Musapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4408 times:
BA is not the worst nor the best airline in the world. They are also not the most profitable in the world.
It is important for any company to look for ways to improve, give their customers a better experience, feeling etc. With their negative news routinely spread around the country (you know the country's media) it is important they find something to improve in order to make themself better and MORE profitable. The reason I post this on here is that I have never seen a wing as dirty as this on a 777. Thats it.
AF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 694 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4355 times:
It's a question of taste. Some like to fly in pretty airplanes, no matter the cost of the airline ticket, or the airline's quality. Some others just care about the airplane's being perfectly taken care of, an airplane that will fly flawlessly.
Of course, the first fact does not prevent the second from being true. But somehow, the airlines tend to cut the costs on paint jobs, and superficial aircraft cleansing, to improve their maintenance departments. AF has had the same livery for years, and do not seem to be willing to change it. Why ? Not because of a lack of artistic tastes. Simply because it's too expensive. They'd rather keep their money to keep on being the biggest, most profitable international airline in Europe.
PHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1208 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4312 times:
Quoting AF1624 (Reply 5): They'd rather keep their money to keep on being the biggest, most profitable international airline in Europe.
I don't want to sound very arrogant, but well, the good AF performance is mainly achieved by KLM.
Don't get me wrong, I think AF is a very capable airline, but you should credit the ones that deserve to be credited.
Varig md-11 From France, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4214 times:
Quoting PHKLM (Reply 6): the good AF performance is mainly achieved by KLM
whenever a dutch company is bought by a foreigner that's the same song.....
you forgot to mention that KL pension fund is financing AF too, or that KL service is much lower now the French are in charge etc etc etc.....
AF TW AA NW DL UA CO BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ PC RG IW SE
Richierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4470 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3978 times:
Quoting BA787 (Reply 10): Chances are the plane had just flown to the US and was flying back again, this coul make the plane dirty depending on the atmosphere but...
Big whoop, dirty planes mean nothing and don't affect many people confidence in the airline.
Also, BA use those a/c as much as they can, cleaning them unnecessarily too often is a waste of hours
I totally agree and hear what you are saying, but I will have to say that the greasy wing in the threadstarter's pic is pretty filthy and does not present the best opinion of BA. Just like US Airways' B737s with excessive paint missing - its not unsafe or dangerous but it presents a negative image. '
I don't need a "pretty" aircraft, but it sure helps public confidence to have a sharp, clean aircraft.
Hotelmode From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3907 times:
Looks to me like it had operated from an airfield with standing snow and thats the residue, thats why its mostly on the aft flap section. Combination of dirty snow and deicing fluid aint pretty. You cant expect aircraft to get valeted every trip.
AlexPorter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3670 times:
I have been on a good number of flights where the aircraft exterior is spotless, except that the wings are dirty like this.
Quoting Hotelmode (Reply 12): Looks to me like it had operated from an airfield with standing snow and thats the residue, thats why its mostly on the aft flap section. Combination of dirty snow and deicing fluid aint pretty. You cant expect aircraft to get valeted every trip.
Of course, I am from Minneapolis, and this could be why I see so many dirty wings.
LouA340 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3308 times:
I feel its just because of the aircraft utilization and they haven't had time to clean it.
Look at this picture of an Emirates 777. The flaps are also quite dirty. Does that mean u wont fly them, I don't think so.
Lan1981 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3223 times:
I do agree with those that have said dirty aircraft aren't the best way to enhance the corporate identity of an airline...I would use the same argument when using the 'premises' of any company, let's say a Starbucks cafe or a bank branch.
Having said that, I must also say in defence of BA that the photo above is the exception rather than the rule.
I must also admit that although shiny, clean aircraft look nicer, there are times when one could say that a little dirt marks here or there add a certain 'character' to the aircraft; I quite like seeing those dirt marks that stretch upwards and away from the corners of the flightdeck windows...gives an impression of speed...maybe it's just me!
Captaink From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5116 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3208 times:
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 1): Who cares? As long as it's safe, it matters not.
Quoting BA787 (Reply 9): Big whoop, dirty planes mean nothing and don't affect many people confidence in the airline.
We can debate this all day. But regardless of the safety and service of an airline, a dirty airplane does not help the company's image. Granted it may not prevent passengers from flying with the airline initially, but in the long run, if continued I am sure the only effect would a negative one.
I imagine this negative effect would be greater if for some reason conditions, (financially, service etc) start to take a turn for the worse as so often happens from time to time in the industry.