It is hard to imagine AA planes looking the same for another 45 years as the previous look which seemed more timeless. Does AA Marketing actively look for ways to tweak their look?

I love the picture of the 777 on the aa.com homepage (third image which displays or you can advance to by clicking on the right arrow). I covered the stylized eagle with my thumb and wondered does this look better? (Without it seeing it photo-shopped it's hard to decide.)

If so the flag tail design could become the logo, where on all marketing material an aircraft tail is placed beside American instead of the annorexic eagle.

United did something very similar in the 1960s or early 1970s when they removed the four stars from their jets which were on both the tail and fuselage. It is obviously less expensive than coming up with a completely new look.

A.netters are consistently asking if AA will change/throw away their new branding. They won't. The new brands are bland, but this one was complex and expensive.

I love the new brand. It's fresh and fitting, and its wonderful to look at!

As for evolution, why would they?

Can we have fantasy/hypothetical types of questions in this forum moved to a new appropriately named forum?

Boeing778X wrote:

As for evolution, why would they?

The American Airlines Eagle has already evolved several times over their 83 year history, and the trend has been it is becoming smaller and less recognizable as an eagle. It is hard to imagine further shrinkage and/or obfuscation of the current one, so perhaps it will disappear altogether. The tail makes a very bold statement as you say, and could one day be their sole brand identity.

http://logos.wikia.com/wiki/American_Airlines

afcjets wrote:

If so the flag tail design could become the logo, where on all marketing material an aircraft tail is placed beside American instead of the annorexic eagle.

Sounds like a great way to increase costs with no revenue upside to offset. So long as aircraft are kept clean and maintained, liveries have no tangible impact on revenues and are often only regarded by enthusiasts and employees.

The AA on the tail was unique, you could spot it easily at an airport and along with the polished fuselage, it was the best trim in the business. Now with the 787 and the airbus planes that cannot be polished, we have lost an iconic logo that stood out for many years. The new tail looks like a rushed patchwork done by a 3rd grader. Just my 2 cents worth.

cheapgreek wrote:

The AA on the tail was unique, you could spot it easily at an airport

I'd argue the new tail it a lot easier to spot and identify then the AA tail.

winginit wrote:

afcjets wrote:

If so the flag tail design could become the logo, where on all marketing material an aircraft tail is placed beside American instead of the annorexic eagle.

Sounds like a great way to increase costs with no revenue upside to offset. So long as aircraft are kept clean and maintained, liveries have no tangible impact on revenues and are often only regarded by enthusiasts and employees.

Of course it has no tangible impact on revenues, but the intangible impact (not saying the one I presented) is huge, otherwise airlines and companies would not pay large amounts of money not only to the companies that create their image, but the cost of implementing the new image too.

It would be less expensive for an airline like American to tweak their current brand identity in the way I mentioned than change it altogether. The current tail could possibly last several decades, especially if they changed the font at some point in the future when the current (and trendy) one becomes outdated.

berari wrote:

Can we have fantasy/hypothetical types of questions in this forum moved to a new appropriately named forum?

Then no one would visit the Civil Aviation forum!

berari wrote:

Can we have fantasy/hypothetical types of questions in this forum moved to a new appropriately named forum?

I hate to be snarky I really get your point but just don't come in these treads. I just scroll past the ones I don't like.

grbauc wrote:

berari wrote:

Can we have fantasy/hypothetical types of questions in this forum moved to a new appropriately named forum?

I hate to be snarky I really get your point but just don't come in these treads. I just scroll past the ones I don't like.

and for sure no need to comment in them they so they can go away quicker.

I personally miss the last AA livery, just polished metal, red, white, and blue stripes down the middle, and the simple AA on the tail. If they were to get rid of the polished metal and go with the light grey that they have now, put the red, white, and blue stripes down the sides, and put that AA on the tail, it would be a killer design. Their new tail looks terrible. I will admit though, it is an easy find in a field of aircraft. It's just that its not that appealing to the eye.

berari wrote:

Can we have fantasy/hypothetical types of questions in this forum moved to a new appropriately named forum?

I love that idea. This discussions are fun but I'm not sure that they belong in the civil aviation forum.

who ever came up with this scheme knows nothing about airline history or care's about the history of American and it's logo....the new one is just nasty....you could always tell American Airlines by the AA on the tail, now it's just a bland thing and it could be any airline....put a plane in each scheme and see which looks best, classic and recognized world wide....

Super88 wrote:

who ever came up with this scheme knows nothing about airline history or care's about the history of American and it's logo....the new one is just nasty....you could always tell American Airlines by the AA on the tail, now it's just a bland thing and it could be any airline....put a plane in each scheme and see which looks best, classic and recognized world wide....

And you can still tell the new AA apart from everyone else by its tail. Whether or not you like it doesn't change that it is easily distinguished.

Super88 wrote:

who ever came up with this scheme knows nothing about airline history or care's about the history of American and it's logo....the new one is just nasty....you could always tell American Airlines by the AA on the tail, now it's just a bland thing and it could be any airline....put a plane in each scheme and see which looks best, classic and recognized world wide....

Sounds like a quote that misses out terrible state AA was in, the BK, poor and getting worse service.

It was a fresh start, a new direction, that keeps the core red white and blue "American." This aligns with the direction the company has been moving.

aviationjunky wrote:

I personally miss the last AA livery, just polished metal, red, white, and blue stripes down the middle, and the simple AA on the tail.

...

I will admit though, it is an easy find in a field of aircraft. It's just that its not that appealing to the eye.

Still plenty of the old scheme to be seen at ROW.

If the new tail stands out, then the designers have done their job.

lostsound wrote:

cheapgreek wrote:

The AA on the tail was unique, you could spot it easily at an airport

I'd argue the new tail it a lot easier to spot and identify then the AA tail.

It is.

Having spent some time at PHX, LAS and DFW in the last few days, I have to say the new AA scheme looks fantastic. Then one of the few 737s left in the old scheme trundles in and looks really shabby in comparison (with its patchwork of bits of grey that can't be polished). The MD-80s look awful and the sooner they join their 'dead' brothers at ROW, the better.

AA will slightly modify its paint scheme by painting the tip of their winglets red . In order to reduce aircraft ground incidents . There is a 737 already flying around with this update . N892NN ..

etops1 wrote:

AA will slightly modify its paint scheme by painting the tip of their winglets red . In order to reduce aircraft ground incidents . There is a 737 already flying around with this update . N892NN ..

And it looks so out of place...it looks like they took a winglet meant for the TWA Retro (which aren't actually red) and put it on the plane.

Just passing along info . That's all ..

I seriously don't understand all of the butthurt about AA's previous bare metal livery. It was outdated, behind the times, and the new livery is an improvement in every way imaginable. No livery was better at making a brand new aircraft look like it was 45 years old had done thousands of cycles like AA's bare metal livery. Good riddance I say. This is 2017, not 1983.

As for the AA logo evolving. Sure, it will evolve, but probably not for at least another decade or two. Re-branding is expensive. Most airlines go 10+ years before changing their liveries for this very reason.

When my sis and I were kids she collected soaps, and she had a small bar of soap from the lavatory of an AA jet that we rode from ORD to BOS in 1977. I liked looking at that soap, for its wrapper was emblazoned with the old, timeless AA logo.


(gravid, meditative pause)



Soap.

I don't really understand the move of this thread. It's neither a poll nor a preference. I think it's a legitimate question regarding likely refinements of a logo, given airlines have been known to do this in the past.

I think the first change you may see is a reversion to "flat", whereby the shading is eliminated over time for simplicity sake. It's not necessarily a good thing but is very much a design trend at the moment to remove shading and the like that give these logos a more dynamic feel. Sometimes it works but often it goes the other way and just makes a logo flat and lifeless. It does enable it to be applied in more settings, e.g. on printed material, and is easier to use.

Then again, we've seen some airlines go the other way. BA's speedwing logo morphed into the speedmarque, while Qantas has recently adopted the shading and simplification of its kangaroo logo. The latter hasn't really worked in my opinion, as the design has been so simplified that it's starting to loose its distinctiveness and the shading component really doesn't add much.

On the other hand, we've seen the likes of Air New Zealand simplify things with the koru, where it went from a pretty dated but still flat design to something of a modern twist during the 90s and 00s as the trailing lines faded out. The application was inconsistent and often clumsy, so now they have a block, flat design. Saudia removed that beautiful blended light blue from its logo, which is now a harsher and less inviting sight. Alitalia has introduced shading to its 'A' but, if anything, it seems kind of dated to me.

So it's an interesting one to ponder. Personally I'd rather see the logo on the tail, which the likes of Delta eventually reverted to. But AA's appears perfectly designed for the tail, in lieu of the flag, so perhaps that's how we'll see things evolve - the application of the logo rather than tweaks to it.

KentB27 wrote:

I seriously don't understand all of the butthurt about AA's previous bare metal livery. It was outdated, behind the times, and the new livery is an improvement in every way imaginable. No livery was better at making a brand new aircraft look like it was 45 years old had done thousands of cycles like AA's bare metal livery. Good riddance I say. This is 2017, not 1983.

The old scheme was great for planes that were built in the 60s and 70s and were all metal. Look at a newer 737 in the old scheme - it looks completely disjointed because of all the parts that aren't metal and can't be polished.

KentB27 wrote:

No livery was better at making a brand new aircraft look like it was 45 years old had done thousands of cycles like AA's bare metal livery. Good riddance I say. This is 2017, not 1983.

In 1988, when American first received the A300, they were painted instead of polished. The paint is almost the same color as today, just a bit darker.

Call me old fashion, but I miss the polished silver bullets with the orange AA & Eagle and the orange stripes running the length of the craft. But like all good things gone bad, American is no longer in the business of service. They're there just to make money cramming people into crummy, uncomfortable seats; while you enjoy being treated like cattle. If lucky these days, you might get where you want to go, if the pilot is not drunk or a rude wait-staffer doesn't throw you off the plane. AA is no longer a company that will get my business; a once proud eagle, AA is now just a busted buzzard .