Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will ANA Remove The Big 787 Titles Off Their 787'  
User currently offlineTC957 From UK - England, joined May 2012, 813 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 12954 times:

Just wondering, with all the negativity in the public's minds now about the 787's, that ANA have thoughts about removing the big bold 787 titles off their aircraft.

46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 12876 times:

Implying your average Joe will remember the difference between an A320 and 787 after a few months of the aircraft back in the air.  

But really.



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3199 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12743 times:

Quoting KPDX (Reply 1):
Implying your average Joe will remember the difference between an A320 and 787 after a few months of the aircraft back in the air.

Well the DC10 is still remembered in the public eye for being grounded as Laker and BCAL were both flying them post 1979.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12603 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting TC957 (Thread starter):
Just wondering, with all the negativity in the public's minds now about the 787's, that ANA have thoughts about removing the big bold 787 titles off their aircraft.

They will, eventually. But it's more likely to have been removed as a result of a new coat of paint when it's due rather than a knee jerk reaction to the grounding.

NH is the launch customer for the 787. Why wouldn't they market that to its advantage?



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently onlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 785 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12524 times:

It will be good to see those jumbos flying again.

User currently offlineTC957 From UK - England, joined May 2012, 813 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12526 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 3):

Because the flying public reading about and seeing your aircraft grounded is hardly a marketing advantage.


User currently offlinecarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2946 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12515 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 3):
Why wouldn't they market that to its advantage?

It is no longer an advantage here in Japan.
There was a lot of negative press coverage when the grounding took affect. Not much news since but there will good and/or bad press once service re-starts.


User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2671 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12478 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 2):

But the difference is that hundreds of people were killed onboard the DC10s



אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3199 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 12203 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 7):
But the difference is that hundreds of people were killed onboard the DC10s

The last place you want a whiff of a fire is on board an aircraft, the fact this machine was certificated and entered service before this issue(s) arose is a genuine concern. Having listened to the SR111 tapes and being rather aware of Valuejet, Nationair and Air Canada to name a few who have lost people as a result of a fire, it's a major worry IMHO.

The 787 is a huge leap in technology, usually someone forgets something in the journey and often people die.


User currently offlinehotplane From UK - England, joined Jul 2006, 1038 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11971 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 7):
But the difference is that hundreds of people were killed onboard the DC10s

Only a matter of time...



?
User currently offlinesandyb123 From UK - Scotland, joined Oct 2007, 1073 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11871 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hotplane (Reply 9):
Only a matter of time...

Until what? I think you're attitude is completely outdated if you think that it's only a matter of time until a 787 drops out the sky?

Ok, they've had more than their fair share of negative press, but I think the concept that a 787 is bound to drop out the sky at some point is scaremongering at best.

Look at the 777, over 20 years in the sky and not one fatality. The only 'crash' was the BA short landing at LHR and everybody walked off the plane.

Aviation is safer than it's ever been. Fact.

Sandyb123



DC3, 727, 737, 744, 753, 777, A32X, A345, A388, ERJ145, E190, BaE146, D328, ATR72, Q400
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2671 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11791 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 8):
The last place you want a whiff of a fire is on board an aircraft, the fact this machine was certificated and entered service before this issue(s) arose is a genuine concern. Having listened to the SR111 tapes and being rather aware of Valuejet, Nationair and Air Canada to name a few who have lost people as a result of a fire, it's a major worry IMHO.

Of course, but the 787 hasn't crashed, so I don't think people can't associate in their mind DC10 and 787.

Quoting hotplane (Reply 9):

Only a matter of time...

Why are you so negative? I think the 787 will not fly again until a real solution is proposed



אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlinehotplane From UK - England, joined Jul 2006, 1038 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11745 times:

No doubt there will be something else after this problem is sorted.


?
User currently offlinesimairlinenet From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 911 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11575 times:

I think for a precedent, we should look at ANA's initial 777-300s.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dennis Lau



How long was it until ANA repainted these into standard? Just 3-4 years.


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3199 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 11300 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 11):
so I don't think people can't associate in their mind DC10 and 787.

Given it has joined the rare list of planes being *grounded* for safety concerns, we're already there.


User currently offlineCalebWilliams From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 305 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 11271 times:

Quoting hotplane (Reply 12):
No doubt there will be something else after this problem is sorted.

As there always is. Just remember to look before you book, if it says 787, you don't have to fly it.



Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
User currently onlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4915 posts, RR: 43
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 11230 times:

What is interesting is that if you look into the past for aircraft that had a design flaw, and that flaw caused accidents, say the Lockheed Electra or the DC-10 for example, there was a huge public resistance to flying on those types. And that was before this information age where everyone knows everything.

Then, the "name" of the aircraft was either removed from aircraft or advertising, like the DC-10, or it was changed to "Super Electra" or "Electra II" ... and that was before people had instantaneous information at their fingertips.

Shoot, my 80 year old mother asked if I was going to fly that "Plastic airplane with the batteries that will melt all that plastic"!! I am ... and I am anxiously awaiting my course date, looking forward to it ... but I didn't tell her that!

So I would not be surprised at all if 787 badging was removed from aircraft on their re-introduction, and it was done quietly and without fanfare.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 892 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11073 times:

Quoting hotplane (Reply 9):
Only a matter of time...

What is wrong with you? Its almost like you are hoping something will happen to the 787.
Air travel is safe and it continues to get safer every years So there is an issue with the battery that doesn't mean that the entire aircraft is now deemed unsafe and that it's only a matter of time before one fails. That is a horrible thing to think and say and it is something no one on a.netters should ever want to see happen.

The 787 will return to the sky and I don't see any reason why ANA or any other airline should try to hide the fact that passengers are onboard a 787. Before the passenger ever boards the plane if they are paying attention they will know in advance what type of plane they will be flying on so removing the 787 badge or the dreamliner badge from the fuselage serves no purpose.


User currently offlinesankaps From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2255 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10868 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 3):
They will, eventually. But it's more likely to have been removed as a result of a new coat of paint when it's due rather than a knee jerk reaction to the grounding.

My gut feel is they will remove the 787 titles a lot quicker than they did the 777 titles. Indeed I believe JAL has painted over their logo on their 787 which is grounded in Boston; while not the same exact thing. it shows their concern about bad PR around this grounding.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 3):

NH is the launch customer for the 787. Why wouldn't they market that to its advantage?

Because it is no longer a marketing advantage, and indeed if the average pax sees big 787 letters on their aircraft, they may have a negative reaction at least for some time until fears ease.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10763 times:

I am sure this problem will be taken care of, just hope it´s the last major on the 787. We have all the snags waiting on the A350 to look forward too after the A380 and the 787 is done  

User currently offlineYYZYYT From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 947 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 10637 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 16):
Shoot, my 80 year old mother asked if I was going to fly that "Plastic airplane with the batteries that will melt all that plastic"!! I am ... and I am anxiously awaiting my course date, looking forward to it ... but I didn't tell her that!

That's the thing... for whatever reason, the 787's troubles have got people's attention, as far as I can see.

For example, my wife has INSISTED that she (and I and the kids) will never fly on a 787*...

Very different reaction than on prior occasions. When AF447 happened, we experts here at a.net were debating how the aircraft had failed... yet despite the media coverage, she happily crossed the Atlantic in A330 (she even asked me what the aircraft was, said "huh" and boarded without another word...).

Trying to figure our how or why the herd stampedes in one direction but not another is tricky, but when it happens it can stick (like it did with the DC 10). Hopefully, looking back the 787 will not suffer in the same way in the public mind.

YYZYYT

*longhauler, I'll try to take one of your flights - don't tell her!!  


User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3611 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 10479 times:

Quoting sankaps (Reply 18):
Because it is no longer a marketing advantage, and indeed if the average pax sees big 787 letters on their aircraft, they may have a negative reaction at least for some time until fears ease.

Especially in Japan, where the public expects stuff to work properly, and where it's therefore a comparatively big story when things don't. For all the press the 787 issues have gotten in the US and Europe, multiply that by about ten-fold for Japan, where the emergency landing happened, after all. The image of that ANA 787 sitting on the tarmac with slides out is now burned into the minds of the Japanese.

It's no surprise to me that JAL completely removed their titles from the 787 at Boston for now (though it makes me wonder if they're doing the same for the 787's in Japan). I would be surprised if ANA flies the 787 again without removing the "787" titles from the tail first.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineglideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 9908 times:

Quoting TC957 (Thread starter):

Just wondering, with all the negativity in the public's minds now about the 787's, that ANA have thoughts about removing the big bold 787 titles off their aircraft.

Yes.



To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 892 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 9267 times:

Quoting sankaps (Reply 18):
Because it is no longer a marketing advantage, and indeed if the average pax sees big 787 letters on their aircraft, they may have a negative reaction at least for some time until fears ease

Should airlines then no longer tell their passenger what type of airplane they will be flying on when they purchase a ticket online? Should they then black out all the windows at the departure gate to keep customers from seeing the type of plane they will be boarding and should they remove 787 from the safety information card in the seat back pocket? All of these measures could help ease customers fears as well. Oh and lets no forget the safety information video can not mention that their are 8 exit doors on this Boeing 787 aircraft

Perhaps if airlines kept the customers in the dark about the type of plane they will be flying on throughout the entire process it could help ease customers fears because people only recognize a 787 if and when they see 787 on the side of a plane.

As much as the 787 was in the news this past January I don't think removing the 787 badge from the side of the aircraft will make much difference. If people are comfortable with the aircraft once it is returned to service then they will fly on it those who are not will then choose to fly a on different plane or with a different airline.


User currently offlinesankaps From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2255 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 9212 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 23):
Should airlines then no longer tell their passenger what type of airplane they will be flying on when they purchase a ticket online? Should they then black out all the windows at the departure gate to keep customers from seeing the type of plane they will be boarding and should they remove 787 from the safety information card in the seat back pocket? All of these measures could help ease customers fears as well. Oh and lets no forget the safety information video can not mention that their are 8 exit doors on this Boeing 787 aircraft

No, why are you making such preposterous suggestions? There is a difference between having the aircraft type on the safety instruction card (though perhaps there is no requirement to have the aircraft model on it), and having it on billboard titles on the body.

[Edited 2013-02-21 12:00:37]

25 drgmobile : And then there's the Comet... But seriously, it always surprised me that the DC-10 did so much better commercially than the L1011 while Lockheed got
26 sankaps : The L1011 lost the market to the DC10 when Rolls Royce (the sole supplier for L1011 engines) almost went BK, delaying the introduction of the L1011 b
27 jayunited : It's not preposterous, your original suggestion implied that passengers would be at ease if they didn't see 787 on the side of their aircraft. I don'
28 sankaps : It is just common sense not to have "787" in billboard font on the body of the aircraft as long as it has a negative connotation. Why add salt to the
29 longhauler : Perhaps not, but history shows that airlines have done just that. Removed the name of an aircraft from the side of the aircraft after negative circum
30 ukoverlander : I think Boeing should give serious consideration to dropping the "Dreamliner" nickname from their 787 marketing. At this point, after debacle after de
31 hoons90 : Isn't that what AA did with their DC-10 "LuxuryLiners"? Remove the DC-10 titles after AA191.
32 jayunited : Perhaps you are correct and the 787 image has been tarnished but lets say ANA removes 787 from the side of their aircraft what happens the moment the
33 Post contains images KPDX : This I agree with.. The Dreamliner name is so dreadful, anyways... I like Boeing 787 much better.
34 davidho1985 : Agree, we are not talking about removing every "787" wording onboard and hide the fact that the flight is operated by a 787. The billboard "787" is c
35 Wingtips56 : Yes, that is correct. They just said "LuxuryLiner" after that. And even though it was 3 years after 191 before the first DC-9-80 came into the fleet,
36 Post contains images longhauler : And this is the ship we'll fly!
37 Viscount724 : The L-1011's major problem is that there was no model fully competitive with the DC-10-30. "Shrinks" like the L-1011-500 are rarely very successful w
38 carpethead : After their first heavy maintenance visit.
39 Mcoov : I would think that that enormous third engine in the tail would clue people into what kind of airplane it is. Not many other types have an engine qui
40 comorin : Time and again we hear from a.netters that the flying public is unaware of the type of aircraft they fly on. Is there any published research to back u
41 CXB77L : Maybe for some, but not for me. I wouldn't hesitate to fly on a 787. I'd fly on one today if I could. The fact that it is grounded now is a good thin
42 Post contains images SXDFC : Maybe Boeing should be making the 787's more like this one..
43 AF185 : What would be the point of having this title in the first place then? I think we underestimate the number of people whom actually know what airplane
44 Rara : They should really consider this. After all, 7x7 is still an amazing brand, instantly associated with Boeing, American aviation, the jet age and so o
45 sankaps : In fact the negative connotation from the DC10 also led to McDonnell Douglas moving to the "MD" naming scheme for the MD11, and DC9-80 ownwards (whic
46 drgmobile : Just two weeks ago I was having a discussion with somebody from Miami who was telling me how he flew a Dreamliner to Germany, which I figured just unl
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...
787 - Will We See The Documentary? posted Mon Sep 26 2011 14:31:09 by FlyingCello
Will Boeing Replace The 787-9/777 With A New Line? posted Mon Aug 16 2010 22:43:11 by panais
Will LAN Use The 787 For MAD-FRA Flight? posted Thu May 1 2008 00:39:53 by LHStarAlliance
Where Will ANA Fly Their 787? posted Tue Jun 19 2007 07:57:47 by Vulindlela744
What Will The Actual 787 Look Like? posted Wed May 16 2007 18:10:53 by Deaphen
Will We See The 787(-3) At DCA? posted Wed Dec 27 2006 00:26:28 by D L X
Where Will NWA Use The 787? posted Sat Aug 5 2006 13:53:13 by DTW757
When Will BA Order The B-787-800, B-747-ADV? posted Tue Oct 11 2005 04:43:03 by KC135TopBoom
Just Curious When Will ANA Firm Up Their 787 Order posted Tue Aug 23 2005 03:21:44 by Georgiabill
Will The Numbers 787 And 797 Ever Be Used? posted Tue Dec 31 2002 01:40:03 by BR715-A1-30