in my opinion. It
38 Contrails: I have to concur with most of those who have already replied. If it works, if it's recognized around the world, if there's no valid reason to change i
39 Alpha 1: Alpha1 - take it easy, it was just a comment. I know it was. Mine was a comment in response. And my response is that all of you who want AA to radical
40 JGPH1A: OK I'm nuts then - but you watch, its gonna change sometime.[Edited 2003-10-27 14:57:28]
41 RB211: Well at least they might want to change the color of the tail and the engines. Maybe dark blue with red and silver accents.
42 Ha763: AA does not need to change anything and does not look dated. AA's logo? Look at United and Delta. United still has had the same U on its tail for over