747Teach From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 176 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1514 times:
Dripstick: The exact weight of paint would be hard to determine, as some is lost during application. And of course, paint schemes vary widely, from complete coverage to only stripes or logos. From my personal experience, a full coverage paint job on a 747 consumes about 60 gallons of primer with reducer, and 60 gallons of topcoat with reducer. When applied with electrostatic paint equipment, most of the paint goes onto the surface, not into the surrounding air. And one manufacturer's high-solids paint weighs about 10 pounds per gallon. So the weight would be somewhere in the vicinity of 1200 pounds.
When new paint jobs are applied, some operators will remove the old paint, and prime and paint back out from the metal surface. And some operators will only prep the existing paint surface, and apply the new paint over the older paint. Of course, successive layers of paint eventually mean more weight to carry around. As most paint removal chemicals will attack the fiberglass surfaces, the fairings are often just prepared by scuff-sanding, and the new primer and paint applied over the old paint. I've worked on many fairings that had 12 to 15 different layers of primer, anti-static, and topcoat applied during successive paint jobs.
The best technique to find out how much the paint job would weigh would be to weigh the aircraft just prior to the initial paint application, then reweigh the aircraft after the paint job is complete. Boeing has probably done this at least once, and could perhaps supply an accurate figure. And just for your interest, the last full paint job on a 747 I was involved with cost approximately $147,000, for materials and labor. Regards,
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1467 times:
>>from complete coverage to only stripes or logos.<<
But even with stripes and logos you have to paint the white background on.
I heard that AA saves millions of dollars of fuel each year because of the small amount of paint they use.
I also heard red is the most expensive color for some reason.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3410 posts, RR: 50 Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1436 times:
From a previous post, same subject, last summer:
===========================
And for those who continue to claim there is no cost savings by not painting airplanes, the following from AA Pilot Q&A forum:
Painted vs. Non-Painted
Q: Over the course of a year, what is the estimated fuel savings operating an AA non-painted 757 vs a painted one like United for example? What's the weight difference?
A: Sorry for the delay. The weight difference between a polished and a painted B757 is about 200lbs. With about 120,000 annual departures, this translates into about $300,000 annually in savings in fuel.
===================================
The above numbers were for AA's 757 fleet only.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
747Teach From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 176 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1397 times:
PanAm747: "But even with stripes and logos you HAVE to paint the white background on." Gee . . . . guess we'd better call American, Eastern, Flying Tigers, Northwest Cargo, et al, and tell them to get their paint guns out.
Red high-solids, low VOC polyurethane paint may be slightly more expensive from some suppliers due to the additional solids (pigment) in the paint to prevent fading. Regards,
ILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1288 times:
They tell kids on kid shows that a 747 paint job adds the weight of a hourse to the plane.
BWIrwy4 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 940 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1262 times:
Airplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1258 times:
I once read that most barns were originally painted red because it was the "cheapest" paint.
In the real world, red is very hard to maintain. Some contains iron oxide (also known as "rust") to enrich the color. Unfortunately the highly reactive mixture oxidizes and becomes dull very easily.
ILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1251 times:
sorry
that is a horse
damit thats too short
damit still too short, lets try again.........
Ups763 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 199 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1253 times:
I believe American Airlines, with regards to it's MD-80 fleet, saves about $380,000 in fuel from not painting its fleet. Not sure about how much it costs for corrosion proctection though.
Penguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 975 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1164 times:
this is from an old boeing article "paint versus polishing"
Summary Though the wieght of paint adds to fuel consumption, the fuel-cost savings offered by polished surfaces is outweighed by the cost of maintaining the polished surfaces. However, because this difference is a very small percentage of operating cost, many operators decide to paint or polish their airplanes based on marketing and environmental impact considerations. Some believe that a distinctive image can best be achieved with a full paint scheme, while others believe the image can be projected best by mostly polished surfaces. The availability of safe solvents and facilities that comply with environmental laws can also play a role in the choice between painting and polishing.
JOliver From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 140 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1086 times:
I saw a trivia calendar once (hardly a great source, but..) proclaiming that an
MD-11 weighs 300 lbs more with paint than w/o
Clear skies to all --JaO
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29366 posts, RR: 61 Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1063 times:
We have a copy of an internal UPS newsletter at the office here called The UPS DISPATCH. I assume we stole it from them.
Anyway in the edition we have Volume 8 Number 6 they have one of those little triva facts boxes. This one has the weight of the paint they use on their aircraft.
It is as follows.....
767 105 gallons of paint weighing 750 pounds
757 90 gallons of paint weighting 650 pounds
727 78 gallons of paint weighting 565 pounds
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Vez From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 85 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 1020 times:
The weight of the gallons of paint given in the thread are WITH the solvent. The solvent evaporates, right? So the dried paint must weight less I suppose.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Dec 2001, 2364 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 136 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 176 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5754 posts, 
sorry
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
