N583NW, In picture 272745 you can see N583NW with its titles covered up. I have received many angry emails saying that the reason the titles are covered is because the plane just came out of the paint shop. This picture, taken 5 days before, shows N583NW in its full paint. It has since returned to the paint shop, where it hasn't come out. Highly unusual for a plane that has already been painted.
"N583NW, Are the rumors true, that Northwest is returning their 757-351s to Boeing? I have been covering RNT for 8 years and have never seen an aircraft with its titles covered over. Nikon Coolpix 5000, TC-E2, 170mm."
When was this ever an issue? If so why would they ever do such a thing?
VS346 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 339 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8524 times:
So, a few days after the 753 was painted in the bowling shoe c/s, NW turned around and told Boeing, by the way our scheme has changed, can you paint it again? Who paid for that? Seems like a waste of money. But sounds like NW is very concerned about possibly having a few planes in old c/s for another few years (à la DL) so that there is consistency in their brand. I think most A.netters are happy with that decision. But economically it's gotta hurt for now.
Virgin-Atlantic: More experience than our name suggests
Boeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8298 times:
I meant the paint scheme in general, not on that specific aircraft.
To clarify, that paper covering is probably left over from when the aircraft was painted. As DesertJets pointed out, it may have been a paint defect, which meant that in fact the aircraft had to go back in to get it fixed. Who pays for that I would be interested in knowing.
Still unclear as to the rumors of NWA giving them back. I know those were eventually squashed. Maybe it was pressurization, but I would have imagined that Boeing worked that out by the time NWA took delivery.
Maybe just a bunch of jealous NWA DC-9 fans who for some reason felt threatened by it.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5162 posts, RR: 43
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8215 times:
Who pays for that I would be interested in knowing.
If it was indeed a paint defect, my guess is Boeing. As long as the plane is not delivered, it is the property and thus responsibility of Boeing. I'm not 100% sure of this, but my guess is that the purchase contract between Boeing and NW stipulates that the aircraft should be delivered to NW painted. Thus, painting is the responsibility of Boeing.
SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7984 times:
So NW can have their a/c painted 1000 times before Boeing delivers it (unhappy with each one) and Boeing will have to go back and re-paint it and pay for it too???
It is pretty rare that there are painting issues, and there is a difference between a paint defect and airline not being happy (which I have never heard of) or changing its scheme.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7972 times:
NW is not returning its 753 fleet - its amazing how rumors get started, one airliner may have a paint issue that requires some correction work and suddenly an entire fleet of airplanes is being returned!
NW is pleased with its 753 fleet, its very cost effecient to operate -and the 753 has found a new niche, flying each of Northwest's routes from LAX, SFO, PDX and SEA to the Hawaiian islands.