Originally Posted by
1995hoo
But Concorde was the equivalent of a long-haul flight. You're not making a fair comparison. Three or four hours on a CRJ from YVR to SLC is not even remotely comparable to three hours twenty minutes on Concorde from LHR to JFK.
Why not? You do cover longer distance, yes...
Would you rather fly from Washington to Dallas on Concorde or 727?
Of course, then there are the people who spent much longer than four hours on a Concorde, with just a brief stretch of legs (or do you stay onboard during tanking?) somewhere remote like Santa Maria, Dakar or Bahrein. London-Singapore is 9 hours in total. Which do you prefer - 9 hours in a 4 abreast Concorde, or 13...14 hours in a 4 abreast B777-300ER First Class?
Originally Posted by
1995hoo
That's also why people aren't making a fair comparison when they compare a Concorde seat to VS's Upper Class, or BA's Club World or FIRST. There's no need for those fancy fold-flat beds on Concorde when it's such a short (time-wise) flight.
True, Kingfisher First or United p. s. are not quite flat beds. But many shorthaul passengers do feel the need for more elbowroom than what is offered in the Coach, even on short hops.