Why are there no OW planes?
Why are there no OW planes?
May 14, 2006 | 4:10 am
#2
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Originally Posted by ByrdluvsAWACO
I'm just wondering why there are no OW livery planes like *A has?
When OW finally get their act together to design a decent logo, than may this will become a realisting option.
May 14, 2006 | 4:25 am
#4
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Originally Posted by lallyr
The *A planes really do look good though. I don't think any other Alliance has this, not even Sky Team.
Lets hope this changes soon.
May 14, 2006 | 8:58 am
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: RSE
Programs: AA Exp|VA Platinum
Posts: 15,913
I dont like the *A planes. They remind me of those trucks that drive around the city with no particular purpose except for the billboard they have stuck on them....The day they replace the flying kangaroo with that purple beach ball on the tail, is the day I start flying *A.
Is this a requirement of airlines joining *A to have a *A logo plane???
Is this a requirement of airlines joining *A to have a *A logo plane???
May 14, 2006 | 9:59 am
#6
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York/London/Hong Kong/The Bahamas
Programs: BonvoyAmbassadorElite, HyattPlatinum, Cathay Pacific Diamond, AeroplanSuperElite
Posts: 239
Yes, from what I understand it is contractual for a number of aircraft from each airline to be done in the *A logo.
May 14, 2006 | 2:44 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: PHX/SFO/LAX
Programs: AA-EXP (1.7MM), BA-Slvr, HH-Diamond
Posts: 7,784
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
Would you want to put the dreadful OW logo on the tail of your plane?
Originally Posted by bensyd
The day they replace the flying kangaroo with that purple beach ball on the tail,
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1032118/M/
Here's a OW mockup(It's not that good)
EI in OW livery
May 14, 2006 | 3:25 pm
#8
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SIN
Programs: SQ PPS, LH SEN, Amex something, nothing everywhere else
Posts: 994
Actually, I seem to recall that SQ held out for as long as possible before doing a plane in *A colors, and that not painting the tailfin with the *A logo is in fact a breach of the *A rules. Can't say I blame them for trying to hold out...
May 14, 2006 | 4:48 pm
#9
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Originally Posted by WearyBizTrvlr
Actually, I seem to recall that SQ held out for as long as possible before doing a plane in *A colors, and that not painting the tailfin with the *A logo is in fact a breach of the *A rules. Can't say I blame them for trying to hold out...
Sometimes I think SQ are part of *A simple because they feel they have to belong to an alliance rather than because they want to be. In may respects, they are a bit like the UK within the EU. Part of it but at the same time not wanting to be really part of it.
May 14, 2006 | 11:51 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,412
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
It is also the reason that SQ don't participate in certain *A activities etc. Remember how the status match the year before last did not include SQ?
Sometimes I think SQ are part of *A simple because they feel they have to belong to an alliance rather than because they want to be. In may respects, they are a bit like the UK within the EU. Part of it but at the same time not wanting to be really part of it.
Sometimes I think SQ are part of *A simple because they feel they have to belong to an alliance rather than because they want to be. In may respects, they are a bit like the UK within the EU. Part of it but at the same time not wanting to be really part of it.
May 15, 2006 | 4:25 am
#12
Join Date: Jan 2006
Programs: QFF WP
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
Sometimes I think SQ are part of *A simple because they feel they have to belong to an alliance rather than because they want to be.
Wouldn't surprise me to see them take a stronger role in Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Blue, and maybe a US domestic carrier,and slip out of Star altogether
Now, back on topic
May 15, 2006 | 4:54 am
#13
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CPT
Programs: BA BD SA
Posts: 4,467
Originally Posted by yyzflyalot
Yes, from what I understand it is contractual for a number of aircraft from each airline to be done in the *A logo.
May 15, 2006 | 6:08 am
#14
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
Originally Posted by mrkz
Wouldn't surprise me to see them take a stronger role in Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Blue, and maybe a US domestic carrier,and slip out of Star altogether
May 15, 2006 | 6:22 am
#15
Join Date: Jan 2006
Programs: QFF WP
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
Isn't Branson in the process of setting up Virgin USA? If so, between the Virgin Airline Brands (Nigeria, Blue, Atlantic and USA) and SQ, they pretty much have all the world covered. All they now need is to set up a South American carrier and SQ can exit Star and form a new 'alliance' with the Virgin group.
IIRC, the only difference is that Virgin Blue and Virgin America are LLC (no FFtiers, no C or F...), unlike Virgin Atlantic
But where there's a will there's a way!
It is a funny combination though: ultra-conservative SQ with Branson's sexy image
!