safety?

The flip side of this argument could be that an airline that spends all its money on making an airplane look cosmeticly nice might not be spending its money on the things that matter most. I’d far rather fly on a safe but scruffy looking airplane, than I would fly on one that looked pristine but which hadn’t had the requisite behind-the-scenese maintenance done on it.

FWIW, I’d fly on that airplane.

Andy

Here’s his other picture of the same aircraft. Not the prettiest looking, that’s for sure.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/658237/L/

I was going to say exactly what Steve said.

The only damage I can see is the paintwork. Give it a lick of paint and it will be as good as new in no-time.

At most modern airports you board aircraft via a jetway, so you don’t really see that sort of view of an aircraft

Yes but regardless of that looks of a aircraft before you fly on it are important to most people, if it looks a state like that one does most people would feel a bit uneasy about boarding and flying in it. 🙂

Just because the paint is a bit tarnished doesn’t mean the aircraft is not airworthy, and how does he know the wiper is non operable just by looking at it???????

is it a trick of the light,or can i really see dents in the panels?

Wow, thats amazing how that was flying in that condition! Even a 2 month old baby would say “No way!” to that!!! lol

Well if i saw that parked up ready to take me to my destination i would ‘Demad another aircraft immidiatley.
You wouldn’t see me walking on that aircraft….more like walking away from it! 😀