Throughout the course of aviation history, we have seen some truly spectacular airplane liveries, like British Airways' Landor and KLM.

However, on the other side of the coin, we've had more than our fair share of ghastly paintjobs, like the HARIBO Tuifly livery, the BA Ethnic liveries, DeutscheBA, Eva Air's Hello Kitty livery, S7 and everything a Thai airline has ever painted on the side of an aircraft.

Am I missing any out? Do you know any trauma-inducing airline liveries?

Delta's livery is okay, but the fuselage titles are way too small.
That is a livery that is begging for billboard size DELTA titles
along with a XXL size widget logo.

Other than that, the United/Continental livery needs a re-design
like yesterday

Don't you think we've had enough United liveries? I am fine with the current one.

Spirit's newest concoction essentially amounts to giant flying Sprint billboards. I'm surprised they (Sprint and Spirit) haven't partnered yet in some way.

Any livery so devoid of imagination such as MU, IB or the new LATAM livery deserves to be on the infamy list. You have an entire aircraft worth of billboard to design on, you can call on top designers/artists across the world and you can represent your country if you're a national carrier, but even if you're an LCC, you can give a positive and premium image. Why not go for something eye-catching, elegant and classy? It doesn't even have to be overly colourful, FJ's livery is fabulous even though it's mostly white. Same with Hawaiian.

Other than that, the United/Continental livery needs a re-design
like yesterday[/quote]

Me thinks this is going to open a right can of worms...but your right!

I actually like the Thai liveries!

United could do with a refresh.
And on that note, Copa can too.
JAL needs one too. I like that they brought back the crane, but the all white looks so bland.
I don't like the new Iberia livery either, it's bland.

Some recent rebrands have been disappointing like LATAM and Air Austral.

There are a few out there that I think are ok, like Delta, and Alitalia which could use bigger titles.
I think the small change to the KLM livery is a bit weird, but I think it takes getting used to.

At least there have been some good changes, like Air New Zealand and Air Malta!

What do you guys make of the Orange KLM livery?

fry530 wrote:

I actually like the Thai liveries!

United could do with a refresh.
And on that note, Copa can too.
JAL needs one too. I like that they brought back the crane, but the all white looks so bland.
I don't like the new Iberia livery either, it's bland.

Some recent rebrands have been disappointing like LATAM and Air Austral.

There are a few out there that I think are ok, like Delta, and Alitalia which could use bigger titles.
I think the small change to the KLM livery is a bit weird, but I think it takes getting used to.

At least there have been some good changes, like Air New Zealand and Air Malta!

I am with you on Thai! Love it!
Generally hate the Chinese liveries...
United has other problems to solve. The livery is the tiniest of their issues!
JAL has..well.. it has NO livery.. it's an airline with only a red crane on the tail! The new Air Austral design is a disaster. The generic "eurowhites" are a flying shame to the brains of the mean beancounters who agreed to pay money to a design consultancy company that didn't do a job at all..
Iberia is a NON-livery. They were classy and instantly recognizable: now they look tacky and cheap.
Azores is also pretty dramatically irrelevant: that big dark green whale is not a livery to me, it's just an applied mega decal that makes no sense and does no justice to the flow of the lines of the airliner. It's totally incongruous.
LATAM is pretty horrid too. I totally dislike the black of NZ..where are the blues, greens and turquoise??? Yuck!

Kudos to Air Malta: colourful, rich in "heritage imagery" and fun to look at.
The new Alitalia is pretty good, but the old Landor one was classy and just perfect IMHO: it just did not need a redesign. Again, it's a company that is battling lots of internal issue, so the livery should be the least of their worries.
The new KLM is so-so. It looks more moderns and has joined the "wavy" club a bit like TUI..but looks less classy!
HOP is a shambles of silly letters on a bland blank white tube... c'mon!

The newest Air Europa livery looks like a mockup from a leasing company. Thumbs down.

IMHO it would be nice to see a DL refresh. Not a complete change, just some small revisions. The "Delta" belly logo looks great though!

oldannyboy wrote:

fry530 wrote:

I actually like the Thai liveries!

United could do with a refresh.
And on that note, Copa can too.
JAL needs one too. I like that they brought back the crane, but the all white looks so bland.
I don't like the new Iberia livery either, it's bland.

Some recent rebrands have been disappointing like LATAM and Air Austral.

There are a few out there that I think are ok, like Delta, and Alitalia which could use bigger titles.
I think the small change to the KLM livery is a bit weird, but I think it takes getting used to.

At least there have been some good changes, like Air New Zealand and Air Malta!

I am with you on Thai! Love it!
Generally hate the Chinese liveries...
United has other problems to solve. The livery is the tiniest of their issues!
JAL has..well.. it has NO livery.. it's an airline with only a red crane on the tail! The new Air Austral design is a disaster. The generic "eurowhites" are a flying shame to the brains of the mean beancounters who agreed to pay money to a design consultancy company that didn't do a job at all..
Iberia is a NON-livery. They were classy and instantly recognizable: now they look tacky and cheap.
Azores is also pretty dramatically irrelevant: that big dark green whale is not a livery to me, it's just an applied mega decal that makes no sense and does no justice to the flow of the lines of the airliner. It's totally incongruous.
LATAM is pretty horrid too. I totally dislike the black of NZ..where are the blues, greens and turquoise??? Yuck!

Kudos to Air Malta: colourful, rich in "heritage imagery" and fun to look at.
The new Alitalia is pretty good, but the old Landor one was classy and just perfect IMHO: it just did not need a redesign. Again, it's a company that is battling lots of internal issue, so the livery should be the least of their worries.
The new KLM is so-so. It looks more moderns and has joined the "wavy" club a bit like TUI..but looks less classy!
HOP is a shambles of silly letters on a bland blank white tube... c'mon!

I like the new KLM, and the orange B777-200 variant, I just didn't like looking at that dark blue band between the light blue and white on the side.

I like the new TUI wavy ones, they are certainly a whole lot better than the hideous old block coloured ones - yellow for TUIfly and blue for everyone else, they were horrible.

Landor is probably the ultimate livery imo, but that statement shouldn't detract from the Union livery which is pretty great. Thank god that outlasted those irritating ethnic tails.

fry530 wrote:

I actually like the Thai liveries!

United could do with a refresh.
And on that note, Copa can too.
JAL needs one too. I like that they brought back the crane, but the all white looks so bland.
I don't like the new Iberia livery either, it's bland.

Agreed on the JAL. I had nothing against that red tailed livery they had for a while, but I know people really like the crane.

With United, I wish they would have just kept the Rising Blue scheme, but I think all these years later the CO livery still looks very sharp. I'd like to see it stick around for a while yet (I know many probably don't share that opinion). An effective refresh would be as simple the wavy line they have going on their 787s, though IIRC they would need to talk to Boeing about that.

I still cringe when I see the new AA livery, truly terrible...
Finnair also looks like a 3 year old did it.

Shouldn't this thread be moved to Travel, Polls and Preferences thread? This merely discusses people's subjective opinions on aircraft liveries.

I think some of you are misunderstanding some of the livery refreshes such as KL and CX (since these two airlines pop up more here). These liveries are very sensitive to change because they are worldwide reknowned brands that you can't change too much. Subtle changes is the key with these liveries. If you would change KL, CX, AF, BA, SQ and the likes too much, it will lose its recognition to their customers. Just look at BA and their world tails campaign. This was a total disaster not only because they used different tail logos but also because no one could recognize BA on those liveries. I mean really, how do you change a livery like AF, KL, CX, SQ in a big way and keep it recognizable to their customers. It's just not possible and this is why you will always see very subtle and small changes to these liveries. KL and CX did an excellent job at tweaking their livery just enough so you will still recognize them but also see an update of the livery to make it a bit more modern and more appealing to it's customers. How can you change the livery of LH and BA, really? These liveries just can't be touched too much, otherwise it will lose its appeal to their customers. Just look at BA in the 90's (world tails...).

I do agree with some livery changes that have been just plain awful. IB and LATAM in my opinion are the worst livery changes I've ever seen and I still hope they will change it again to something more identifiable with their previous liveries. There's just no unique-ness in those liveries. AV was also criticized (even by me) but they actually did a good job in updating their previous livery and merging the TA and AV brands quite well. LA and JJ were liveries to me that they just should have kept instead of changing their names to a ATM machine from a bank (LATAM).


A388

all this whining and no pictures.. also unfortunately the complaints are old and well trod..
I had anticipated something new...

andr16b wrote:

Throughout the course of aviation history, we have seen some truly spectacular airplane liveries, like British Airways' Landor and KLM.

Agree.

andr16b wrote:

... ghastly paintjobs, like the HARIBO Tuifly livery, the BA Ethnic liveries, DeutscheBA, Eva Air's Hello Kitty livery, S7 and everything a Thai airline has ever painted on the side of an aircraft.

Strongly disagree, except for the Hello Kitty trash (and all those other Asian toy planes). I seem to be one of the few people who really like the BA ethnic livery (apart from that they replaced the Landor scheme). S7 isn't too bad, too.

The all-white JAL scheme is a joke.

My rule of thumb is: Cheatline = good; Euro-white or anything that's too swooshy = bad.

China Eastern is probably worse than Iberia or LATAM IMO. The most boring font possible, and an all white aircraft.

Every time I see the new Iberia or LATAM or China Eastern liveries, I want to vomit. I used to hate the current Spirit livery, but it's grown on me because at least it brings colorful diversity to different airports, and really does make them the taxi cab of the airlines.

Air Canada's 1993-2004 scheme was a real let down from its red stripe livery.

New LATAM is bad, but I think it would look pretty nice with some relatively minor fixes. Extend the purple swoosh down the belly of the aircraft, and give it a busier fuselage (either billboard titles or a slogan).

There's always hope. For example, Avianca's "summa" paint scheme from a few years back was awful, but the current one is OK.

bmacleod wrote:

Air Canada's 1993-2004 scheme was a real let down from its red stripe livery.

Heh, I actually really like the tail.

Where do I start?! LOL

United ... bring on a top-to-bottom brand refresh. Actually, there was a pic of a 757 with titles that were serif, thought it looked fresh and unique. (The former Continental font)
LATAM ... uninspiring
Chinese Airlines ... see LATAM
Scoot
Air New Zealand ... I saw an A320 with the black tail and titles and white fuselage (it's in the db somewhere) and no fern on the back. Simple, clean, loved it. The mix of Mauri and fern seem mismatched.
SAS ... looking grimey

just my two cents.

Norwegian -- looks ok till someone calls it the 'used tampon' livery, then you'll never see the same way ever again.

Sorry for spoiling it for you!

I just love this kind of thread.Let's "bury" them all. First of all,have you noticed how many airline signs just don't look like airline signs at all? Some look like supermarket products,for example Vietnam airlines sign looks like it came from a handkerchief box.The same goes for China airlines a.k.a. "almond blossom airlines". You see you can't have anything you like on a tail.It has to be "stylized" which means it has to have some movement in it. I agree that Iberia is non-existent. I say that KLM looks like an ice-cream cone or should I say "orange sorbet". As for "Fanhansa" or Fathansa or Funhansa, even bad taste should have some limits. On the contrary, I do like the new American.The new color,the new eagle,it looks like Wild West. I say not bad at all. We will revert...

What about WOW Air's purple birds? Something for getting "eye-cancer" or acceptable? Definetely eye-catcher, like the Icelandic Football...

Chinese airlines esp Air China- terribly uninspiring, doesn't reflect the developed, modern and powerful state that Beijing has become.

UAL777UK wrote:

Other than that, the United/Continental livery needs a re-design
like yesterday

Me thinks this is going to open a right can of worms...but your right! [/quote]

He's very right and you're very right

AirbusOnly wrote:

What about WOW Air's purple birds? Something for getting "eye-cancer" or acceptable? Definetely eye-catcher, like the Icelandic Football...

WOW purple is gorgeous. Spirit yellow is ghastly. LA/MU are coma-inducing. New KA feels too much like a copy of TK. CA is still stuck in the 50s-60s. AY can use a slightly smaller font. KLM new orange-blue is amazing, as is the pitch-black fern on the NZ birds. AD has an artistically stylized map of the nation. Fiji is crisp and eye-catching without being "in your face". LH/QF/SQ are timeless designs, so don't change anything that isn't broken.

SWISS is one of the rare cases in which Euro-white actually works well.

andr16b wrote:

I like the new KLM, and the orange B777-200 variant, I just didn't like looking at that dark blue band between the light blue and white on the side.

The smaller band of dark blue is much better than the thick one they used to have, but the wave looks odd to me. It works on the 787, but I think isn't quite as good on other AC. The 'Orange Pride' livery is stunning IMHO.

santi319 wrote:

I still cringe when I see the new AA livery, truly terrible...
Finnair also looks like a 3 year old did it.

Agreed! The tail is garish, obnoxious, and a bad reflection on the US flag.

Can't say I am a fan of JS either.

Revelation wrote:

Norwegian -- looks ok till someone calls it the 'used tampon' livery, then you'll never see the same way ever again.

Sorry for spoiling it for you!

*applauds such sadism*

bmacleod wrote:

Air Canada's 1993-2004 scheme was a real let down from its red stripe livery.

I really kind of liked that one.

In this thread: people forget taste is subjective.

I hate liveries that lack any story or idea behind them, it's very obvious with newer rebrands like Iberia, China Eastern and LATAM. Older liveries, in particular from legacy carriers, tend to have history behind them so it's easy to follow the evolution of the livery and brand and what it represents.

I hated the new Finnair livery until I saw it in the snow, it all made sense when you see how clean the design really is and how it's meant to blend into the Finnish landscape, especially at winter.

gzm wrote:

I just love this kind of thread.Let's "bury" them all. First of all,have you noticed how many airline signs just don't look like airline signs at all? Some look like supermarket products,for example Vietnam airlines sign looks like it came from a handkerchief box.The same goes for China airlines a.k.a. "almond blossom airlines". You see you can't have anything you like on a tail.It has to be "stylized" which means it has to have some movement in it. I agree that Iberia is non-existent. I say that KLM looks like an ice-cream cone or should I say "orange sorbet". As for "Fanhansa" or Fathansa or Funhansa, even bad taste should have some limits. On the contrary, I do like the new American.The new color,the new eagle,it looks like Wild West. I say not bad at all. We will revert...

The logos that don't look like they belong to airlines usually come from national airlines which prefer to use a national emblem rather than a typical "flying" image of some sort. In the early days these national airlines opted to have their national emblems designed with wings to represent the flying aspect of their business, the Qantas kangaroo had wings, the Aer Lingus shamrock had wings and Aeroflot had the winged hammer and sickle. Over time most of these logos lost their wings and went through a minimalist phase, Aer Lingus for example went for a wingless and rather plain looking shamrock in the 80s, by the mid 90s they rebranded to what we see today which is a more natural, slanted shamrock to make it look like it was flying along with the aircraft or blowing in the wind.

Airlines like Norwegian are younger and have gone down the predictable route of an aircraft flying around it's titles, it looks like something out of Microsoft clipart and was common with low cost airlines, even EasyJet and Ryanair had cartoon versions of their aircraft as logos for a short while.

The current Air NZ one does not work on the Dash 8 fleet. Fern vs Koru fighting for space on the tail, resulting in a big, imbalanced blank space. Combined with the fern's form not complementing the white/black split line curve and the tiny titles (more imbalanced blank space), it doesn't work for me. It also feels to have lost any character, as the black/silver fern combination is generic and common, while the teal reflected a major portion of air travel history in NZ and the colours seen about that country.

https://img.planespotters.net/photo/687 ... 687859.jpg

The LAN to LATAM transition isn't great either. Hopefully they can improve, as LAN was nice

Delta's sucks.

They need to dump the burning widget and go back to the pre-Ron Allen widget.

Easyjet's new scheme.....very cheap and nasty. The airlines that are more interested in longevity and service do not change liveries, like KLM and Lufthansa.....KLM's recent tweak is pretty unnecessary but never mind.

Even American Airlines new, (ish) scheme will date in a couple of years. Its about brand identity, customer service and continuity.

American's is simply the worst.


They went from a classic look with their polished fuselage to this cheap, nasty and amateurish 'livery'


Unbelievably bad.

santi319 wrote:

I still cringe when I see the new AA livery, truly terrible...
Finnair also looks like a 3 year old did it.

Personally I think Finnair's livery is spectacular. It is very simple yes, but there something about that dark metallic blue on white that just pops. And the stylized "F" on the tail is perfectly proportioned for every aircraft type. For me one of the best liveries out there, I wouldn't change a thing about it. Now for ugly how about NOK Air, surprised no one has mentioned them yet. God those things are hideous.

I'll say I wasn't a fan of LY's pre-1999 livery, especially on its 742s at the time as it made the plane look larger than it actually was. It worked best on their 707s and 752s given their thin frames.

I also didn't like TS's older livery (before they added "Welcome" in numerous languages to the back half).

Max Q wrote:

American's is simply the worst.

They went from a classic look with their polished fuselage to this cheap, nasty and amateurish 'livery'

Unbelievably bad.

They could trash the fussy (and doubtless expensive) tail, and put the Greyhound (sorry I mean Eagle) on there.

Seen it full size a lot in Auckland recently, as they have a big billboard campaign introducing their return to NZ. It actually works at the larger size.

For me, nothing will ever beat the old BOAC blue with the golden speed bird, or the simple elegance of the Pan am 707's and 741's. I know that airlines never will, but bring back the cheat line I say!

Unpopular opinion I can tell, but the old American OneWorld titles on an unpainted fuselage was something that should have never taken flight.

Airliners.net new livery is awful lol

China Easterns latest.. Awful.

Funny that this hasnt been mentioned yet: Austrian. Their new livery is just too boring, they should change the font for austrian to a more modern one and make billboard titles

Probably going to catch hell for it, but the can of worms has been opened so here is my opinion.. Personally, I can deal with the livery of every single airline in the world, (minus WOW Air, that purple gives me a headache) just PLEASE dont make me keep looking at the HORRENDOUS new Spirit paint scheme. I HATE that yellow more than I have ever hated a branding before. That being said, now to nitpick the others. American would be ok if they redid the tail. The livery looks good until you see the tail. United needs a complete rebranding. Name, livery, product offered, etc. Delta I like, I wish they would go back to anything pre wavy-gravy, Southwest's new scheme seems almost toy-like but that can be fun in a way. I like the new AS livery, its small changes to their classic, storied livery are just what it needed. More of a refresh than a new livery which is good every now and then. I agree on Norwegian now that its been mentioned, and will never look at it the same again. I agree on the issues with JAL, Iberia, & Finnair, just way too plain. I like the BA livery and not sure how I would feel about them going back to Landor but I could probably get on board with it. I LOVE the retro, 80's-ish look of Air China. Same for China Southern.. EgyptAir, Air New Zealand, Etihad, I think are pretty cool. Air Canada's current, eh... Not sure about that one. I'm enjoying seeing a return of the Eastern Hockeystick. I think that about covers the ones I see the most.