Fisher Aircraft is a relatively new entrant to the American aviation industry, based in Hartford, Connecticut near industry giants Pratt & Whitney and United Technologies (UTC). Its main base of operations located at Bradley International Airport (BDL) in Windsor Locks, CT.

 

Fisher began in 1986 in Windsor Locks as an FBO for Bradley under the name of "Fisher Flight Support," servicing corporate jets and charter flights which operated from the airport. In 1991, a small maintenance base was added for Learjets and Challenger business jets in partnership with Bombardier, which had acquired Learjet the year prior. In 1994, Fisher upgraded to become a Bombardier service center with full maintenance and repair services, leading to the renaming to "Fisher Aircraft Services & Maintenance." Over the coming years, Fisher expanded maintenance operations to include aircraft engines and avionics. 

 

In 2008, Fisher made its leap into aviation manufacturing, purchasing the bankrupt very-light-jet manufacturer Echelon Aerospace from New Haven, CT (HVN) and transferring their operations 50 miles north to Bradley. As a result, the Echelon 100 jet was renamed to the Fisher Ultimate 100 and Fisher was renamed again to "Fisher Aircraft Manufacturing," which ultimately led to the termination of maintenance services with Bombardier. Most recently, Fisher focused on upgrading, upselling, and enhancing the Ultimate 100, with modest deliveries beginning in 2011 and onwards after the effects of the Recession fell off. As of 2014, the Fisher Ultimate 200, a re-engined and upgraded version of the Ultimate 100, is offered for sale. 

 

Today, however, a brand-new factory for a new aircraft line is being constructed at Bradley, at 650,000 square feet. An additional facility for aircraft production in Massachusetts, Connecticut, or New York is currently being studied. Fisher plans to release a new 80-100 seat regional jet concept, dubbed the "Regional Jet of the Future," shortly. Specifications, however, are unknown at this time.

has a connection to Florida, America's steaming dump and tropical wasteland

fails to understand hyperbole and sarcasm

*spits out my tea* they do WHAT

 

dislike for confusing Connecticut (yes, there's a place known for boiled/steamed burgers) for Massachusetts (a wholesome place for your money to die)

What are alliances for?

There are two kinds of alliances, those in the forums and those in-game.

 

Those in the forums (look for Forums > Alliances > [alliance name]) are more strategic cooperations. They tend to have stricter admissions policies and require a certain standing before accepting people. They tend to operate in only a few specific worlds (such as how Dynasty World operates in RDelta), but have much closer cooperation in comparison to the strictly in-game alliances. Expect teamwork, cooperation, and tips and tricks to come your way with these alliances, but know that you need the experience to join some (especially those like Unitedwings, Dynasty World, or Azure). There will also be some policies like anti-competition and cooperation involved with joining one of these alliances.

 

Those in-game tend to do much less. If you look under "Reputation," 10% of your possible reputation comes from alliance destinations served. If you feel as if you'll be accepted in one (and acceptance rates are usually high), then join one. You should (depending on the size of the alliance) gain a few reputation points. Some alliances in-game are connected together, either via threads in the alliance forum or external methods such as Slack or Discord. For the most part, however, many treat in-game alliances as ways to gain reputation and have little in terms of actual cooperation. 

Updated the Northern Air. I think this looks much better than my old design.

Better, but still not good. 

 

First of all, what's up with that logo? An upwards tick and the letter N? You could do better than that.

Secondly, what's up with the font? It's visible now, but the choice is still sub-par.

Thirdly, the colours (and gradient) you've used just clash with each other. It's a mess.

Fourthly, where'd the door outlines go? You kind of need those.

 

I'd go back to the (literal) drawing board, maybe check out BFS' Northern gallery beforehand. 

bomp

Hello, my in-game airline is Key West Airlines. If anybody is willing to give some feedback on this livery that is much appreciated.

 

As a livery, this kind of stands out to me. The color choice (salmon and blue, contrasting colors), font (something default), and logo (a generic beach scene) don't especially strike me as well-thought-out.

 

In terms of coloration, Key West should either follow the Floridian standard of bright tones (red, orange, and I guess salmon), or take advantage of its surrounding by water and go for cool colors (blue, teal, aqua, etc.). Mixing both together leads to clashing, although there are some rare circumstances (America West, for example) where it just happens to work. I'd recommend the website coolors.co as a place to find numerous complementary palettes, although I should note that not all the colors they suggest actually look nice on planes. 

 

For the font, the late 90's had what I'd call "the Last Serif Standing," as well as the "Sans-Serif 101" period. Many airlines either brought out the last and best of serif designs (United's Battleship Grey, TWA's final livery, Delta's "Wavy Gravy," etc.) or experimented with sans-serif fonts (Swissair's final scheme, Japan Airlines' "Arc of the Sun" livery, Sabena's final scheme, etc.) around now. For Key West, the American trend of a serif font would be nice to see here, but in a darker and more noticeable color than salmon (try looking at Oggey's "Independence" for reference). 

 

The logo may be what I have the most qualms about. It's generic, uninspired, and the fact it needs to be cut into an ovular shape proves its misplacement on an aircraft. Key West may be known as a vacation destination, but beaches don't tend to do well as logos. I'd recommend making a simple palm tree logo instead, or making a wordmark logo with "KW" somewhere in an Air Florida-esque livery.

 

The livery you presently provide isn't great, but it's a good start towards making a refined, time-applicable livery. I'm excited to see what you come up with.

Note: this counts trams/light rail/people movers, commuter/heavy rail, and subways/monorails

 

As of 22AUG2018:

 

Amsterdam (NL): GVB Trams, NS Sprinter

Atlanta (GA): Atlanta Airport PlaneTrain, ATL SkyTrain

Avignon (FR): SNCF TER

Boston (US): The T (Green Line, Red Line, Orange Line)

Copenhagen (DK): Copenhagen Metro, S-Tog

Detroit (US): Terminal A ExpressTram

Geneva (CH): TPG Trams

Hong Kong (HK): MTR

London (UK): London Underground

Minneapolis (US): Minneapolis Airport Tram

Nagoya (JP): Meitetsu μSky Limited Express

New York (US): New York City Subway, AirTrain JFK

Newark (US): NJ Transit, AirTrain EWR

Nice (FR): SNCF TER

Orlando (US): Orlando Airport People Movers

Osaka (JP): Osaka Metro

Oslo (NO): NSB Commuter

Paris (FR): Paris Métro, RER

Rome (IT): Metropolitana di Roma

San Francisco (US): BART, San Francisco Cable Cars

Seattle (US): Sound Transit, Sea-Tac Satellite Transit System

Seoul (KR): Seoul Subway, AREX, Incheon Airport Starline Shuttle

Tokyo (JP): JR East, Tokyo Metro, Tokyo Monorail

Vienna (AT): WL Tramway

Washington DC (US): WMATA Metrorail

Could you provide an example of your works? It's much easier to try and fix things when you can see what can be improved.

I have to agree with Vision on this one. I remember that about a year ago I had the same resources and templates that I had now, but with a lot less patience to get things done. I eventually began pushing out liveries, but they were jagged, rough, and downright ugly things (I guess the same could also be said for my current gallery). Only when I reformed my livery creation process did I get satisfactory results.

First and foremost: think about the brand first. A livery is meant to be a large vizualization of a brand and what it stands for. AusJet doesn’t really look like much, aside from a kangaroo. From looking at it, I can’t tell if it wants to be an LCC, legacy, flag carrier, or hybrid airline. Air Pacific, on the other hand, is a good example of thinking about the brand first. You can tell precisely what you’re trying to represent and what the brand is all about. Having a set brand allows you to “tune in” on what you want to put in the livery, making it crispier. If you look at Internederland or Oceanic, for example, you find that the refined and minute qualities they have, along with the careful and concise use of colour put off an air of authority and premiumness, exactly what you’d look for in a flag carrier or major airline.

Second: think about originality. AusJet (a mix of Qantas and.JetStar) and Mountaineer (a toned-down Frontier) both lack the originality needed to really make the livery shine. Otherwise, you’re just going to fidn yourself “boxed in” to what the real-life livery looks like. Once again, I look at Air Pacific, agruably the most “original” livery you’ve presented. It’s got a set message that you’ve created for yourself and that you can allow to stretch any way you want. Creativity and originality are key in making a crisp livery; otherwise, you just have a knock-off. Names like Vanguard and Columbia were original, never-before seen ideas, allowing the corporate identity (and livery) to prosper.

Third: look at colours. One of the key ways to get attention and to make your liveries stand out is using colours — sometimes, like with Spirit Airlines or Air Asia, this means using bright yellows and reds. But it doesn’t always have to be that way. Looking at Mountaineer, I mainly see one colour: green. It doesn’t really pop out or contrast with other colours, and it’s kind of dull on its own, preventing the eyes from fully absorbing the livery. Freedom Airlines, on the other hand, is beginning to get there. Multiple distinct colours with high contrast make the eyes wander and absorb. It does, however, have a case of the “eurowhites” — just like modern liveries (lookin’ at Air France and the new Lufthansa), having too much white makes your liveries dull and boring. Staring at a mostly blank sheet of paper has the same effect, not because the colour white itself is boring but because there’s nothing interesting going on. If you look at the tail of Freedom, the stripes allow the eyes to look up and down, then focus on the logo and extraneous details. You want that, but for the entire livery. The crispiest liveries are always ones that never bore you —look at the bright colours of Amstelair or the soothing tones of New England’s blues next to each other as an example.

Fourth: Take time. Make some rough sketches first before you even reach for the computer so you can quickly run through dozens of ideas instead of handcrafting a few logos and giving up. Before you move on to a different step (making the logo, thinking of names, changing the time period, changing the class of service or country), make sure that your previous work is the best it can be. Rushing leads to mistakes, and mistakes leads to sloppiness and blandness. If you look at brands like Midamerican or NAA, you find that they don’t release new things very often, and are some of the oldest galleries here. The actual time and effort used in crafting liveries perfectly means that, although you won’t be pumping out liveries at the speed of light and may not be on the first page of the gallery all the time, you will get a better, crisper, and cleaner result.

Finally: look for inspiration. If you are really stuck, try looking up similar airlines or ones from roughly the same time period to get an idea of wha tou want to make. You obviously can’t take their idea pixel-for-pixel, but you can take the ideas, concepts, and brainstorms from earlier sessions and combine them with these insiprations to make something new. There’s no such thing as a completely original idea — everythinf is borrowed at least a little bit from somewhere else.

I sincerely hope this helps you!

The entirety of New Caledonia is under the shaded portion of BFS' map... should be a valid entry in my book. If it's shaded, it's included, including American Samoa (US), Guam (US), Northern Mariana Islands (US), and Wallis-et-Futuna (France). No one complained when that guy made a Guamanian entry, so why should we complain now?

Best International: Tokyo-Haneda (HND), more specifically in the international terminal. The domestic terminals for JAL and ANA are on the older side, but they are better off compared to most airports in the US. Haneda's international terminal is new, spacious, clean, and offers great ramp views (including the spotting deck). It's on the large side in terms of walkability, but it's rather pleasant to stay in. My runners-up would be Seattle-Tacoma (SEA), New York-JFK's T4 (JFK), Seoul-Incheon (ICN), Oslo-Gardermoen (OSL), and Singapore-Changi (SIN). 

 

Worst International: Los Angeles (LAX) overall. As much as some terminals (T2, T5, TBIT, etc.) are on the spacious, new, and airy side of things, some of the terminals haven't been updated since construction, or retain the same layout. T1-T8 were not designed for today with all the space TSA takes up and the number of passengers flowing through, leading to traffic into the airport, long lines at every terminal, and cramped and crowded gate areas. Runners-up in this category include Rome-Fiumicino (FCO), Atlanta-Hartsfield Jackson excluding Terminals T and F (ATL), Honolulu (HNL), London-Heathrow (LHR), New York-Newark (EWR), and Paris-CDG except for 2E and 2F (CDG). 

 

Best Regional: San Jose, California (SJC). As much as it's on the smaller side, it's bright, clean, and modern. I appreciate that both short gate distances and space for TSA lines are present here. I guess it doesn't count as a regional airport anymore with all the international flights, but I guess it's regional enough considering the destinations it serves. Runners-up in this category include Bergen (BGO), Busan-Gimhae (PUS), and Portland (PWM). 

 

Worst Regional: I'm going to have to award this to Santorini, Greece (JTR). Small terminal with little inside that can barely support a single flight, let alone multiple. It was fine to fly into but a pain to leave from. Other notable examples of bad regional airports include Osaka-Itami (ITM), Geneva (GVA), Kona (KOA), and Burbank (BUR). 

Airline Name: Malayair Berhad (operating as malayair)

Country of Origin: Malaysia

ICAO | IATA | Callsign: MY | MYR | Malay Air

Fleet:
Malayair's fleet is almost entirely composed of Boeing aircraft. Currently, the 737-800 and 737-900ER aircraft are used for regional flights, the 777-200ER/LR for long-haul flights, the 777-300ER as Malayair's flagship, and the A330-200 and A330-300 on Australasian routes. To replace these aircraft, Malayair has orders for the 737MAX series (with 3 delivered), 787-8 and 787-9 to replace the A330 (6 -8's delivered), and the A350-900 as a replacement for the 777-200ER/LR.

Description: Malayair is a leading full-service carrier in Malaysia, founded in 1973 to connect Malaysia and Singapore with regional flights. From a base in Kuala Lumpur, Malayair leads Southeast Asia as a premier carrier and a Unitedwings member since 2013. Serving 4 continents, 73 destinations, and 27 countries around the world, Malayair has global reach and represents Malaysia.

Livery Breakdown:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isn't Kiwi disqualified? Time stamps mark it as being first displayed in early July. 

 

Rules:

 

• Livery must have proper titles for its country. (I.E english name and language of the country need to be present if the main language is other than english) 
• Cannot be already established (the goal of this is to promote creativity. Not just enter something with a year of work behind it. 
• Preferably 2 airline submissions per country. 
• Remove your signature by clicking Enable signature in the upper corner. (we want this forum to look as clean as possible)
• Please do not clutter the forum with comments until we close submissions.

I'm... shocked? In awe? I'm not really sure how to describe it. 

 

First and foremost, I guess I'd thank the judges for the effort they put into putting this whole contest together. 

I'd also like to specifically congratulate @OtakuWeebster and @Leebro for submissions and victories, as well as all those who competed for their time and effort. Many designs in this contest were strong, and it was intriguing to see how all of you would create an original livery in a region where many pre-established carriers exist.

 

Thank you all once again!

N664US, Denmark, Danske, CPH, DK

Favourites: Qantas (2017-), Hawaiian (2017-), Air Canada (2004-2017), Garuda Indonesia (2010-), KLM (1971-2002, 2002-2017, 2017-)

 

Least Favourites: Mexicana (1991-2008), Virgin Australia as Virgin Blue (2000-2006), Japan Airlines (2011-), Lufthansa (2018-)

N664US, TRANSPORT AÉRIEN ALGÉRIEN, DZA, ALG — Algiers Houari Boumediene International Airport

About Algérien
Transport Aérien Algérien (IATA: AG, ICAO: DZA, Callsign: ALGERIAN), commonly referred to simply as Algérien, is an Algerian airline based on the grounds of the Houari Boumediene Airport in Algiers, with focus cities in Oran and Paris - de Gaulle. In Arabic, Algérien is referred to as الجزائرية, which is a shortening of the full name of الخطوط الجوية الجزائرية. It is the flag carrier of Algeria, with service to 31 domestic destinations and 42 international destinations.

Algérien operates a fleet of predominantly Airbus aircraft, most of which came as a result of the long and historical (albeit tense) relationship between Algeria and France, which has provided both financial assistance and technical aid on the purchase and maintenance of both Airbus and ATR aircraft. Algérien is currently a member of Unitedwings, offering a connection between Northern and Western Africa and the world.

Current Fleet
Airbus A319-100 — 8C 114Y — 14 aircraft
Airbus A320-200 — 12C 132Y — 20 aircraft
Airbus A321-200 — 16C 159Y — 6 aircraft
Airbus A330-200 — 23C 28W 192Y — 12 aircraft
Airbus A330-300 — 30C 35W 223Y — 3 aircraft
ATR 72-500 — 68Y — 15 aircraft

Aircraft Orders
Airbus A330-800neo — 8 aircraft from 2018 (sole and launch customer)
Bombardier CS100 — 10 orders from 2020
Bombardier CS300 — 5 orders from 2019

 

 

Presented here is a breakdown of the livery's main components.

 

Here's a render of an example A330-200 in the Algérien fleet.

This is my favourite thread on AE. Also the first one I visited.

Considering that you have a hub in Boston and occupy 13 gates, I personally would begin to consider building a terminal but hold some reservations. 

 

Building a terminal is very cost effective: the amount you spend on gate leasing fees is dramatically reduced (instead of like $300k per gate, it's about $150-200k in total times the number of expansions you've made). 

 

I'll provide my hub of Minneapolis as an example: I used to have 25 gates leased, with a total monthly leasing cost of about $20 million / month. I replaced it with a 28-gate terminal for about $115 million upfront, and my cost of operation went down to $160,000. I've expanded it twice, so I'm paying about $480,000 / month now ($160,000 times 3 total expansions/buildings), but overall I'm still saving a lot.

 

The problem arises when you are a smaller airline — sure, a terminal will reduce the amount of money you spend per month, but there's a large upfront cost that will take some airlines many weeks, months, or even years to collect, especially if operating out of a large airport like Boston. Leasing gates can also provide for more flexibility, in which you don't have to build a costly expansion everytime you need more slots. I'd personally recommend that you wait until you occupy around 20 gates, then build a terminal with around 25 to allow for some more expansion. Note that there is a flat expansion cost added to the number of gates you want to add — try to have as few gate expansions as possible. 

If you read above I'm not trying to change A/C types, just adding another. Also I don't want to go after smaller jets as I'm trying to keep my maintenance down as much as possible so I can charge less on routes. I'd be interested in order the A321 for trans-atlantic routes in the future maybe, but I don't really want to go larger than the A319

 

You seem to be really focused on the 100- to 130-seat market, and in your game, it is fall 2000. If you're adamant about avoiding the Airbus A320 family because of its size, but don't want regional jets, I'd recommend the 717-200. It has a max capacity of 134 (around that of the 737-600), and it has a shorter turnaround time, less runway use, and a much lower price and roughly the same fuel flow (depending on which engines you pick). It ends production in 2007, but for now, it should be a good aircraft with less of a maintenance cost.

 

IT KNOWS

The pinned tutorial is from 2011, and has lost relevance. Wsoliman's tutorial is woefully inadequate. Many denounce GIMP as being simple, and complex to use. I present to you my own, complete tutorial on GIMP and its inner workings. Note that this tutorial is based on the macOS operating system.

 

Step 1. Download

The official website for GIMP is www.gimp.org. From there, you may download and install it onto your computer. Note that GIMP works for Windows, macOS, and Linux (pick your poison). From there, add it to your list of applications and launch it. You should get a blank screen that looks somewhat like this:

 

 

Step 2. Add Templates

You guys all know where Med's templates are. As a refresher, they're here. Download them, and then keep them in a safe and organized place so you know where to access them later (and while you're at it, consider helping Med out with a donation or something?). Once you've done that, double-click on the template to add it into GIMP. The .psd should be recognized by GIMP and opened automatically. If it does not, right-click on it and then click "Open With" and then select "GIMP." As an example, I've picked the 737-800. It should look something like this:

 

 

Step 3. Layers

A key aspect of GIMP (and most painting programs) is the layering options. Think of them like an onion, in which one layer goes over another. Note that Med has arranged his templates so that the base layer is in white ("FUSELAGE," for example), and all details (ie. "FUSELAGE EFFECTS") go above it. When painting, make sure that your paint goes in a new layer between the base layer and the detail layers. That way, the paint looks accurate. Also know that some templates, like the 737, offer multiple variants. Clicking on the eyeball will make layers visible or invisible: you can make the regular wing invisible and the wingletted wing visible, for example, to change the variant. That looks something like this:

 

 

Step 4. Painting

Now is when you can really get to town. I'm going to use a real-life airline for an example, in this case, something simple like Delta. First and foremost, remove all unnecessary layers. In my case, I've removed the eyebrow windows and the metal overlay.

 

Now, you get to add a new layer. Directly below all the layers are the layer modification tools: the left-most one will add a new layer. Position it where you'd like, and then name it something memorable. Below, I've created a new layer for the fuselage, and called it "FUSELAGE_PAINT."

 

 

Here's the fun part. Select a colour with the two swatches of colour on the left-hand side: change the top one to the colour of your choice. In Delta's case, it would be their signature blue colour, which I've added.

 

But, how do you paint within the lines? The answer: select tools. The left-hand side is full of tools for this purpose. Most are self-explanatory: the rectangle select tool makes rectangles of the size you drag, the ellipse select tool does basically what the rectangle select tool does, but for ellipses, etcetera. Free select lets you either hand-draw what you want or make a custom polygon out of straight lines. My favourite tool, however, is the paths tool, which is arguably the most complicated. Basically, it works like the free select tool, except you can click-and-drag to add curves to your pathways. When you're done, click "selection from path." I've done this below with the Delta 73H's belly paint.

 

 

You may ask now: what about the overhang? This is solved with layer masking, which is straightforward when you figure out what it is. This is going to differ from SKY's tutorial, but the principle is roughly the same. Using the base layer ("FUSELAGE," in this case), go to Layer > Mask > Add Layer Mask > Layer's Alpha Channel. On the paint layer, use the rectangle select tool to crop the layer to be the same size as the fuselage's (Layer > Crop to Selection). From there, repeat what you just did with the base layer, adding a layer mask to the paint too. Both layers should now have a layer mask on them. All you have to do now is hit Cmd-C on the fuselage's layer mask, and Cmd-Z it to the paint's. From there, hit the anchor below the list of layers to adhere the new layer mask. Voilà, conforming paint. 

 

 

All you really need to do is keep doing this for all the other layers (tail, engines, etc.) until you get a plane that resembles your aircraft. You can also use other tools to add touches you want (ie. the text tool for registrations or aircraft titles), or use File > Open as Layers in order to add logos or whatnot to your livery. 

 

Step 5. Finishing Touches

In order to add realism, consider adding details to make your livery realistic. You can do this by blocking windows, changing door outline colours, etc. in order to get an aircraft that looks like it could work in the real world. I've finished the Delta 737-800 below, complete with registration. 

 

 

Step 6. Exporting

To export a GIMP image, just use Cmd-E and hit enter. It'll create an exported .png image directly next to the .xcf file in which you've saved the image. From there, all you need to do is upload it and add it here.

 

 

 

And voilà! You have successfully created a livery! Most stuff on GIMP is relatively straightforward, but if you need any help (gradients, colour exchange, etc.), feel free to ask me. I highly recommend trying to replicate a real-world livery, getting to know how to use GIMP successfully before you go on to try to make your own unique livery. 

New GIMP sucks, to be honest.
2.8 is way simpler to get around for me and it’s much easier on my eyes.

I downloaded new GIMP for the tutorial and I honestly have no idea how to do anything anymore.