Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Don't Ryanair Leave Aircraft Unpainted?  
User currently offlineAlasdair1982 From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2008, 468 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 13405 times:

Just a thought that struck me. For a conmpany like Ryanair who will do absolutely anything to make the cost of a flight as low as possible, it seems odd that they have their aircraft fully painted instead of using a livery scheme similar to AA.

Does anyone have an answer as to why?

Thanks

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12242 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13385 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

An AA style paintjob is actually more expensive to maintain to keep it looking nice.


911, where is your emergency?
User currently offlinegr8circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3099 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13288 times:

LCC or no LCC, there certainly has to be a benefit from having your planes painted in a distinct livery and recognisable at airports around the world....the plane's livery has to connect with the advertising campaigns and material..... lets say Ryanair painted their planes just white all over, they may save a bit on the colors....but that saving would not be justifiable as it's actually a huge loss of identity......so, they concentrate on cutting costs elsewhere......

User currently offlinepadster From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13046 times:

how about an all white aircraft with a big R on the tail then... very distinct !

User currently offlinemetjetceo From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 12979 times:

Simply stated, as cost conscious as MOL is, he also has a very firm grasp on the importance of branding.

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 1):
An AA style paintjob is actually more expensive to maintain to keep it looking nice.

though it costs more, the extra weight is justified in fuel costs, as I have always understood it. If I am not mistaken a 737 may have as much as 150 lbs of paint with a full paint job.


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9610 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12944 times:

Paint vs bare metal is a difficult evaluation to make. Paint weighs hundreds of pounds, but it also reduces corrosion and removes the need for polishing the fuselage. In the 80s & 90s there were more airlines with bare metal, but all but AA have transitioned to cheaper schemes which consist of mostly white (lightest and cheapest of the colors) with some logos or decoration to make the plane recognizeable. Since US Air and Aeromexico switched over to paint, I have a feeling they saved money by doing so.


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently onlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3881 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12879 times:

From what I undertstand AA uses some sort of " special paint " or coating if you will on their frames too, to make it look good and withstand corrosian etc. It's proabably more expensive than ordenary paint.

User currently offlinenoelg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12847 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 5):
Paint vs bare metal is a difficult evaluation to make. Paint weighs hundreds of pounds, but it also reduces corrosion and removes the need for polishing the fuselage.

And don't forget that the likes of AA have relatively low aircraft utilization, as opposed to FR whose aircraft are normally flying for upwards of 18 hours a day. Keeping FR's aircraft clean would be a nightmare with such high utilization.


User currently offline413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12847 times:

It's a brand. A brand needs a logo, an identity, something someone can easily pick out when they see it.

User currently offlinegr8circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3099 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12710 times:

Quoting padster (Reply 3):
how about an all white aircraft with a big R on the tail then... very distinct !

Good idea   


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12700 times:

Painting minimizes corrosion potential, minimizes maintenance costs and increases resale value.

More expense up front for a better profit down the road.


User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2699 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12700 times:

The most puristic airline livery I ever saw...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Groot

Quoting padster (Reply 3):
how about an all white aircraft with a big R on the tail then

We had this before, almost  
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerard Helmer



User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25170 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12621 times:

Quoting gr8circle (Reply 2):
LCC or no LCC, there certainly has to be a benefit from having your planes painted in a distinct livery and recognisable at airports around the world....the plane's livery has to connect with the advertising campaigns and material..... lets say Ryanair painted their planes just white all over, they may save a bit on the colors....but that saving would not be justifiable as it's actually a huge loss of identity......so, they concentrate on cutting costs elsewhere......

I don't agree with that. Branding is important but not on on the aircraft livery, especially for LCCs where price is the only important variable. Passengers will choose to fly FR regardless of the livery, based only on price and schedule.

In my opinion that's generally true for all airliines. By the time passengers even see the aircraft they have made their carrier choice. Every aircraft could be painted white, black or purple, with no carrier identification at all, and I doubt there would be a signficant difference in traffic compared to today. Where branding is more significant is in advertising and on their website etc.


User currently offlinemetjetceo From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12311 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12):
I don't agree with that. Branding is important but not on on the aircraft livery, especially for LCCs where price is the only important variable. Passengers will choose to fly FR regardless of the livery, based only on price and schedule.

In my opinion that's generally true for all airliines. By the time passengers even see the aircraft they have made their carrier choice. Every aircraft could be painted white, black or purple, with no carrier identification at all, and I doubt there would be a signficant difference in traffic compared to today. Where branding is more significant is in advertising and on their website etc.

I completely agree with you in regards to passengers not even paying attention to the aircraft, but an aircraft livery is often the key to the marketing campaign. Whether its a tail, the whole plane, etc. the livery often plays a key role within the images and graphics used in the the campaign. Whether they truly paint their planes in that design is another thing, but an attractive livery is a great thing to have. Direct Air is a perfect example. They have Direct Air planes all over their site, but I dont believe there was ever a plan painted in those colors.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2106 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 12164 times:

Add to all of this . . .

It would be impossible to have an all metal look on the current generation aircraft. The flaps, rudder, engine cowling and many other exterior components are composite and requires paint.

Now if they want the best corrosion protection with the minimal application of paint, they would just have everything painted with one coat of primer.    .

Even then, the primer for composite may have different shade and color than the primer for aluminum.

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinepadster From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11953 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 14):

so ... ryanair planes in 1 coat of eggshell white paint then  with a big R on the tail in crayon

[Edited 2011-05-11 14:33:15]

User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4320 posts, RR: 36
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11562 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12):
Branding is important but not on on the aircraft livery, especially for LCCs where price is the only important variable

I actually think aircraft liveries themselves are important for the peoples perception. With Ryanair having faily classic schemes (and uniforms) they could portray themselves as a decent real airline. This was more important 10-15 years ago when some people thought of Low cost carriers as unsafe fly by night operations, especially after the Valujet accident especially. That would be worse if they had their aircraft in primer or something minimalistic.
Also as Ryanair is not part of some airline booking engines, they constantly need to get in peoples minds. No doubt there have been people arriving with Aer Lingus on Dublin, Air France in Marseille seeing Ryanair airplanes for the first time and only then think about checking their website or flying on them.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2178 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9682 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 5):
Paint vs bare metal is a difficult evaluation to make.
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 5):
Since US Air and Aeromexico switched over to paint, I have a feeling they saved money by doing so.

Air Canada tried this shortly after they introduced they "glacier green" livery, on a 767-200. They quickly abandoned the concept, and I remember reading that they decided that the weight and potential fuel saved was not worth the extra maintenance costs. Which is a good thing for my eyes, since i think this aircraft was the ugliest-looking flying machine ever... Bare metal and glacier green together : oops.

[Edited 2011-05-11 20:11:23]


When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7370 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12):
I don't agree with that. Branding is important but not on on the aircraft livery, especially for LCCs where price is the only important variable. Passengers will choose to fly FR regardless of the livery, based only on price and schedule.

In my opinion that's generally true for all airliines. By the time passengers even see the aircraft they have made their carrier choice. Every aircraft could be painted white, black or purple, with no carrier identification at all, and I doubt there would be a signficant difference in traffic compared to today. Where branding is more significant is in advertising and on their website etc.

The big potential of growth for Ryanair are those people who did not consider to use a plane at all in their daily lives up to now. For these non-flyers, subjective impressions are important, and nice looking shining proper aircraft are among the most important. If FR planes would look cheap, this public would think "They save on the aircraft" - something that would stop them flying.

The majority of FR flyers are very different to the majority of flyers of legacy airlines.


User currently offlineOwleye From Netherlands, joined Feb 2006, 959 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6976 times:

I do not have flying experience with Ryanair. I flew easyJet several times: the easyJet livery looks inexpensive and their branding feels inexpensive but their aircraft are great, well maintained and the staff is very friendly. Last week I flew from Charleroi and watched a huge Ryanair line up on the tarmac when embarking for my Jetair flight. The Ryanair fleet livery looked quite impressive and fancy: spic and span, their fresh snow white, banana yellow and contrasting dark royal blue shining in the Spring sun. The livery really attracted me and wanted to invite me to fly Ryanair. The Ryanair livery is convincing me to be a nice brand...though their agressive way of marketing, their cheap 'noisy' looking website and the really basic concept makes me a bit shivering to fly with them... Imagine Ryanair would have had a very basic livery design in combination with their very basic concept...I think in that case nobody would feel comfortable with such an airline brand.

User currently offlineAxelESGG From Sweden, joined Jan 2010, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5775 times:

I think it would be nice with a white scheme so we can criticize even them more!!

User currently offlineIcelandairMSP From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4745 times:

Or, if they want to save (or earn) money on a paint scheme, just have the planes be ads for other companies.

It's an interesting question, but I think the weight and cost of paint (in application and weight penalty) are very marginal against the basic issues of perception. People may be paying for a ticket price but they also want what they paid for, which is Ryanair. Approaching an aircraft that is painted all white or is all metal or whatnot brings up associations with military, governmental, and private aircraft or could be perceived as a bait-and-switch tactic; that you bought Ryanair but they're passing you off onto another contracted airplane, even though that would probably be preferable.

They've been masterful at what they've done so far with saving on costs, but some potential direct savings lead to much more consequential indirect costs.


User currently onlineeicvd From Ireland, joined Mar 2008, 2157 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4418 times:

Quoting IcelandairMSP (Reply 21):
Or, if they want to save (or earn) money on a paint scheme, just have the planes be ads for other companies

If only FR would return to the glory days of their logojets.


User currently offlineVasu From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 3896 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2856 times:

Quoting eicvd (Reply 22):
If only FR would return to the glory days of their logojets.

I'm quite surprised that they haven't... surely this is an earner! Its been a while since FR did this (on the whole aircraft, that is - I know there are a lot of Communitat Valenciana stickers at the moment!)


User currently offlineFly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3150 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2643 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Owleye (Reply 19):
The livery really attracted me and wanted to invite me to fly Ryanair. The Ryanair livery is convincing me to be a nice brand...though their agressive way of marketing, their cheap 'noisy' looking website and the really basic concept makes me a bit shivering to fly with them... Imagine Ryanair would have had a very basic livery design in combination with their very basic concept...I think in that case nobody would feel comfortable with such an airline brand.

To me, their rather classic, almost elegant livery doesn't fit the rest of their rather "tacky" branding.



Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2609 times:

Quoting Fly-K (Reply 24):
To me, their rather classic, almost elegant livery doesn't fit the rest of their rather "tacky" branding.

did you ever make the experiment to order a breakfast and a champaign onboard a Ryanair flight ( for about 18 € together )? You will have a very good service, good quality, fresh croissants, very fast and friendly , and save a fortune compared to those who charge every passenger for "full service" and give you basically 50 cents of worth...

If you know what you get and want, to fly FR can be a nice experience.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Don't Ryanair (RYR/FR) Use Acars? posted Wed Aug 2 2006 11:56:14 by TimRees
Why Don't BA Operate Cargo Aircraft posted Sun Jun 18 2006 04:32:32 by VV701
Why Don't More US Carriers Fly To Kiev? posted Wed May 11 2011 09:34:35 by goblin211
Why Don't AA Expand? posted Tue Dec 7 2010 05:29:20 by worldliner
Why Don't Manufacturers Start Their Own Airline? posted Mon Nov 22 2010 10:45:39 by eugegall
Why Are Some Aeroflot Aircraft Reg'd In Bermuda? posted Sun Oct 24 2010 16:10:21 by Numero4
Why Did EA Leave 757 On The Tail? posted Sat Jul 17 2010 12:44:33 by jetpixx
Why Don't TP And IB Fly To Asia? posted Thu Jul 8 2010 16:15:09 by cadamosto
Why Don't US Carriers Order The A380? #2 posted Thu Jun 10 2010 13:11:06 by scbriml
Why Don't US Carriers Order The A380? posted Sat Jun 5 2010 17:49:51 by ATLflyer