Boeing Phantom Works Logo

Reaper

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
31 March 2009
Messages
274
Reaction score
90
Hi guys!
Does anyone know who uses this logo for their designs? I found it on photos of the latest Boeing designs FA-XX, X-48, T-X...
BWB%20ProdCARD.pdf

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads//2012/12/Boeing-TX-thumb.jpg
 

Attachments

  • logo.jpg
    logo.jpg
    5 KB · Views: 241
Thanks! So I assume Phantom Works does the conceptual aircraft designs for Boeing Military Aircraft, since all configurations are more or less military related!?
 
I hope that doesn't mean that the 'masked man' Phantomworks logo of McDonnell heritage is going away...
 
AeroFranz said:
I hope that doesn't mean that the 'masked man' Phantomworks logo of McDonnell heritage is going away...

I'm afraid that the "Phantom", which was around since the early days of McDonnell aircraft, may be gone for good... :(
 
Stargazer2006 said:
AeroFranz said:
I hope that doesn't mean that the 'masked man' Phantomworks logo of McDonnell heritage is going away...

I'm afraid that the "Phantom", which was around since the early days of McDonnell aircraft, may be gone for good... :(
This is indeed a poor logo design disrespectful of all basic logo design rules. Very "fashionista" and overworn design. Looks like something already 10 years old, at the time people discovered Flash™, and massively invested vector graphics. Kiddo stuff. If any of Paul Rand's heritage has a meaning, someone missed it and that's bad. (Paul Rand and Saul Bass masterfully crafted what is known today as "graphic design".)`

Now, what I see here quite indeed looks like a "P" but may also take after a "plasma aerodynamic" markings / area designed to control skin friction drag. Boeing holds several patents exhibiting unusual plasma areas and design on BWB designs. There could be a connection. I can't imagine they hired a 15 year old brainless designer to craft a poorly evolving phantom identity. Rule of thumb in graphic design: always design your logo against a square grid or a circle shape. Not what we see.

A.
 
Your version is the Wikipedia one, but it is warped. Here is a slightly different drawing (one eye, different hat) but in better quality.
 

Attachments

  • phantomlogo.jpg
    phantomlogo.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 158
It boggles me how management does not value the pride and heritage of a design organization. I heard years ago Lockheed tried to get away from 'Skunkworks' altogether in official documents, preferring 'ADP' instead. I believe the push came from Fort Worth, but this is second hand rumors from a friend.
 
AeroFranz said:
It boggles me how management does not value the pride and heritage of a design organization. I heard years ago Lockheed tried to get away from 'Skunkworks' altogether in official documents, preferring 'ADP' instead. I believe the push came from Fort Worth, but this is second hand rumors from a friend.

I don't know how easy that is to do when a company like Boeing Military Airplane Company is consolidated with Hughes Satellite Systems, Hughes Helicopters, Vertol, McDonnell Aircraft Company, and the North American Aviation division of Rockwell International and it becomes Boeing Defense, Space & Security. At least Boeing has added the Douglas Aircraft Company logo to its own. Boeing also operated North American Aviation as a subsidiary for a while as Boeing North American when it purchased the aviation assets of Rockwell International. I guess that the combined company when Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas could have been named Boeing McDonnell Douglas.

Lockheed Corporation merged with Martin Marietta and purchased Loral Corporation's defense and electronics business and also purchased the former Convair Division of General Dynamics. Should the combined company have been called Lockheed Martin Consolidated Vultee?
 
Triton said:
Boeing also operated North American Aviation as a subsidiary for a while as Boeing North American.

But you see, the key here is "for a while"...

The name McDonnell remained in McDonnell Douglas. Now both are gone.
The name Ryan remained in Teledyne Ryan... Now it's gone.
The names Republic and Hiller remained in Fairchild Republic and Fairchild Hiller... Now all three are gone.
The name Canadair was kept for a while by Bombardier but now it's gone.
The name De Havilland Canada is gone.
The name Vought was revived by Northrop but then disappeared again.
The name Schweizer has been dropped by Sikorsky. Now it's gone.

Names like Convair, Curtiss-Wright, Bellanca are long gone. And of course I'm only taking the example of American aviation, but it happened all over the world. When European companies became conglomerates, all the names that had made aviation disappeared.

I hate it when all these emblematic names that made aviation go down the doldrums. I don't see any justification for it. The companies now claim as their rightful heritage the history of those companies they competed with for decades, almost as if it had never happened. The specifics of these rich separate companies are all lost, blended into a would-be stronger identity that is in fact a chimera, an impossible creature made up of parts that do not fit together.

Some reasons for hope ? The reappearance of Beechcraft after a long stint as Raytheon. Or the reappearance of Piasecki.

But how long until the name Grumman is lost in Northrop Grumman?
The long-gone Martin name resurfaced in Lockheed Martin. But for how long?
The names Bell and Cessna still exist, but how long until it's all Textron?
How long until Kaman becomes part of Lockheed and this identity is lost, too?
 
The Americans at least kept some names, compared to the Europeans merging most of the names under one name that only lasted for around ten years.
 
Thank you so much for that. I've kept reading that logo for years as "SSP" which made no sense at all!
 
If only you did lol
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom