41–50 of 75 posts
The Asian airlines I've used (JAL, ANA, Singapore, AirAsia) have been pretty damn good. It's hard to mess up curry and rice; you get salad, side dishes, bread, ice cream and alcohol. Many of the dishes are designed by famous chefs, even in economy.
When comparing "flying then" to "flying now", you need to look at the real cost of the flights. Yes, the experience in economy class has got worse, but the cost of the ticket has also significantly dropped. In 2021 dollars, the cost of a round trip air fare has basically halved since 1979. You could buy a business class ticket now for a comparable price to economy back then. https://www.airlines.org/dataset/annual-ro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One more reason to just invest more in good high speed train infrastructure. https://www.chronotrains.com/?zoom=4.4&lng=4.85&lat=49.23&st...
It would only take a couple of terrorist incidences on the train to make the experience as painful as flying already is.
Planes are an exceptional target because they can be deviated to foreign countries or to dramatic impact sites and because are so isolated while in the air. Neither applies to trains.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> round trip air fare has basically halved since 1979 I don't think that number will hold up if you include square feet of personal space and lbs of luggage that might need extra fees.
Or factor in the loss of purchasing power, along with the shrinkflation. I love when people adjust for inflation in these debates but don't factor in purchasing power of the dollar comparison. The ticket price is more expensive now, than 1979.
Gallons of milk in my grocery store.
Lbs of potatoes of X species.
Feet of 2 by 4s to X spec.
sq inch of flat in Dallas.
Hours worked for a white collar clerk.
Etc. "Inflation adjusted" dollars are not quality adjusted really.
In the same way a economy class ticket is a worse experience than in the 90s, e.g. a chicken is a worse chicken too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> round trip air fare has basically halved since 1979 I don't think that number will hold up if you include square feet of personal space and lbs of luggage that might need extra fees.
The airlines.org figures includes a column with bags and fees. More or less halved in real terms since 1990. You might have lost an inch or two of legroom. Then again, you might not because they made the seats skinnier...
When comparing "flying then" to "flying now", you need to look at the real cost of the flights. Yes, the experience in economy class has got worse, but the cost of the ticket has also significantly dropped. In 2021 dollars, the cost of a round trip air fare has basically halved since 1979. You could buy a business class ticket now for a comparable price to economy back then. https://www.airlines.org/dataset/annual-ro…
This is a case where I wish society didn’t optimize for the lowest price and instead made it acceptable to pay more to make the default option more appealing. Yes, you can always pay for business class, but it’s framed as an upgrade, not the baseline standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a case where I wish society didn’t optimize for the lowest price and instead made it acceptable to pay more to make the default option more appealing. Yes, you can always pay for business class, but it’s framed as an upgrade, not the baseline standard.
Yes, but... today, if you don't need more than carry-on luggage and are ok with not getting anything to eat during the flight, you are able to afford flying, let's say, from Munich to Barcelona for a weekend, which you maybe wouldn't have been able to do when "paying more for a more appealing default option". Of course it's debatable if encouraging such flights is good for the environment, but purely from the perspec…
But my point was more that just as we have certain expectations for other things, it would be nice if we had the same for air travel – and not just resign ourselves to "the absolute lowest price possible" as the defining characteristic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but... today, if you don't need more than carry-on luggage and are ok with not getting anything to eat during the flight, you are able to afford flying, let's say, from Munich to Barcelona for a weekend, which you maybe wouldn't have been able to do when "paying more for a more appealing default option". Of course it's debatable if encouraging such flights is good for the environment, but purely from the perspec…
It's my understanding that most of these cheap flights are heavily subsidized to begin with. But my point was more that just as we have certain expectations for other things, it would be nice if we had the same for air travel – and not just resign ourselves to "the absolute lowest price possible" as the defining characteristic.
The Asian airlines I've used (JAL, ANA, Singapore, AirAsia) have been pretty damn good. It's hard to mess up curry and rice; you get salad, side dishes, bread, ice cream and alcohol. Many of the dishes are designed by famous chefs, even in economy.
I had a fine time on JAL, theyve come a long way since being responsible for one of the more infamous food/air incidents - the poop plane: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Air_Lines_food_poisoni...
1) 200 people with diarrhea and vomiting. Can't imagine how the plane smelled.
2) JAL's catering manager committed suicide after hearing about this.
3) If the pilots had eaten the food the plane may not have even landed safely - at the time pilots did not eat different meals to the passengers, but this is now commonplace.
4) Ultimate cause was actually American - Alaskan cooks in Anchorage prepared the food, and one had infected blisters on his hand.
5) Could have been prevented if the food wasn't stored at room temperature for 6 and then 8 hours. Matches my experience with Japanese people who have no problem leaving cooked food out in supermarkets all day long, or leaving leftovers overnight at room temperature without chilling it, very different to the US or UK.