Love it. Alone it is only okay, but I love the images of the AA planes lined up at the terminal- makes it striking.

I am laughing at everyone who is saying they should have just placed the logo on the tail. If they had done that then you will all be screaming about AA's lack of creativity and how it is just "another logo on the tail with billboard titles."

But its okay- I know people on A.net don't like change and are only initially happy if it either has cheatlines or it looks like they splashed buckets of paint all across the fuselage. Remember how much everyone here hated the DL livery when it first came out?

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 97): Wow, that new paint job looks like ****.It looks like the bastard child of Greyhound and Aeroflot.

LOL. It's like it was an after thought, or the budget for rebranding got hit very hard in bankruptcy.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 122): AA should have taken the Air France approach and made subtle tune-ups to the livery rather than start over from scratch

  . Agreed. The modified font and logo, really freshened it up markedly.

The logo is fine. A dark blue would have been better. The fuselage, would look nicer with a silver type of paint, like someone mentioned, similar to what NW had.

What are they going to do with the winglets? The logo would fit perfectly on there. Or are they going to cut corners and not do that?

The tail looks like it was designed in a begining needle point class where they were smoking pot and became distracted. Horrible. I thought IB's new scheme was bad. AA's is a disaster just fromt that nasty tail. Did they forget the US flag has stars on it?

Are there any AA employees @ headquarters who read these type of comments? I really think they need to amend, etc., that tail, add the logo to the winglets....

http://www.wfaa.com/news/American-Ai...es-unveils-new-logo-187287631.html

American Airlines unveiled its new logo and look Thursday in a video. (Credit: Jason Whitely/WFAA)

My main issue is the tail. It looks so last minute. When the revised logo was originally posted on the other thread, I thought THAT was what was going to appear on the tail. I think that would have been much more desirable.

The worst livery I have ever seen. Let us pray they cease to exist before many aircraft get damaged by this paint job.
Please, keep the name American and the paint job of US Airways.

I think the biggest problem with this livery is that it will be outdated before they even finish painting the fleet. Most of the modern airline schemes feel like they fit in this era (there are certainly exceptions), but are refined enough or simple enough to still look relevant in 20 years. Even the UA scheme, while 'dated' is refined enough that it still works, and would even more with a slight refresh of the globe icon.

The more I look at the tail on that AA 737....it's just so, so, so busy. There is way too much going on. It's glitzy, it's 'fresh' but like anything that is trying too hard to be 'in the now' stylish, it will be out of style before it even hits the store shelves. I think if they toned it down a little, lose the gradients and the multi-toned stripes, maybe it would work.

Quoting Polot (Reply 201): But its okay- I know people on A.net don't like change and are only initially happy if it either has cheatlines or it looks like they splashed buckets of paint all across the fuselage. Remember how much everyone here hated the DL livery when it first came out?

Gee, thanks for painting everyone with your wide brush!  

People actually DO like change. Positive change. If you go back to the speculation threads, hordes of folks were looking forward to a change to the 44-year-old design, even to the point of coming up with new livery examples of their own.

As far as Delta is concerned, I personally don't like the use of 'negative space', where you have to imagine what should be there, but isn't. That's simply personal taste in design. But even I have to admit that DL got it right in that you know that the tail has a widget on it. How many people will look at the new AA tail and see two letter As? Not very many, I would gather, which is one of the many reasons that makes the new design a dud on delivery.

The tail is what kills this livery.

If they take the eagle livery on the front of the fuselage and slap it on the tail...problem solved.

I suspect, however, the flag livery on the tail has to do more with an integration of the USAirways flag logo into American's new look...a preview of things to come?

baw716

Quoting dfwcre8tive (Reply 203):

Is it just me or is the grey on the 773 a different color than the metallic-ish one on the 738?

I will say that AA did a first class job of keeping this all under wraps; very tight ship being run in their branding/PR/marketing departments!!

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 209): Is it just me or is the grey on the 773 a different color than the metallic-ish one on the 738?

I noticed that as well. The 737 base color is definitely more appealing.

I think I'd like it more if I weren't a little offended that they butchered the flag like that. There are no stars, which are the esscence and importance of the American flag, and they somehow thought it would look better with stripes in their place? Sorry but no. Just no.

As for the rest, it's just a ripoff. Cubana tail, thinned-out Greyhound logo, okay font. Definitely not what i want our namesake airline represented as. now I'm gonna face scrutiny for these remarks, but that is it.

Not knowing what to expect, I needed a minute to comprehend the new livery. In the end, I quite like it.

A few things:

The high-res 737 picture shows the visual line created by the top of the tail’s leading edge and the fore edges of the red and white strips does extend to the bottom of the fuselage (the grey under the flag and aft of the line is different from the fuselage’s grey) (as mentioned by L0VE2FLY, Reply 184). This separates the tail and aft fuselage from the rest of the fuselage, like QF’s red tail and aft fuselage does. As a result, the flag does not seem to cut into the fuselage and just randomly end, like I thought it did in the renderings.

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 69): It looks like the tail stripes are layered...there's 2-3 strips within each stripe, some of which have a gradient? I'm not sure I like this, it comes off as very busy up close...

Quoting thrufru (Reply 180): Those were my thoughts, too. Now that the high resolution photo of the 738 is posted, I'm a bit more keen on it. The gradations on the vertical stabilizer look a lot better than the solid blue and red stripes I'd imagined.

I too liked the flag a lot more when the high-res 737 picture helped me see the layers and gradients. They make the flag less “cheap”/bland and more of something interesting to look at. They also draw my eye to the flag’s blue color, which I like along with RedTailDTW. The layers and gradients also make the tail look 3-D and sort of like a stained glass window. Lastly, the different colored blue strips also remind me of the blue, two-tone, striped tails from UA’s “Battleship” livery.

Do all the colors and quadrilaterals on the tail remind anyone else of B6’s “mosaic” tail pattern a little?

PA727, Reply 252, Part I:
"The only other nit I have to pick is with the billboard American title. From the 737 pictures in the post, I get the sense that the lettering is not wide or bold enough and that the windows obscure it somewhat. Particularly in the picture of the approach at DFW, it looks like the windows keep American from being read clearly."

That is what I thought too! But B6 seems to be happy with their billboard titles. I think it will be easier to read once people become more familiar with the new livery and associate it with “American”. I bet someday you could paint a word that starts in “A”, ends in “n”, and has similar letters (like “Armenian”) and it would take awhile for anyone to notice! 

There was a moment of revulsion, then panic.

But it's passed, and I feel OK about it. I actually like the tail, but the new "logo" ahead of the A seems to be an Afterthought.

AA 77W en route to DFW right now from LAX. Spotters be ready!

It's hideous. Absolutely friggin hideous... If they find the second grader that designed it, they should take his lunch money.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 215): AA 77W en route to DFW right now from LAX.

That appears to be AA's regularly scheduled 767-300, not a 777-300.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...6/history/20130117/2045Z/KLAX/KDFW

Quoting nwcoflyer (Reply 74):

Quoting n797mx (Reply 178):

Do you have any info on where 670AA will show up? So far we have 2 aircraft in the livery with a total of 4 to be in the livery by e end of January...

Wow, that was a BIG letdown! the new livery just doesn't look integrated to my eye. the front logo looks fine, but that paint job on the rear stabilizer and rear section of the fuse just looks overwrought and too busy.

Quoting PacNWJet (Reply 45): Although the overall livery is very different, the first thing I thought of when I saw the tail design was this: View Large View Medium Photo © Antonis Panayotatos

To me the tail design is more reminiscent of Colgan Air:


View Large View Medium

Photo © Frank Robitaille


To me, the tail design is an abomination and needs to be ditched and the eagle needs to be on the tail. It looks like the tail of a charter carrier or low cost airline, not one of the flagship airlines of the United States. The American flag motif on the tail is associated with US Airways and should remain so. Now someone with some Photoshop skills put the US Airways tail design on the new AA livery.....

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 215):

Flight #2246 is the LAX AUS flight, today it is operated by Nose# 3AR. Not a 777 300 ER.

Next Aircraft to get painted looks to be nose# 7LB left for VCV from DFW yesterday at 2024 and arrived at 2209.

[Edited 2013-01-17 13:35:32]

Quoting keny156 (Reply 221): 2246

2446, not 2246, is the flight pictured. LAX-DFW.

In my opinion, the fact that the background colour is NOT eurowhite is a plus. This new livery does modernize the branding and creates a fresh new look for the airline. The tail scheme is much more "in your face" than the outgoing tail design. My overall verdict: 6.75/10

N.B.: I cannot help but notice that the curved white triangular shaped thing separating the blue and red fields in the logo resembles the dorsal fin of an Orca whale going up an escalator.

~CGKings317  

I am in what seems to be the majority of people that are going: "WTF" is going on with that overly busy tail.?!?

I like the cleaner look of the font, and it only took a minute to give a positive nod to the logo. I tend to agree that the font could be a bit darker.

But that tail... it just doesn't relate to the rest of the aircraft. Individually, I don't mind it, combined... but, I have two thoughts:

Maraget Thatchers reaction to BA's World Tails comes to mind:

http://tinyurl.com/anm84jt

What is even more amusing is where they actually might have got the inspiration for their tail! I tend to think it was from Fort Whoop-Up,
a fort that was built to stem the flow of Whiskey Trading between Montana and Southern Alberta in Canada... hmmm... (the fort was south of YQL)

http://tinyurl.com/a9xgpmy

Coincidence? Anyways, my thought is the use of the streamlined logo would have looked a lot better on the tail, perhaps with some gradiant to it. The tail as unveiled is just WAY too busy.

I guess we will all have to grin and bear it, and get used to it like we did Delta.... *sigh*

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 222):

AA flight 2246, if being flown by 767 nose number 378

So..... let's take a look at AA's present (and future) fleet and see who will and will NOT be getting the new livery:

YES:
777
737
Airbus
787

NO:
MD-80s

MAYBE:
767-depends on how long American plans on keeping them around.
757-same as the 767

Here are 2 photos (from link posted above)

View Large View Medium Photo © Christian Eggers

View Large View Medium Photo © Andy Egloff

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 217): Quoting PHX787 (Reply 215): AA 77W en route to DFW right now from LAX. That appears to be AA's regularly scheduled 767-300, not a 777-300. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...6/history/20130117/2045Z/KLAX/KDFW

That may explain why it's not showing the a/c type on FR24, despite my filters. Thanks for the clarity.

I like it! I think they needed a change and this is just that, something fresh and new. Whilst the tail is 100% to my tastes, the rest of the touch points are great and well needed.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 72): Are pilots, F/As, mechanics, and CSAs getting new uniforms? What happens to the crest on pilot hats? The current crest is based on logos AA used prior to the 1968 rebranding.

All articles state that in time new uniforms will be released. Lets hope for something nice stylish and formal, and quicker then the UA uniform which we still haven't seen!

Looks weird, with only the tail having colors. As though the aircraft is just wearing underwear and nothing else  

Quoting flyabr (Reply 219): Wow, that was a BIG letdown!

WOW, you actually hit the point that all of the nay-sayers wanted to but didn't.

I personally like it, HOWEVER... typical A.Netters build up sooo much hope and hype that when it finally arrives, they are all pissed off/disappointed because they spent so much time glamorizing "what could be" and then upset and or furious that it didn't "blow their socks off" and of course have to rant on about how bad it is! ( I am not saying you are one of them, just that you actually hit the perfect phrase that others couldn't verbalize).

Regards,
135Mech

huge disappointment .. they went from iconic to something so much less .. a fake flag on the tail and the mighty eagle has been trashed .. huge disappointment ..

We spent millions on design team, but settled on a pre-school drawing.

We are going to spend millions on re-painting and merge the company with someone else.

Most people seem to love the logo but hate the livery. I love the logo but am wondering what a US Airways tail might look like on this. Photoshop, anyone?

Took me a while to realize that the tail is a styalized Americcan flag. Very clever.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 215): AA 77W en route to DFW right now from LAX. Spotters be ready!

Well, wouldn't someone @ LAX have gotten it?......or did you mean VCV, were the 738 was painted?

After looking at the photo in post 203 I can honestly say this has got to be the worst livery in the air. Anybody else spot the Greyhound standing to the left of the A. Look close you'll see it. I hope AA didn't pay more than 5 bucks for this design,if they did they got cheated.This is one ugly girl that should have been kept in the closet. AA going to have to black out the terminal windows so it doesn't scare the passengers before they board it.

Probably nothing could have lived to the speculative hype of the past few months.

Having said that I'll give it a C+

Oh well can't wait for the new UA livery.   

Quoting ckfred (Reply 150): I think the original Saul Bass livery for United had the logo next to the name, and again on the tail. Even on the battleship gray livery, there was the logo next to the words "Worldwide Service" under the cockpit windows, if I remember correctly.

You're right it did...

Quoting steex (Reply 156): I'm not sure I understand why having the logo on the plane twice would look silly. A very large number of airlines have that exact arrangement. Off the top of my head, I know that all of AC, CX, DL, KE, KL, LH, and US do this. There surely are others.

...and you're also right, so allow me to clarify that I was also taking the size of the logos on the tail and fuselage into account   The old UA logo was nowhere as prominent (and large) on the fuselage as you now find it in the new AA paintjob, and furthermore, the fuselage itself got more livery features than in AA's new livery.
LH also has a small (unicolour) version of their logo on the nose, as well as on the tail, but you generally wouldn't find a livery that uses the logo on the tail and fuselage in about the same size. Even on CX, the fuselage logo is a lot smaller than the tail logo.

IMHO, resizing the new American titles and logo on the fuselage and then putting the logo on the tail as well would give you a very bland-looking plane with only the two logos standing out from the grey/silver. Basically the equivalent of an uninspired Euro-white livery, except using grey/silver instead of white.
So I like that they dared to put some colour on the tail and didn't go for the OhSoFamiliar "Titles with small logo on forward fuselage, logo on tail, unicolor fuselage" approach, which when taken to extremes gives you liveries like this one
https://www.airliners.net/photo/SunEx...d=8ae1b7da0806f4b5a7fae71ea661f409
Nice to see they dared to be different, particularly given that they knew that any redesign - however necessary from a branding/image standpoint - would upset a lot of people.

I love the new AA livery. Its a huge upgrade over their current livery.

Interiors on the 77W's in J cabin look great as well. Although the color scheme inside should be called "50 shades of Grey"

I've been resisting to comment but I might as well add my 0.02c... Neutral view on the NEW long awaited scheme...
Hopefully the airline moves forward with the rebranding...

EK413

As a long time employee, i understand the need to modernize. The use of the letters AA has gone from one of pride to one of embarassment. So I get the reason to get rid of that, but to me it looks flat and the first thing I thought of was Aeroflot.

Stripes on tail design are too thick, if they had been a little thinner it may have not looked so tail heavy and perhaps somewhat better.

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 179): I think we are seeing the beginning of another way to cut costs. Think about it United took the existing Continental paint job and simply removed "Continental" and put "United" in its place. Here we have only a fleeting reference to an airline identity for a new scheme. This afterthought is basic and removeable enough to be changed should it become necessary

AA went for something much bolder than UA did - it presumably cost a lot more, too, although that's not saying much, as UA probably spent all of $200 on getting advice on (thankfully) changing the font of the United titles that replaced the Continental titles.
I also don't see how the new logo and titles are any more or less removable than any other kind of title/logo design, irrespective of whether you find it aesthetically pleasing or not. Even if they had kept a more conservative/traditional variation of the A/A logo with the eagle between the two A's, that would have been very easy to replace with something new should the need arise.

As things stand with the new branding, I have very good reason to believe that very little indeed would change about the look of the planes and general CI should US and AA really merge.

I don't like it. The only thing that works for me is the size of "American" and the nearby insignia. Other than that, it just looks so boring and washed-out (trading smart and classic for muted and dull). While I really don't like the design of the tail, I could probably warm up to this look if they used darker reds and blues to make them "pop" out from the light gray. Even the color of "American" is too muted and boring. Sorry, AA; not a fan of this.

I find it interesting that they chose the logo to be the one that's on a right-facing airplane. I thought most carriers with mirror-image logos on their aircraft, used the on that's on the other side of the aircraft.

e.g. The UA tulip logo on tickets, menus, baggage carts, UA Center, etc, is the one shown on the side of the aircraft that's pointed to the left.

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 1):

Agreed mate... With all the Euro white schemes these days, I'm starting to get bored. VA, QF, JL, AY, LH... it's starting to be like looking at a fleet of white Toyota Corolla's each with different plates and wheel covers... "Same Same, but different"    Thank god they did not have the new livery applied to a Euro-white base.

Anyway, I really like the new AA "do"... It's new and shiny...

Cheers,

PX

It's unfortunate that so many people on this board dislike the new livery; this thread is starting to wreak of geriatrics and the unimaginative. To me, this is by far and away the best livery of any U.S. carrier, and one of the more edgy, modern, and symbolic liveries in the sky. The Flying Symbol and large-format lettering are spot on, and the tail is definitely acceptable. It's also a livery that should require less maintenance from a visual perspective, considering the base color. With time I think the negative sentiment will dissipate (in correlation with the UA "tulip" sympathizer-types). Can't wait to see all the tails in a row one day.

Quoting rj777 (Reply 227): MAYBE: 767-depends on how long American plans on keeping them around. 757-same as the 767

With the new Airbus's coming in the next year or two I don't see many 757's being painted but the 767-300's are going to be in the fleet past 2015 so they most likely will

Quoting N766UA (Reply 185): It's a brand, not freakin' conceptualist modern art.

Funnily enough, I recently saw a design documentary that had - among others - an interview with Massimo Vignelli, the guy that designed AA's previous livery and Corporate Identity. He could go into great lengths explaining every element of the design - and he also pointed out what a bold step it was in the 60s to go with the simple, clean-cut lines of the livery and particularly the Helvetica font. Far from everybody liked it back in the day as it was seen by many as being too modern, too simple (and he would have liked to be more radical, not even using the eagle).
If you want to check the documentary out, it's called "Helvetica".
Aviation geeks be warned that the only other aviation reference in it, besides AA, is an interview with Paula Scher, who was involved in UA's pre-merger corporate identity design (although she doesn't talk about that in the documentary).

As for "conceptualist modern art" - if you talk to any designer worth their money you'll realise that branding is exactly that, but on a commercial scale.

[Edited 2013-01-17 15:02:34]