Airplane Porn: United’s Paint Problem

It’s Labor Day here in the US, so I wasn’t planning on posting anything today. But after I saw this shot of a United 747 with some serious paint problems, I figured I’d put up a little airplane porn for you during the holiday.

Pretty nasty, huh? I wonder if something happened to this particular aircraft or whether this is a problem with United’s new paint in general.

Thank you, Tim Bowrey for the permission to post your fine work. You can see more of Tim’s photos on JetPhotos.net.


13 Responses to Airplane Porn: United’s Paint Problem

  1. EcoPainter says:

    Less paint means less weight which means less fuel. Obviously a deliberate attempt by United to cut costs. :-)

  2. Bobber says:

    Aircraft vitiligo?? Perhaps it’s United’s stealth mechanism for making it easier to spot structural faults in the airframe, somewhat akin to American’s approach of not painting their fleet. Or, conversely, they cleaned it a bit thoroughly.

  3. The Traveling Optimist says:

    The results of using too much Comet (or was it Ajax) instead of scrubbing bubbles.

  4. ATLTPA says:

    This is what happens when you outsource aircraft painting to Earl Scheib.

    They’ll paint any 747 for $999.95!

  5. c says:

    clearly unknowing pax don’t wonder loudly enough at the terminal if “that old plane is safe” for united to notice.

    these sort of comments are usually highly effective when it comes to restaurant bathrooms, so why shouldn’t they work for airlines? ;- )

  6. Yo says:

    Just tell the pax, that if they help paint it, they will get free water and sodas.

    How old can that paint job be? Its the new livery…

  7. robert says:

    Speaking of paint jobs, you’ve changed your photo. No more shades.

  8. Brandon says:

    I saw a united 737 at LGA on Friday with flaking and or scraped paint just above the midline on the forward left portion of the fusalage.

  9. CF says:

    robert – It’s true. I had plenty of people tell me that my old photo was a bad one of me. So, I took a better one at Long Beach the other day and posted it up there.

  10. HB says:

    Passengers voted not to pay the $9 primer fee.

  11. Ryan says:

    And the paint job is not that old either… As Eco Painter put it, just another way for United to cut costs.

    Cheers!

    Ryan

  12. Steve says:

    Several years ago, some Fed Agency was requiring additives in Aircraft Paint …

    Turns out the stuff was crap, and it gave results like you see here . . .

    It wasn’t just UA that had this issue . . .
    .

  13. Brendan says:

    I think when they were painting the plane that the painters did not put stripper on some of the spots you see on the aircraft.

Join the Conversation

*