Not A Haiku

RowUnderDCA-

I do see your points... but for what there was to work with I think they did a good job.

In nations with a flag carrier, the symbol is as much a source of national pride as thier flag is. Look at the upset after BA started using the World Art tails or whatever they were called- people saw it as something like flag burning. People really accociate with a LOT Polish, Lufthansa, or Aer Lingus as they represent thier nation's wordwide status.

The United States, because of its size and deregulated airline industry, doesnt really have a national flagship airline. Pan Am's symbol was at one point the most recognized symbol in the world along with Coca-Cola. When you saw the Beatles come to America, the blue meatball was right behind them. Interestingly, that logo was a globe with little reference to the US or its flag. Today, the AA Eagle or United sweeping U/tulip represent America, again without all that much reference to the national identity.

USAir, pre-Airways, had a logo of its name with vague blue and red (replacing the rusty orange-brown look). The name itself was an attempt at a big-boy name instead of something regional like Allegheny, Piedmont, or Pacific Southwest. It succeeded in making it sound like a real airline, but also sounded pretty generic. The Airways rebranding cleverly replaced the now pokey-sounding "Air" with Airways, which is much more international and distinguished sounding. The midnight blue and gray that dominate along with red and white reference the flag but wisely use shades of the colours that are not widely used. The dark blue is serious and businesslike and wont be confused with any other major airline.

The "stylized flag" logo is very clever. US Airways is a conglomerate of regional airlines that each had a very clear, and very different identity. But the combined entity had little to go on as a brand, unlike American, Delta, United and friends who have always been what they are and have a long standing identity as a part of American culture. US Airways wanted to be seen as one of thier peers (at least at the time). With little more to go on than the name- US Airways- they went with a rendering of the US flag. That could have gone wrong and been tacky, but what they ended up with is brilliant. It does its job without offense, evoking America but also forging an identity for an airline that needed one. When one of those planes lands in a foreign country, it demands the same respect our bigger rivals do. It's a stamp that can be put on anything from uniforms to ground equiptment to napkins that is uniquely ours and is unmistakeable.

As an employee (or not :rolleyes: ) that was junior enough to only know it as US Airways, its a source of pride. I feel proud when I see that logo because it was a major part of my life that I enjoyed immensly and know that I did a good job at. It will never represent furloughs, dispacements, bankrupcies, concessions, or unemployment to me as it represents the airline itself, not the people currently "taking care" of it or the sad events that have led to the current situation. To me it represents some great life experiences and wonderful people. You cant beat that!
 
Light Years said:
RowUnderDCA-

I do see your points... but for what there was to work with I think they did a good job.

In nations with a flag carrier, the symbol is as much a source of national pride as thier flag is. Look at the upset after BA started using the World Art tails or whatever they were called- people saw it as something like flag burning. People really accociate with a LOT Polish, Lufthansa, or Aer Lingus as they represent thier nation's wordwide status.

The United States, because of its size and deregulated airline industry, doesnt really have a national flagship airline. Pan Am's symbol was at one point the most recognized symbol in the world along with Coca-Cola. When you saw the Beatles come to America, the blue meatball was right behind them. Interestingly, that logo was a globe with little reference to the US or its flag. Today, the AA Eagle or United sweeping U/tulip represent America, again without all that much reference to the national identity.

USAir, pre-Airways, had a logo of its name with vague blue and red (replacing the rusty orange-brown look). The name itself was an attempt at a big-boy name instead of something regional like Allegheny, Piedmont, or Pacific Southwest. It succeeded in making it sound like a real airline, but also sounded pretty generic. The Airways rebranding cleverly replaced the now pokey-sounding "Air" with Airways, which is much more international and distinguished sounding. The midnight blue and gray that dominate along with red and white reference the flag but wisely use shades of the colours that are not widely used. The dark blue is serious and businesslike and wont be confused with any other major airline.

The "stylized flag" logo is very clever. US Airways is a conglomerate of regional airlines that each had a very clear, and very different identity. But the combined entity had little to go on as a brand, unlike American, Delta, United and friends who have always been what they are and have a long standing identity as a part of American culture. US Airways wanted to be seen as one of thier peers (at least at the time). With little more to go on than the name- US Airways- they went with a rendering of the US flag. That could have gone wrong and been tacky, but what they ended up with is brilliant. It does its job without offense, evoking America but also forging an identity for an airline that needed one. When one of those planes lands in a foreign country, it demands the same respect our bigger rivals do. It's a stamp that can be put on anything from uniforms to ground equiptment to napkins that is uniquely ours and is unmistakeable.

As an employee (or not :rolleyes: ) that was junior enough to only know it as US Airways, its a source of pride. I feel proud when I see that logo because it was a major part of my life that I enjoyed immensly and know that I did a good job at. It will never represent furloughs, dispacements, bankrupcies, concessions, or unemployment to me as it represents the airline itself, not the people currently "taking care" of it or the sad events that have led to the current situation. To me it represents some great life experiences and wonderful people. You cant beat that!
:up: :up: :up: :up:

I totally agree. I'm a US1 and have given alot to this company and I live near a flight path to GSO. It's a great source of pride to be able to see our 737's swooping in for final approach..
 
LT: You always word things so eloquently and right on. I agree our Logo is beautiful and a great sense of pride. When you posted those couple of videos with our planes in the air and the background music, it gave me chills and tears swelled. I still get choked up about our company, what was and what may be.
 
700UW said:
What about WN and HP who have whole planes painted in the flags of states?
Not the same thing. Those aren't the company logos.

As noted, BA was excused because they used to be the national airline, and VS's logo is not a British flag, it is the word "Virgin" in red stylized script...the same as on all of Branson's products.

Personally, I was a bit offended by the US Airways logo for two reasons. First, it takes a lot of gall to be the Johnny-come-lately to the major US airline world and try to play oneself off as the national airline of the US (particularly in hindsight). Secondly, it's so highly stylized as to evoke a corporate representation, as alluded to before.

That said, It's not something I've lost sleep over. Just more of an irritant than anything else. The color scheme and such were all nice touches, though...made the airline go from looking vaguely tacky to a "pressed suit" sort of business look.
 
Gee.. well, then, I'm NOT alone. That's about exactly how I feel. I think the whole thing LOOKS great, but conceptually troublesome.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top