|
   |
Home >> Forum >> No Paint... Civil aviation forum
No Paint...
Return to the forum index - Post a message for this thread
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 14 Jun 9:33 |
|
| |
Hi,
Is it really that the No Paint liveries are more interesting for the airlines because the paint is heavy, so without it they are saving fuel...
And what do you think about those liveries?
Personally, I think AC's 767 without paint looks ugly like AA's planes! But AM's 777s are not as ugly as the other, but they are beautiful...
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of penny - Sent 14 Jun 10:06 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of MANCMAN - Sent 14 Jun 11:19 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 14 Jun 11:43 |
|
| |
Hi, thanks!
The BAe is painted, but in white. Cathay an JAL are not wearing paint but will this really help them to save money (on fuel, because in paint, it's sure, they will save!)?
Thanks,
Regards,
Hagop
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of MANCMAN - Sent 14 Jun 13:56 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 14 Jun 16:58 |
|
| |
Lol, they prefer their planes to look ugly!
I think to company who can really fit the bullet livery is NWA, because their plane are already grey.
But don't do this NW, you planes are great like this, don't try a crazy thing!
Lol!
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 14 Jun 17:01 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of Trevor - Sent 14 Jun 21:37 |
|
| |
Aircraft without paint on long haul will burn less fuel than those with paint, and there is a weight to the paint they use on the aircraft. However, if not buying factory new, and pre-polished, key is to look closely at the aircraft's usage and how long you expect to have same within your fleet.
Air Canada recently did an experiment with fin # 613, a Boeing 767-200ER. This aircraft was stripped of all its paint, the tail was then painted in the new livery, the engines cowlings were painted and the logo was put on the side. For Air Canada, they informed when they analysed the cost of stripping the existing paint off and treating the metal ( chemicals to remove the paint, polishing, the man hours and time aircraft out of service ) against the time frame Air Canada still expects to have its 767 in service ( as these will be replaced by B787's ) they realised the savings in fuel were less than the cost to strip. In additional, Air Canada informed this look proved very unpopular with flying public. Bear in mind also the metallic aircraft is not an aircraft that is maintenance free. The surface has to be treated and polished.
I could not find an example of this aircraft on this websight, but in case you have not seen what this particular aircraft looked like, you can do so by clicking on:-
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0971778/M/
I say looked like because ironically fin # 613 is actually in this week for a full paint job in the new Air Canada liveries.
So in answer to your question, yes without paint ( due the weight of the paint itself ) the aircraft will burn less fuel. If the aircraft is in heavy use on long haul, those savings over time will add up. However, if this is part of your costs savings to off-set against higher fuel costs, it is by far better to purchase the aircraft this way to begin with. For Air Canada, they have found weight savings to reduce fuel costs in other areas, plastic wine bottles instead of glass, new lighter dispensing trolleys in the cabins. In addition the seats being used on airliners today are also vastly different to as recently as 5 years ago, i.e. much lighter.
all the best, Trevor
PS I agree with you on the new look NWA with the paint rather than metallic it is modern and classy !! Also neat is Air Canada's retro A319 Trans Canada Air Lines click on:-
http://www.airfleets.net/show/?pic=5373
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 15 Jun 14:09 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of N196UA - Sent 27 Jun 5:48 |
|
| |
Well, here's my opinion on no paint liveries,
Some liveries like AA's actually look good because the metal is polished and taken care of (or at lest looks like it has) unlike AC's 767 which was in bare metal which was about the ugliest 767 I've ever seen. Typically no paint liveries are pretty boring or ugly but the trade off is usually some savings in weight and fuel.
regards,
N196UA
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of hagavaf - Sent 27 Jun 10:14 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post a message for this thread
|
|
Messages must be written in english. Messages written in an another language will be deleted.
Post only messages related to the civil aviation, and do not insert any ad. Your IP is logged.
You can custom your text by using the following codes
[B]Your text[/B] : Text in bold
[I]Your text[/I] : Text in italic
[U]Your text[/U] : Text underline
[S]Your text[/S] : Text striketough
To include an Airfleets.net photo, use the code [P]Photo number[/P] |
|