Lufthansa new livery...yuck

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
989
Location
Cincinnati, OH and Port Charlotte, FL
Lufthansa went with safe & boring for their new livery...navy and white with only one little residual yellow square on the fuselage. I miss the "yellow bird" on the tail already. Wonder how much it'll cost to repaint their fleet, and how long it'll take.
 
It's very plain and basic

new-lufthansa-livery-1002x360.jpg
 
Don't jump to conclusions. The new color scheme may be more fuel efficient.

Remember the '60's-'70's multicolored Northeast jets to Florida? The paint was heavy and wind resistant!

I thought we were supposed to complain about the price of checked baggage and the absence of peanuts.
 
Love that plane though. Boeing 747-8i.

Actually it doesn’t look too bad. Lufthansa tends to be conservative
 
Looks kind of like FedEx paint scheme .

American Airlines a few years ago did a terrible design with new paint jobs on their aircraft.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Looks kind of like FedEx paint scheme .

American Airlines a few years ago did a terrible design with new paint jobs on their aircraft.


I agree. It looks overdone. Most airlines now have poor livery designs. I like Alaska’s Eskimo on the tail. It’s a classic and I hope they don’t change it.

Qantas just changed their kangaroo to a modern version and customers are calling it a sacrilege.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Looks kind of like FedEx paint scheme .

American Airlines a few years ago did a terrible design with new paint jobs on their aircraft.

American wanted to stick with the familiar polished aluminum look, but you cannot polish some of these newer aircraft such as the 787 and the upcoming 797. So, they decided to paint it as close to the familiar polished look as they could get.

As for the livery, American allowed the decision between two designs to be made by the employees. The designs were the current one and the older AA emblem with an eagle silhouette. 60% of the employees voted to keep the current designs, a move supported by upper management as they are focusing heavily on moving away from old AA and USAirways logos in order to help employees move past the merger (which is still an obstacle for some).
 
Originally Posted By: JustN89
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Looks kind of like FedEx paint scheme .

American Airlines a few years ago did a terrible design with new paint jobs on their aircraft.

American wanted to stick with the familiar polished aluminum look, but you cannot polish some of these newer aircraft such as the 787 and the upcoming 797...


I think a clear coat that shows the carbon fibre weave would be perfect.
 
Is it too much to ask that they have a 2nd color other than the navy blue? A little yellow on the tail would liven things up. That's my only objection. The look is clean and simple other than that, which I find appealing.

I read an article recently about the alleged identity of the Alaska "Eskimo"...is that even a socially-acceptable way of describing someone?!?
 
Last edited:
Earl Scheib for planes? I am sure the proper prep and paint to the mfgs specs will bring to light that again aircraft is a Latin word for expensive. I couldn't imagine the cost of a paint job. Then the cost to paint a fleet. !
 
The hospital where my wife works changed their logo recently, and costs involved with rolling out the new logo were staggering...signage, uniforms, printed materials, a coffee mug and duffle bag for every employee...I can't imagine the expense involved with rebranding an airline...
 
Originally Posted By: CincyDavid
Is it too much to ask that they have a 2nd color other than the navy blue? A little yellow on the tail would liven things up. That's my only objection. The look is clean and simple other than that, which I find appealing.

I read an article recently about the alleged identity of the Alaska "Eskimo"...is that even a socially-acceptable way of describing someone?!?
I doubt that any one with a life would care even an Inuit.
 
Originally Posted By: Linctex

It's very plain and basic

new-lufthansa-livery-1002x360.jpg



Guess even the stripe down the windows cost money


And this is a real plain plane
 
Originally Posted By: PimTac

Qantas just changed their kangaroo to a modern version and customers are calling it a sacrilege.


their "modern version" kangaroo - looks like a weird alien
 
The decorative exterior coating on one of those 747 aircraft weighs about 600 lbs. For the airlines that used polished fuselage surfaces, they still had to apply a non-decorative coating to all composite surfaces such as flight controls and engine cowlings. There was a massive weight and cost savings for the aircraft that had polished surfaces but the upkeep ate up any form of monetary benefit.

We always used Crown Metro paint for our aircraft. By the time we sprayed the fuselage with yellow zinc chromate primer and applied a full base of white gloss, we'd have $150,000 in a paint job when you factor for labor and livery.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: CincyDavid
Is it too much to ask that they have a 2nd color other than the navy blue? A little yellow on the tail would liven things up. That's my only objection. The look is clean and simple other than that, which I find appealing.

I read an article recently about the alleged identity of the Alaska "Eskimo"...is that even a socially-acceptable way of describing someone?!?
I doubt that any one with a life would care even an Inuit.
I agree. Way too much worry on "socially acceptable" these days.
 
Maybe its just me but what difference does it make? I mean nobody sees the thing when its doing what its supposed to be doing, flying.
 
Originally Posted By: xxch4osxx
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: CincyDavid
Is it too much to ask that they have a 2nd color other than the navy blue? A little yellow on the tail would liven things up. That's my only objection. The look is clean and simple other than that, which I find appealing.

I read an article recently about the alleged identity of the Alaska "Eskimo"...is that even a socially-acceptable way of describing someone?!?
I doubt that any one with a life would care even an Inuit.
I agree. Way too much worry on "socially acceptable" these days.


I have Cherokee ancestry and I don't care, personally. Most others I know don’t, either. There are bigger things to worry about. Use “Native”, “Indian”, etc., as long as it’s polite.
 
Last edited:
I see them right out the window from in the lounge … this is not hard to look at … pretty clean look:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top