America West's Fleet Transition To Us Paint Scheme

[TWskyliner]

What airline is does it remind you of, Leisure Air? Me too.

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

The airline's name is US AIRWAYS... what should they have for a logo, a Viking?

I


NW- The logo no longer says NW or points to the northwest. The color looks different depending on the lighting and it's not always flattering. And someone really should have told them about the rap group NWA.

I always thought that the NW logo was one of the best in any business.
It's an "N" It's a "W" [of course "W" has a political meaning now that not everyone likes, but I digress 😀 ]
It's an arrow pointing to the Northwest . The old colour scheme looked a little to busy for my taste, but what a great logo!

As for those predicting or advocating the "bare metal" look, I'd be surprised. A number of carriers (mostly US based) flirted with that in the early eighties (after the second "oil schock"). I imagine that there is a reason why it has been mostly abandoned. Fuel savings did not offset increased of keeping the planes buffed? Bare metal can look great if it is maintained, terrible when it isn't.

 

[tadjr]

For those who dislike the stylized flag icon logo, what instantly recognizeable logo would you suggest? You need something more than just a certain color for brand identity. Would love to hear what you would suggest?
Just a big US or something like that? Wouldnt that look too much like aanother caarier?

Although this could work if we could get the Star Alliance logo included.
US*

 

[Light Years]

I always thought that the NW logo was one of the best in any business.
It's an "N" It's a "W" [of course "W" has a political meaning now that not everyone likes, but I digress 😀 ]
It's an arrow pointing to the Northwest .  The old colour scheme looked a little to busy for my taste, but what a great logo!

[post="286047"][/post]​

When they had the bowling shoe look it indeed pointed to the Northwest, and was a bit of an optical illusion... it's an N! And a W! Now the logo points wherever.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

For those who dislike the stylized flag icon logo, what instantly recognizeable logo would you suggest? You need something more than just a certain color for brand identity. Would love to hear what you would suggest?
Just a big US or something like that? Wouldnt that look too much like aanother caarier?

Although this could work if we could get the Star Alliance logo included.
US*

[post="286048"][/post]​

I'd pondered a simple star logo perhaps something with a 'stitched on' quality (although that might be structurally disturbing to the mind).... also changing the name to United Star Airways- abbreviated USAirways. Of course, that presumed further connection with United and Star alliance.

Or how about a variety of 'star' representations on the tail... one like a stichted on star.. one like a medal... one like a child's drawing.... one like a shining star.... a spinning star..... a gold star...

 

[Light Years]

Why would we not want to be US Airways, as in the US? Should American Airlines change thier name to Absolutely Airlines? Why does US Airways not deserve to be associated with it's home country? Other airlines would love to have the name and what it implies.

 

[firstamendment]

So should Bank of America get rid of their stylized flag as well. You guys need to get over it. The flag will stay. I can promise you that.

Also, the airbus planes cannot have the metal bare. That is why US Airways went with paint as oppose to the polished metal. There is not one airbus aircraft in the world with metal showing. Even American had to paint their A300's (or310's?).

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Why would we not want to be US Airways, as in the US? Should American Airlines change thier name to Absolutely Airlines? Why does US Airways not deserve to be associated with it's home country? Other airlines would love to have the name and what it implies.

[post="286058"][/post]​

Who is United States Airways?

 

[Light Years]

A few years ago, someone actualy wrote a question to US Airways News asking what the US stood for. The answer was that it came from USAir, in which the US obviously stands for the United States although the airline is not actually called United States Airways. It's implied and understood.

Similarly, the current PSA Airlines is simply PSA Airlines, not Pacific Southwest Airlines as it's named after. ATA Airlines is no longer American Trans Air, it's simply ATA Airlines.

USAviation's official name is not United States Aviation. You're allowed to have an abbreviation.

 

[Light Years]

LY

I already have that outfit...Halloween 19--

[post="285976"][/post]​

"C'mon Girls! Do you believe in safety? Cos I got something to say about it, and it goes something like this...

There are TWO door exits in the front of the aircraft....

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Ok.... I really don't have bad feelings about this. I just don't prefer it. I like real words or real english or real names. Abbreviations are fine, but US Airways isn't a real abbreviation. Abbreviations 'abbreviate' actual words! I don't like 'ATA' either, for SEVERAL reasons: letters that don't actually abbreviate anything anymore but when they did they abbreviated unreal words American Trans Air?? AND it is confused with the Air Transport Assocation, which is also confused with another interest group of FBOs. Now, I hear it referred to as ATA Airlines. what?

It's just a preference. A series of letters doesn't make a name. It just seems hollow to me. AHA! It's like AAA plumbing to get in the front of the yellow pages!

It is a similar but separate issue with the 'flag-like' logo.

All said and done, I've always liked U's and PI's paint schemes and colors. I'm just not fond of the logo or the name.

At this point, I'm afraid that all suitable, basic, obvious 'real word' potential names are taken with the possible exception of "National." So, no big deal....

Another small observation: 'American' is about a place (our home on the American continents) United States is obviously about a political entity. I suspect that one reason U management doesn't really want to be United States Airways, is because they actually want some potential distance from politics and the state. USAirways is not the entity formed by the Postal Service after the coming energy crises that bankrupts all commercial airlines, forcing the GOVERNMENT to create a public monopoly. I would want some distance from that association, too, if I were a corporate type. So, in fact, USAirways, stands for United States, kind of but not really... especially if U management doesn't want it to do so. Too cute by half.

Geez, now I'm convincing myself that I REALLY don't like it.. I better stop and get ready for happy hour.

 

[tadjr]

"C'mon Girls! Do you believe in safety? Cos I got something to say about it, and it goes something like this...

There are TWO door exits in the front of the aircraft....

[post="286076"][/post]​

Of course, there would be two options for this outfit, domestic and international. Domestic would look like this one, international would have the "nose cones" down about the belt level.
Ducking for cover....

 

[eolesen]

Also, the airbus planes cannot have the metal bare. That is why US Airways went with paint as oppose to the polished metal. There is not one airbus aircraft in the world with metal showing. Even American had to paint their A300's (or310's?).

[post="286061"][/post]​

Hmm.... AA's A300's have been bare metal for several years now.

 

[LUV2FLYHIGH]

I'm hoping maybe (I've said this on the AWA forum that we have) they should have a contest for the new look of the Aircrafts, we are going to need something KICK ASS to win over the FLYING PUBLIC and its gooing to start with our LOOK!! Its already been said we need to get along to make this BAD BOY FLY!! I'm just all up on staying positive about this merger and I'm looking at it as a good thing, because I want to keep my job and have fun while I'm doing it. (YES NEW UNIFORMS IS A MUST!!)

 

[kiloromeo]

the new "look" will dissapoint.... :down: