Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 29896 times:
New or old makes no big difference, it''s practically the same. Somehow this one feels a bit more retro to me, with the bigger titles and fewer stripes on the tail. To be honest, I don't think the change was necessary.
Seriously, I like everything about the livery except for that red slash/dot. As NicoEDDF notes, it gives it a Polish flair. I think a French flag waving in a fashion similar to how the union jack is displayed on VS would have been a better touch.
Also... the engines are just too while. But they're ok.
Just to be clear, I like the livery... but its also 'almost there' and doesn't quite impress.
AFKL From Netherlands, joined Feb 2008, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 29644 times:
For those who say it's boring, I will have to agree, but then again, it's no less boring than it has always been. It's not exciting, but it's not ugly. I do however like the larger titles, which something where Delta for instance, went wrong.
Initialy however, when I heard of the "livery change", I was hoping they would get rid of the excess white. Unfortunately this did not happen.
So will we have to wait for another 30+ years for a true livrery change?
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 29111 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 3): So is the airline airfrance now? Lacking a space or some other way of deliminating the words seems pretty stupid to me.
I wondered too if the airline had changed its name. New liveries are supposed to reflect a new image but I don't see any reason why Air France would want to change the name, especially as the French are so very proud to be French! Is it possible the painting of the name was done in error?
Panamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5063 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 28748 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 19): but AIRFRANCE withotu some space or other delimter is just dumb.
It's a brand, and it's moving towards a more global, less country-specific brand name (perhaps to eventually ease the integration of the KL brand into one). The closest analogy I can come up with is with Lufthansa. What is Lufthansa? It is not a word on its own, but it is really made up of two words "Luft" (which is Air in German) and Hansa (after the medieval trading group - Hanseatic league, based along the coast of Northern Europe). Today, no one even questions what Lufthansa means anymore....similarly, in the future, people will get use to that "one-word" airline called AIRFRANCE...
Acey559 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1567 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 28508 times:
I wasn't a fan when I saw the original renderings on here a while ago, but seeing it on the plane I think it looks pretty good. I think it would be even better if the sky weren't so cloudy, but I still think it looks alright. Granted, the 777 is a beautiful airplane so that may have something to do with it, but I still don't looks as bad as I originally thought it might.
Speedbrds From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 28386 times:
Meh... There really isn't anything special about it.
If you take a closer look, the tail design of the scheme is slightly different. It has a "swoosh" effect at the bottom of the colors. Sorry, I couldn't think of the proper word, but I hope it is understandable.
The one major thing that everyone can see is that the aircraft is very neat and clean. Rare to see that these days.