Jump to content

British Airways 100th anniversary retro colours


Rb277170

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Sturmovik said:

I hope you have enough money for new clothes, and enough space on your luggage to carry them back.

Actually I am very pleased to have my bag delivered to my hotel in Dayton OH within 36 hours so well done to BA/AA. I only had to buy a few replacement items and my company will cover that so no big deal in the end. Now I can look forward to enjoying a weekend at Wright-Paterson and searching for those elusive Pledge Klear floor polish bottles. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

That's not great.. Let's hope they don't back date the lost baggage compensation rate to the 1971 BOAC amount either? 

I must admit, I'm quite a fan of these retro schemes and a nice set of 1/200 or 1/400 die cast airlines would make a lovely collection. It will be interesting to see what Qantas does when we turn 100 in November 2020. Unlike BA, I doubt there will be any recognition of the merged / absorbed TAA (Trans Australia Airlines), which is a little sad given its significance to the success of domestic aviation in Australia. Anyway, this thread is about BA and its proud history - so kudos to them, well done. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

 

They offered me a paltry £1 2s7d as compo!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 10:10 AM, Eric Mc said:

Yep - that's how I've equated it over the years. It's like saying I'm 95 because my mother was born in 1924.

 

BA should be challenged on their made up 1919 birth.

Why?

 

Should I tell Alex to repaint the retro jets back as a member of the Britmodeller community challenges BA on it? get a life people, it's the 100th anniversary of BA which has been formed and made up over the years of a number of airlines and predecessor companies coming together.

 

Get out more, enjoy it for what it is, and enjoy seeing those retro jets.

 

I will however be talking to the commander of the 48FW for painting his F15’s in heritage schemes when we all know the original were operated by the USAAC and not the USAF, and ask him to paint them back………..

Edited by Agent K
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Agent K said:

Why?

 

Should I tell Alex to repaint the retro jets back as a member of the Britmodeller community challenges BA on it? get a life people, it's the 100th anniversary of BA which has been formed and made up over the years of a number of airlines and predecessor companies coming together.

 

Get out more, enjoy it for what it is, and enjoy seeing those retro jets.

 

I will however be talking to the commander of the 48FW for painting his F15’s in heritage schemes when we all know the original were operated by the USAAC and not the USAF, and ask him to paint them back………..

No need to be aggressive about it.

 

BA didn't exist until 1 April 1974. That is the legal birth of the entity that we know as BA. That is a fact.

It can trace its ancestry further - as can I. But it doesn't make me 250 years old. And it doesn't make BA 100 years old.

 

I like the retro jets. It's a great dose of nostalgia for me. But even BA would struggle to find a 100 year old BA colour scheme (unlike KLM).

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Eric Mc said:

BA didn't exist until 1 April 1974. That is the legal birth of the entity that we know as BA. That is a fact.

It can trace its ancestry further - as can I. But it doesn't make me 250 years old. And it doesn't make BA 100 years old.

 

I like the retro jets. It's a great dose of nostalgia for me. But even BA would struggle to find a 100 year old BA colour scheme (unlike KLM).

My thoughts exactly Eric.  👍

 

Chris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Agent K said:

Why?

 

Should I tell Alex to repaint the retro jets back as a member of the Britmodeller community challenges BA on it? get a life people, it's the 100th anniversary of BA which has been formed and made up over the years of a number of airlines and predecessor companies coming together.

 

Why? Because they are not a 100 years old, its a simple fact they came into being on the 31st. March. 1974 and the current company has nothing whatsoever to do with what was flying in 1919.

 

I'm enjoying the retro liveries, like most on here, but BA you are not a 100 years old!

 

Tommo

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Eric Mc said:

No need to be aggressive about it.

 

BA didn't exist until 1 April 1974. That is the legal birth of the entity that we know as BA. That is a fact.

It can trace its ancestry further - as can I. But it doesn't make me 250 years old. And it doesn't make BA 100 years old.

 

I like the retro jets. It's a great dose of nostalgia for me. But even BA would struggle to find a 100 year old BA colour scheme (unlike KLM).

I posted my reply before I saw yours Eric, well said.

 

My feelings are its disingenuous of BA towards KLM and Qantas who both shortly will be able to say they are indeed a 100 years old.

 

Tommo.

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect the reason why BA hasn't indulged in retro schemes before (apart from one 757 ) is precisely because of their fairly short existence and dilemmas as to what schemes they should pick to commemorate.

 

I would love them to select a few Imperial/Cambrian/BKS/Northeast schemes as well. To me, the BA 100 anniversary should not be so much about the celebration of 100 years of BA (which is nonsense) but 100 years of the start of the BA family tree. In a way, the fact that they have chosen BEA and BOAC schemes as part of that celebration is a nod in that direction and I applaud that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Eric Mc said:

I would love them to select a few Imperial/Cambrian/BKS/Northeast schemes as well. To me, the BA 100 anniversary should not be so much about the celebration of 100 years of BA (which is nonsense) but 100 years of the start of the BA family tree. 

To me its the 100th anniversary of British commercial aviation, not BA. Good grief BA was only incorporated in 1983.

 

Tommo.

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bedders said:

Really love that BOAC scheme. But 100 years of BA? It's a corporate lie about as laughable as it is insulting.

 

Justin

 

Agreed.

 

To me it seems BA have a PR Dept and/or a company out of control. I would be curious to know how much BA paid the Bowie Estate for nano second of a clip in their current ad? It is well known Bowie hated flying and in the earlier years of his success he used to go to extraordinary length not fly, including crossing the Atlantic by ship and touring the US in a Winniebago camper. In his later years he even appeared in a Cunard advert FoC. Someone has not done their homework.

 

Tommo.

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

 

 To me it seems BA have a PR Dept and/or a company out of control.

If only they would change that music - dull dull dull. With 500 years of genuine history, more classical tunes are available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

To me its the 100th anniversary of British commercial aviation, not BA. Good grief BA was only incorporated in 1983.

 

Tommo.

It can all get a bit technical. BA as an entity came into being on 1 April 1974. Before that it simply didn't exist at all. However, in 1969 a review board had been set up to ascertain if the amalgamation of BEA and BOAC would be the right thing to do. The other area they were looking at was co-ordinating and streamlining the affairs of Cambrian Airways and Northeast Airways. This committee was called the British Airways Board and they presided over discussions with unions and management prior to the actual merger which eventually happened on 1 April 1974. Of course, between 1974 and 1987 BA was state owned. It was (eventually) privatised in 1987 after 6 years of wrangling and false starts. The switch to the Landor scheme happened in 1984 in anticipation of the move to privatisiation but that was delayed for three years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well,  whatever the corporate entity, as far as I can see, the "family tree" of BA looks like this:

 

BA%20Family%20tree.jpg

 

So it's not unreasonable, IMHO, to claim that today's BA is the inheritor of a direct line of descent from three airlines that started operating in 1919: Daimler Airways, Handley Page Transport, and Instone, via Imperial Airways and BOAC. Clearly some of you will disagree, but given that it's delivering some nice looking airliners for people to model, I'm not sure why the subject is generating such ire...

best,

M.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I'm not so sure. Under this principle BAE Systems could claim to be 100 years old because it has links back to the Army Balloon Factory. In my book, a name is a name, and once you change it, you  take the consequences of that decision and can't later go back and say that the change never happened. 

 

Justin

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, cmatthewbacon said:

Well,  whatever the corporate entity, as far as I can see, the "family tree" of BA looks like this:

 

BA%20Family%20tree.jpg

 

So it's not unreasonable, IMHO, to claim that today's BA is the inheritor of a direct line of descent from three airlines that started operating in 1919: Daimler Airways, Handley Page Transport, and Instone, via Imperial Airways and BOAC. Clearly some of you will disagree, but given that it's delivering some nice looking airliners for people to model, I'm not sure why the subject is generating such ire...

best,

M.

 

 

Without wishing to be rude in the slightest, the above is exremely simplistic and there is zero linkages in some cases and some huge disconnects that are missing from the above 'family' tree.

 

It not generating ire, its just wrong plain wrong of BA to claim what they are claiming.

 

Yes, they can say it's a 100 years of British commercial avaition, no its not a 100 years of BA.

 

Tommo.

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The family tree is missing many, many branches. Where's Air Transport and Travel? Where's Railway Air Services - a really significant pre-war airline (and an important precursor to what became BEA)?

 

Did you know that Aer Lingus was started as a joint venture between the Irish government and Railway Air Services and that BEA later inherited the Railway Air Services shareholding. Therefore, Aer Lingus should be part of the BA family tree as well. Indeed, now that BA and Aer Lingus are part of the IAG, they have rejoined the fold, so to speak - so they should be in the tree between 1936 and about 1961 and then back in again from the 2014.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

Without wishing to be rude in the slightest, the above is exremely simplistic and there is zero linkages in some cases and some huge disconnects that are missing from the above 'family' tree.

Blame it on the software he used to produce it.

 

:coat:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...