Official: New AA Livery - Jan/17 - Part 3

LipeGIG · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:05 am

As part 2 become too long, we are opening Part 3 for discussions in order to make easier for users with low speed internet connections.

Link to Part 2
OFFICIAL: New AA Livery Today! Part 2 (by Luxair747SP Jan 17 2013 in Civil Aviation)

Please continue to enjoy the website.

tonytifao · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:14 am

So right now, there is only the 738 painted? I think the 777 will look much better!

aeroblogger · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:21 am

The livery is hideous. I hope they keep the current US livery when the merger happens.

[Edited 2013-01-17 16:58:34]

Acey · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:24 am

Quoting aeroblogger (Reply 2):

So right now, there is only the 738 painted? I think the 777 will look much better!

At least a few 777 should have the majority or part of the paint done, with just the tail and decals to go. I agree that it looks better on the 777. I'd be surprised if they don't end up putting stripes or the logo on the outside of the 738's winglets as well. Helps to break up the monotony of the fuselage.

us330 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:33 am

I don't mind the lightening of the colors or the font, but they screwed up everything else.
I was hoping they'd keep the AA and the Eagle, but they did neither.
Whereas the last AA livery is seen as a classic brand that set a trend when it was created, this livery merely follows an existing trend of billboard logos. They missed a great opportunity to make retro cool again in the form of bringing back the lightning bolt cheatline, and make it in red white and blue.

idlewildchild · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:34 am

OK, everyone is going to think I'm nuts but after staring at it for 30 minutes I actually have already come to accept it and think it's sort of cool. From pictures I see it in flight it realize is a stylized flag with a very cool logo. I even sort of like the plainness of the grey. Weird that it grew on me that quickly.

Yes, it is clearly Americana to the MAX and that's a good thing because that's the name of the company and that's their brand, AMERICAN.

So here's where I am about 45 minutes into this - it's bold, it's contemporary and it's going to be a classic for the stylized tail. Let's see where I am after a few hours!

vishaljo · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:35 am

Sorry but why did they do away with that Absolutely Iconic Livery?

B747forever · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:35 am

Will ask again in this thread.

When will the first revenue service with the newly painted 738 take place?

boeing773er · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:40 am

Anyone wanna take a guess when a new AA.com will come out or at least when the logo up top will reflect the new logo?

Xkorpyoh · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:41 am

I am still in shock, sad and angry about this mess. This is a missed opportunity to create something truly modern, unique and creative, but we got this livery and logo borrowed from somewhere else:

Logo: I like it, but there is nothing new or creative about it. Most people see Greyhound or Air France. For somebody looking at it for the first time, not knowing that AA had an eagle as a logo, they wouldn't see an eagle unless somebody explains it. so, FAIL!.

TAIL: HORRID! Tacky! cheap! OVERUSED!... there is nothing new, modern or creative about it (the new Aeroflot and BA did a better job with their flags on the tail). The tail design doesn't match or goes with the rest of the plane and that design is not seen anywhere else in the branding inside the plane or at airport or elsewhere, so it DOES NOT BELONG THERE!!!. I love the US flag, but it is not done correctly in this tail and has been used too many times on airplanes (charter companies and ugly Family Airlines, as an example)

Branding: I like the branding at airports and inside and elsewhere, but I think abandoning the scissor eagle is a big mistake. An stylized eagle should be on a red painted engine and on the tail. The tail should have been the new logo with a subtle eagle painted in light vanishing silver (think of the BMI livery with very subtle colors showing a design in the background)

Main concern: The goal here is to show a new, modern, creative AA that attracts premium travelers. This tail translates to WALMART / cheap / tacky and goes again the image they are trying to convey, so it doesnt work. For example, one of my favorites liveries is the Spirit Airlines pixel/silver livery which I think has been one of the best ever (unique, creative and modern), but as a new ULCC they wanted to convey a new image as cheap, fun and simply, so i think the new (tacky) livery says that and it works for their rebranding. This new AA livery doesn't work for what the new AA is trying to be.

Wingtips56 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:44 am

As an AA retiree, I have to say I'm a little disappointed. But I'll get used to it, and I'm already moving on with my life.

I am more surprised than disappointed, however. While we groaned or joked about having to put a double A (AA) in everything {AAdvantage, Senior TrAAveler, AAirpass, and jokes about DelAAys, LAAte, "Thank you for calling Uh-Uh-merican", etc.), the AA was unmistakably tied to the company and more recognizable than most logos anywhere. Without that, even the frequent flyer program remaining AAdvantage will seem disconnected. I don't see the new swoosh as having that instant recognition.

Other notes: when the now outgoing livery was first displayed, the tail had the big AA but no eagle. The scissor eagle was added after a hue and cry from traditionalist employees.

On the tail .... well... it is what it is. But I think that applying the new swooshing eagle logo to the tail would have looked too much like the 1960 United Air Lines tail, and we can't have that!

On the swoosh...I think it will be fine pointing in either direction, unlike many other logos. Am I one of the few that noticed that the NW bowling shoe and final NWA liveries had the compass logo on the tail or fuselage --- properly pointing to the North West on the port side, but (so that it faced forward) pointed to the North East on the starboard side? I always thought that was amusing, not being affiliated with NW.

On repainting the fleet: it may take a while as the economics of taking a plane out of service just for repainting may not be what AA needs at this point. Most, I'm sure, will be redone in tandem with their heavy checks, when they have to be stripped anyway. On the outgoing fleet (762, MD80, excess 763, etc.), I don't see them being repainted in the new scheme unless they are do for a heavy check before they leave the fleet.
--- However, I can see a quicky job to refresh the fleet in shorter order by just redoing the tail, removing the cheatline stripes and replacing the stick-on title and logos with the new ones, with the fuselage remaining unpainted until later.

seahawks7757 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:44 am

I love the new logo, from a distance can't stand the livery but up close I love the detail in the tail. But only up-close. Otherwise the thing is a fugly eyesore from a distance.

kgaiflyer · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:47 am

I'm thinking -- a livery so imbecilicly simplistic and child-like would be *really easy* to superimpose over both AA and USAirways airframes in the event of a merger.

aacun · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:48 am

Well, now we have to wait till next week to find out what our new unifors will be like. I cant wait to get out of the blue. And I think the days are counted.

PA110 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:48 am

Has there ever been a new livery that has been well received by A.nutters? Honestly, so many people getting their panties in a bunch. Personally, I like the logo, and would have loved to see it used on the tail. But then again, I remind myself I'm just a spectator, and can go about my day fretting about things that really matter. In the greater scheme of things, I have zero input (along with just about 99.9% of A.net).

Wingtips56 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:49 am

Quoting B747forever (Reply 7):

I read in an internal publication that it may go on a roadshow to show it off around the system before taking revenue flights. But it could just be slotted into the rotation at any time anyway. They made a big deal about the special retro jets and other commemorative sub-liveries in the past, but any "road showing" was simply accomplished by publishing the dispatch routings a few days in advance, for people to run out and take a look, so that could apply here too.

OA412 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:50 am

Good God! What were they thinking? That livery is atrocious. Absolutely awful. They took a great brand and ruined it with that hideous tail design.

dfwcre8tive · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:52 am

Here's an interview with Tom Horton that describes some of the branding changes and plans:

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...anding-and-a-possible-merger.html/

spacecadet · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:54 am

Quoting vishaljo (Reply 6):
Sorry but why did they do away with that Absolutely Iconic Livery?

Because it's 50 years old.

Are you still driving a Desoto while smoking your Lucky Strikes? How many other brands can you think of that have remained exactly the same for 50 years? (And why do you think that is?)

People can argue over whether or not they like the new livery, but as far as I'm concerned there's no arguing with the decision to change the livery at all. Some people here are revealing themselves to simply be afraid of *any* change.

IrishAyes · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:54 am

Quoting xkorpyoh (Reply 9):
I am still in shock, sad and angry about this mess. This is a missed opportunity to create something truly modern, unique and creative, but we got this livery and logo borrowed from somewhere else:

Me too. I honestly could stare at this thing for hours and there isn't enough marketing video technique in the world that could possibly make this look any less unappealing to the naked eye.

The corporate logo actually looks fine, and even the scheme on the 737 doesn't look terrible. But on the 77W, I cringe. The tail is really the weak point. It really does look like the Cubana flag and that's what is going to resonate in my mind EVERY time I see the scheme on a widebody.

RIP

TSS · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:55 am

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 10):
Other notes: when the now outgoing livery was first displayed, the tail had the big AA but no eagle. The scissor eagle was added after a hue and cry from traditionalist employees.

I seem to recall the outgoing livery received a few other "tweaks" after it was initially displayed but before the rest of the fleet was painted. I can only hope the new livery is similarly refined before it goes into widespread use.

qf340500 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:56 am

i love it, much better than the "un-painted" canned-peaches thingy. Finally a livery, quite classy, american enough and still looks distinct. Well done!

AA94 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:56 am

What I find very funny is that if AA had gone the "safer" route with an Eurowhite livery, the same people would be complaining on here that AA isn't imaginative enough blah blah.

I admit I'm not a huge fan of the livery. I think the logo is well-executed - it's a modern refresh to an iconic brand. It's something elegant and different that doesn't stray too far from the safety of tradition.

The livery isn't terrible, but I'm still having a hard time reconciling myself with that tail. I think it's certainly bold and recognizable, and maybe that's what AA was going for. I believe that AA is trying to communicate that they are moving away from the perception that they are "drab" and "boring." While us avgeeks appreciate the simplicity and timelessness of the old colors, some members of the public may not.

I believe the new scheme is AA's attempt at trying to show the world that they are fresh and creative, and hopefully the service will be executed that way. This isn't your grandmother's AA anymore. It's an AA that's built upon the foundations of the days of good 'ole flying, with a modern, fresh twist.

Just my

.

Quoting vishaljo (Reply 6):
Sorry but why did they do away with that Absolutely Iconic Livery?

The composite materials on the 787s and A320 family of aircraft could not support the current polished aluminum base of the current (now outgoing) livery. Combined with their impending departure from bankruptcy, AA felt it was an ideal time to refresh the brand.

Quoting aeroblogger (Reply 2):
The livery is atrocious. I hope they keep the current US livery when the merger happens.

Doubtful. Regardless of what people seem to think on the site, AA and Futurebrand put a significant amount of time and money into creating this new identity. Considering that a combined carrier would be called American, the AA brand will stick. This isn't going to be an UA/CO situation where the United logo is kept and the airline is just called "American." This AA brand is in it for the long haul, so US can either take it or leave it.

aacun · Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:56 am

And as far as the airplane, when I finally saw it this morning, I was more shocked than anything. The old livery is the ONLY AA livery I have known. So of course its going to be a shocker to have it change. But since its introduction this morning, the more I look at it the more I like it. The tail is not as complicated as I initially thought it out to be. I really like the body of the airplane and I must say that in the video I saw, when all the airplanes ere together, it actually looked really nice. Cant wait to see our MIA terminal full of planes with the new livery.!!!!!!!

Mack8994 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:03 am

First off, KUDOS for doing a brand re-fresh. I can appreciate how difficult it can be to come up with a concept that pleases everyone. It was long overdue! I do like the body but not the tail. I know it is meant to represent the American flag but it looks very similar to Cubana's tail livery.

Just my two cents.
Cheers,
Mack8994
(aka Greg)

YYZbound · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:08 am

Good lord the drama on here is ridiculous. Wishing the airline ceasing operations because of this??

C'mon people.

I personally don't like the livery...but I'm certainly not going to react to it like I'm witnessing an execution at Birkenau!

Love it...hate it...it is what it is, and we'll get over it and move on.

And BTW....yes, my 'inside source' that told me there was no red in the livery was WRONG....and we'll all get over that too.

ROTFL

A388 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:08 am

As was asked before, I also would like to know when this 738 will start commercial service? I want to photograph it when it flies to CUR (CUR has two daily flights from MIA).

Cheers,

A388

shamrock604 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:09 am

Well, I love it.

There, I said it. The tail will perhaps take some getting used to for some.

I think it's the sort of scheme that will grow on people.

DeltaMD90 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:12 am

I can't decide which is worse, WN or this new AA livery. I think AA's is a worse design but WN's is a plane-full of bad whereas it's just AA's tail that's offensive to my eyes (IMO.)

Then again, I didn't like DL's paint job at first but now I really like it. Widget beats all though

tayser · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:13 am

I actually think it's quite a handsome livery and good integration with the eagle into the logo.

B747forever · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:15 am

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 15):

Hopefully it wont take too long before the bird hits LAX. Will for sure be out there to see how it really looks like

captainstefan · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:31 am

Apologies if someone commented on this in an earlier part of the thread-

My observation: front looks fine, much better than I expected, to be honest.
Tail? Ecccch. IIRC the Flag after which THIS ENTIRE BRAND is stylized has 7 red stripes. This tail has 6. How on earth does that make sense? Especially when the tail as is (6 stripes) looks unfinished. Why not add another stripe at the bottom?

contrails · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:35 am

I have one word for the new livery: "Ugh!"

The tail is just plain ugly. The front end, the logo, reminds me of Greyhound. Why change it? They had a livery that was well-recognized around the world.

There is an old saying that I'm reminded of: If it ain't broke don't fix it.

murchmo · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:36 am

Think it looks terrible. The US airways (new livery) has always looked best to me. Elegant and royal. But this looks like a bad blend of trying to be forward thinking with that weird swooshy thingy in front that is possibly a logo? Ugh, looks out of the 90s or something. Simple is always better. They could have done something significant and great. Shoot that guy who did a case study and did AAs rebranding for a school project did a better job, especially with the logo. Oh well.

ATLTPA · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:38 am

Horrible! The tail looks like Walt Disney's vomit. The Sno-Cone eagle isn't much better.

Interesting perspective (shared by some on A*net) from this Phoenix (home of USAirways) TV station, though: http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/story/20...1/17/american-airlines-debuts-logo

ATLTPA

martinrpo1 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:39 am

Tom Horton: “Early on in this process when we embarked the different process of restructuring, I said to our people, what we’re going to do here is we’re going to set out to build American’s flag carrier, an airline that could compete on the level of any airline in the world. When I think of flag carriers, I think of the great companies of Oneworld, our great partners like British Airways, Cathay Pacific and Qantas. That’s the sort of quality and look to the customer that we seek, and we think the new look is very much in line with that.”

Their strategy is to covert American into America's flag carrier. That explains why they decided to use the flag. The more I see the more I like it. It is patriotic, fun, elegant, and stands out from the crowd. Give it chance! I bet it is going to become many people's favorite livery!

IMissPiedmont · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:40 am

It's a Greyhond bus! Count me as a not fan.

deltaflyertoo · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:42 am

Quoting PA110 (Reply 14):
Has there ever been a new livery that has been well received by A.nutters?

I've read every reply here and elsewhere on the net. You are right, we are tough audience. However what makes this different from other critiques is the large number of people who are of the opinion of how amateurish and off brand it is. While other logo rollouts people just find them boring or unoriginal. So big difference.

Motorhussy · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:42 am

Love the impassioned pleas for the status quo to prevail, it's very comical. Unlike many, it would seem, I really like the new livery; reminds me of USAF Korean War era jets.

cloudboy · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:42 am

I like the logo, even if it does remind me of car parts. But I can't get over the tail. It's like they tried to incorporate US Airways already compromised livery.

I am not good at graphics, and I know this is a one off request, but could someone PLEASE make a mockup of that livery but with the old AMC car logo on the tail? I think that would look really cool!

seahawks7757 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:47 am

Quoting murchmo (Reply 33):
The US airways (new livery) has always looked best to me.

Are you kidding me? The Blue scheme was a million times better. The current one is just boarding.

Quoting A388 (Reply 26):
s was asked before, I also would like to know when this 738 will start commercial service? I want to photograph it when it flies to CUR (CUR has two daily flights from MIA).

AA aircraft are trackable on FlightAware.com

Mat1776 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:55 am

The new tail design is as friendly to my eyes as a #100 grit sand paper.

I hope the new tail design would soar high into the Big WAAste Basket in the Sky.

And quickly.

Xkorpyoh · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:02 am

What if AA had 3 different designs and allowed employees and travelers to vote for their favorites, then decide?
Wouldn't that have been better, specially for employees to feel included and show them that they matter?

AirCalSNA · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:09 am

Interesting how the subtle grey stripes on the new AA tail seem to echo the subtle grey stripes on US Airway's fuselage.

flyguy89 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:09 am

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 37):
However what makes this different from other critiques is the large number of people who are of the opinion of how amateurish and off brand it is. While other logo rollouts people just find them boring or unoriginal. So big difference.

Of course it's "off brand", because unlike any of the other livery roll-outs, AA's livery was older than most of the people on a.net. I like the new livery, but I'll admit there was a shock value in it for me simply because it was, at first, hard for me to wrap my head around the fact that this was AA's new livery...the polished silver look has been AA's look for my entire life, so of course any significant change is going to be shocking. Compare this to UA who's cycled through 4 different liveries in the past 25 years, DL who's gone through 4, US at 3, or NW who went through 3. AA's was clearly the oldest unchanged livery, so anything new is going to shock people.

aerokiwi · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:13 am

Quoting PA110 (Reply 14):
Has there ever been a new livery that has been well received by A.nutters?

Several.

You have a few categories (based on general feedback on here that I've seen) though, such as:

Complete overhaul successes: Saudi Arabian, LAN, Thai (especially the metallic purple), Air Fiji, Aerolineas Argentinas, Turkish, Delta, Hawaiian, Avianca, Aeroflot, Asiana
Complete overhaul failures: JAL, Finnair, AA, Malaysia, Aeromexico, Germanwings
Complete overhaul undecided: TAP, Virgin Australia, Garuda, Asiana, Southwest, Air India, TACA, Air Canada

Tweaks successes: KLM, Air France, Alitalia, Qantas, Singapore
Tweaks failures: Swiss, Air NZ, Virgin Atlantic, Ethiopian
Tweaks undecided: Continetal/United

But lately we've had some serious duds, AA being the latest. Just atrocious and with a bleh grey fuselage!

777way · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:19 am

Is Virasb Vahidi Iranain origin?

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 31):

I think the blank space at the bottom suggest that another stripe was meant to be added but may have looked too much on the already awkward llooking tail so they left it blank which looks quite odd.

alfa164 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:19 am

I have no objection to the body of the plane - with changes to composite materials coming, there had to be a change, and the new livery looks like a modern (if somewhat generic) update of American's style - but tail is (how do I say this politely?)... hideous. I remember the past DL ("wavy gravy") tail; despite its detractors, it reflected the look of the American flag in a far better (and far classier) way.

The "AA/Eagle" logo - new or old - has been an iconic symbol of the airline. I don't understand why it wasn't incorporated into the tail. The new one - dare I say it - looks more like and update of the US Airways tail, not an AA plane.

EA CO AS · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:26 am

DISAPPOINTED!!!

PHX787 · Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:30 am

I am noticing one trend here:

The guys who really dislike the livery tend to post often on how the livery would never change

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net