Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Cutting costs and painting planes...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

BORAT

Registered Abuser
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Posts
139
Ok, so we are all being forced to look for ways to cut costs these days but what is killing me is airlines changing paint jobs while they are in financial crisis. It makes sense if the airline is changing the scheme in order to save money by using less paint, but it dosen't feel right that it seems everyone and their mother is doing it. Anybody know the cost of painting a jet? And how much weight/money is saved by having a polished aluminum scheme?

-BORAT
 
Polished aluminum is a biatch to keep clean and shiny, no way would it be cost effective.
 
polished aluminum vs. white?
 
I heard that it cost $85,000 to paint an ATR in the DAL flag tail scheme. I don't kow how accurate that is, but I say that probably isn't too far off.
 
You need to look at the big picture.

First, most airlines repaint their airplanes on a regular schedule anyhow. Usually it is associated with a major inspection. Therefore, changing the scheme doesn't usually cost any more than it would to paint it in the same old colors.

Second, it is usually a marketing decision to change the logo, colors and or look of a company. The people who make these decisions usually do so because they believe a new look will improve peoples perception of the company and therefore increase sales. Believe me, its all about money. If an airline could avoid painting airplanes, they would.

JetPilot500
 
Swass said:
You have to really rub polished alum to keep it shiny, not so with white.
True, just fly it through a rain cloud and it looks good.

Airlines want to keep their planes looking good in the public's eye. Just look at all the threads about the public's image of pilots when we walk around the terminals with arm pit stains in our shirts, and faded black pants.
 
No, no I totally understand. The question I am asking is the fact that Alaska we have our jets painted white, which is nice but I was thinking that if we switched to a polished aluminum like what AA has, it might save money by eliminating the need for the white coat which could cut weight. Then again I believe that you may have to coat the jet with an anti corosive coating or something. I know it was about $25,000 to paint my 185 a year ago...Imagine the cost of a 747!
 
Wouldn't a good paint job help to keep corosion in check?

And now for a stupid question: Does a gallon of fresh paint weigh more than after it has dried?

Just curious.

Greg
 
BORAT,

I know this much: At Southwest, we have our 25th Anniversary plane, called "Silver One."

It cost so much to keep it polished and shiny, it was actually costing us more money to constantly polish it than if we'd just painted the friggin' thing.

And so we did. Unfortunately, they used a really poor paint for the job - no real metallic gloss to it - and the plane came out looking more grey than silver. For a while there, many of us referred to it as "Primer One." ;)

And although I haven't seen that particular plane in a while, last I'd heard, they'd repainted it with a much better paint.

So to answer your question, if the information I've been told is correct, it acutally costs more in the long run to constantly polish an unpainted airplane.
 
White is cheep. That Eskimo is one UGLY dude anyway. O'ya and while I'm rippin ALK, that $5 a meal thing has been tried. It sucks. So does that $10 DigiPlayer. Next it will be $1 to get the lav door open. Keep gouging your pax dollar for dollar and they will go to Southwest.
 
seethru said:
And now for a stupid question: Does a gallon of fresh paint weigh more than after it has dried?
I have no idea how much paint weights, but I know it's heavy. About 20 years ago, I owned a Schweizer 1-23 sailplane. I had it stripped and repainted. We had a set of scales in the hangar so just for grins we weighed it before and after it was stripped. The paint weighed 30 pounds!

'Sled
 
seethru said:
...And now for a stupid question: Does a gallon of fresh paint weigh more than after it has dried?

Just curious.

Greg
I would think it would weight more wet than dry...with the water content...sure

just a guess tho...

-mini
 
I once heard that when Northwest switched from bare aluminum to paint back in the '80s, it cost $1M in fuel, per year (entire fleet) to fly all the paint around. Just a story I heard....
 
JetPilot500 said:
You need to look at the big picture.

First, most airlines repaint their airplanes on a regular schedule anyhow. Usually it is associated with a major inspection. Therefore, changing the scheme doesn't usually cost any more than it would to paint it in the same old colors.

Second, it is usually a marketing decision to change the logo, colors and or look of a company. The people who make these decisions usually do so because they believe a new look will improve peoples perception of the company and therefore increase sales. Believe me, its all about money. If an airline could avoid painting airplanes, they would.

JetPilot500
JetPilot hit the nail on the head. Planes in typical use need to be repainted (or should be) every 5-7 years. Airline aircraft, enduring many my cycles than "typical" need it more often and, as JetPilot correctly pointed out, are usually associated with a major inspection since the aircraft is scheduled to be down for several days/weeks.

Many decided to change schemes to keep the public interested. Our tastes change over time. Why do you think car model styles are revamped every 5 years or so? Plus, the average Joe and Jane feel much better about flying on a shiney "new" looking airplane, when in fact, it could be 30 years old with 50,000 hours. Not to rag on any one particular airline, but have you seen some of the USAir aircraft lately? I saw a 73 the other day and I swear, half the paint was peeled off. Now, some people see that and wonder just how bad the maintenance might be as well!

Image gets the customer the first time, customer service keeps them. Airlines are trying to win every dollar paying pax they can get!

2000Flyer
 
Last edited:
One thing I do know ... COMAIR is not painting any of their aircraft ... and it shows! There are some really bad looking AC flying in the CMR fleet.
 
Kingairrick said:
I once heard that when Northwest switched from bare aluminum to paint back in the '80s, it cost $1M in fuel, per year (entire fleet) to fly all the paint around. Just a story I heard....


However, they probably saved $3M/year in cleaning/polishing costs.
 
seethru said:
And now for a stupid question: Does a gallon of fresh paint weigh more than after it has dried?
Paint has distillates in it that have mass. They evaporate after being sprayed onto the aluminum and leave only the binders and pigments behind. This means that the paint loses weight. Someone correct me if I am wrong?
 
scuzzer23 said:
Paint has distillates in it that have mass. They evaporate after being sprayed onto the aluminum and leave only the binders and pigments behind. This means that the paint loses weight. Someone correct me if I am wrong?
Sounds logical to me....kinda goes along with my assumption. I knew something was evaporating...

-mini
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom