mike1968

Without having insight on your topic, United had a handful, at best Europe routes until it acquired Pan Am's London hub/route authorizations. At them time, from a pax perspective, you connected through London on a TATL widebody to UA-London based 727s to places like AMS, HAM, BER, BRU, etc. I think that acquisition came with London and other European crew bases who were already unionized through Pan Am and then some issue about how that merged into UA. Probably a former PA to UA F/A / pilot could could comment.

Bear96

IIRC, for F/A bases only LHR came with the PanAm deal. FRA and CDG (which is now closed) were started by UA in the 90s.

narvik

The ONE thing that I have noticed more than ANYTHING is the complete lack of interaction with fellow passengers these days.
And I am completely guilty of this myself.

I never had a flight back in late 80's/early to mid 90's where I wouldn't be chatting to my seatmate or other passenger[s], for part or most of the flights.
Parties were had.
Friendships were formed.


Nowadays, I can go 14 hours on a plane without saying one word to any other passenger.

WHAT GIVES???

Long Zhiren

You don't know? (1) In coach, everybody is so crammed together these days, everybody's in everybody else's personal space. It's uncomfortable. (2) Everywhere else, it's the sign of the times. The pointy end is still social, as long as you're not walled off in pods. Before take-off, everybody's glued to their personal devices. Sometimes, talking to somebody else loudly enough for everybody else to hear. It's ridiculous. You see it at the airports. At train stations. Everywhere. On French trains, there are "Zen zones" where you're not supposed to talk to anybody else...

GrayAnderson

So, I got linked to this thread from another site. Here's my view, reading that thread and based on everything I can tell, is as follows:
-The biggest issue with the "good old days" is price. I know there's the question of average airfare from various airports (and some claims that it hasn't gone up "that much"), but I think that distorts the shorter nature of many flights in the 1960s versus now (e.g. more longer-distance traffic, less shorter-haul traffic now by proportion). You're probably looking at anywhere from 6-10x the cost for a "baseline" coach ticket depending on the route/city pair and the year you're looking at.
--A major asterisk is that a number of shorter routes today will still carry nosebleed/"go away" fares, as will some thinly-served markets. As a handy example, when I started traveling on Amtrak regularly (so we're looking at 2008-9) tickets to/from Des Moines in coach were more expensive than taking the Capitol Limited in a sleeper and connecting to the California Zephyr in Chicago. It was about break-even when you take into account the taxi ride from Osceola to Des Moines. Another example I would offer, circa 2006, would be the $500-ish one-way fare I recall being quoted from Newport News to Daytona Beach shortly after Christmas. Yes, I know, I would have likely gotten a better rate Norfolk-Orlando with a round-trip and date flexibility...but I was 19 and didn't know about doing more complex searches involving other destinations.
--The other asterisk, which I'll discuss below, is that the ticket in question did include quite a bit more in terms of "benefits" (and no, I'm not talking about the "Coffee, Tea, or Me" type...).

-The biggest plus was probably the lack of "stupid games" on the airline side. Yes, I realize that variable ticket prices allowed for aggressive market segmentation and contributed to eventual medium-term profitability (the jury is still out on whether the current era of profitability will stick if fuel prices spike). From the end-user perspective, they're still at best a mixed bag...and I think that there's a case that forcibly unbundling things like baggage, seat selection, and the like is an overwhelming negative. So are super-high load factors. Being able to work out of a ticket for a trip that falls apart after booking (and actually get your money back instead of a voucher) one of those big pluses that's gone.
--It should be noted that there are some unrelated issues of "unbundling" which are externally-induced. A pair of handy examples here are expedited security (which wasn't needed 20 years back) or some checked luggage fees (if you want to bring any significant amount of liquid...e.g. a bottle of wine). I cannot entirely fault the airlines for these, but it isn't like they've tried to work out a customer-friendly kludge.
--I'll also quite frankly damn the pushing of travel insurance (which is basically the airlines doing everything they can not only to monetize everything but to outsource responsibility if things go haywire). Of note, most things like this haven't generally generated qualifying spend credit.
--A subset of this belongs to ULCCs, with intentionally capricious seating practices (such as "defaulting" to seating pax in a group that doesn't pay for seat selection all over the cabin even when nearby seats are available). In a sense, while everyone is bad, they're far worse.

-A secondary issue is the on-board situation. The read I get is that in coach, the food was substantially better and the seating better (the crack about a 32" slimline seat being "as good as" a 34" seat feels a bit painful...no, guys, it's noticeable, and it's even more noticeable the second time you went to that well to knock it down to 31" or 30" or 29"...and it's noticeable on both the legs and the butt now, too...). In Business/First, the situation wasn't as nice as it is now (you still had more legroom and better food/drink than in coach, but it wasn't a yawning gulf that nowadays is often "meal" versus "peanuts/pretzels").
--I'd also stack the rising load factors on here. Basically, you're getting squeezed in two dimensions (smaller seats and being far more likely to have "company").

-The third issue is, of course, the airport situation. I've made my thoughts clear on the TSA side of things before, but I think it is worth considering how much the "improved" (post-security) airport experience is a byproduct of security theater. Put differently, the need for lots of fancy food options did not exist until the risk of an hour-plus security line induced it (at origin airports) or the (relative) rise of heavy hubbing-and-spoking (at connecting airports). Considering the above-market pricing for a lot of things, I look at this more resentfully (the food isn't a horrible change in some cases, necessarily, but the "shopping mall" aspects are something I loathe, particularly when it is "pushed" in the design as is often the case) as it basically amounts to monetizing a (mostly pointlessly) negative change. Crappy airport food is a non-issue if you're only at the airport for half an hour or 45 minutes, and the improved options are often overpriced.
--Just as a note, but I wouldn't be surprised if "monetizing the airport situation" accounts for a few dollars off the average ticket price via reduced fees to the airlines. In that sense, however, you are unbundling a service which wasn't needed in the past.
--I would be curious as to what the lounge situation was at various points (in terms of provided food, drink, snacks, etc.) in the early 80s, as well as the restaurant situation at some of the major connecting airports (e.g. JFK or LAX) versus at smaller airports. Going back to the 90s, I know there were very limited post-security options at (say) PHF and ORF. However, there's always been a decent pre-security restaurant at ORF as long as I can recall (granted, there might be an issue with my taste buds not being terribly discerning here...) and PHF has intermittently had too little traffic to support more than a bar on either side of security (which is where it is now, FWIW).

I feel like this is probably fairly even-handed in terms of looking at things. My view is probably best summed up in a distortion of a certain quote from Steve Jobs: "A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you shove it down their throats, bit by bit, slice by slice, and tell them to like it or frak off and they can't really choose to frak off. Then, somehow, they buy it..." I suspect that if an airline had tried to slam in the "modern" business models in the early 1980s, it would have had (at best) limited success...but the slow drift in that direction did make it possible.

(And yes, for me that applies to a lot of modern technology as well.)

dilanesp

I disagree with A LOT of this.

1. There's no doubt that adjusted for inflation, fares were quite a bit higher. Even with respect to monopolized or dominated routes. Yes, it may seem horrible to be paying $1200 roundtrip for some flight where there's no competition, but even there, trust me, it was $3000 in today's dollars way back when. If there were even scheduled flights!

A related point- the expectation consumers have that fares should track distance, whether on trains or planes, is a false expectation. If you go to the mall, swimwear and underwear sometimes cost as much as outerwear, despite using far less fabric. Why? Because prices are set by supply and demand, not the amount of material you are getting. Since you mention Amtrak, folks who take the Northeast Corridor pay far more for train fares than folks who take the Pacific Surfliner out here where i live, even though the distances covered are similar. Why? Supply and demand.

LA-New York, a route with tons of competition, is going to cost less with an advance purchase than Bozeman, MT to Chicago. There's lots of competition, and the service can be provided in larger planes that are cheaper to operate. That's PROPER. It SHOULD cost less.

2. Unbundling is a direct result of consumer behavior. If consumers weren't insistent on clicking on the cheapest possible fare, even if it is on Spirit, Allegiant, or Ryanair, legacy airlines wouldn't unbundle. But unbundling is the ONLY way that luxuries can be delivered given this sort of consumer behavior.

3. Super high load factors are good. Really, really good. Ideally, every airline seat on every plane should be filled. That's good for the environment (lowest carbon footprint per traveler), and it also keeps fares low and airlines from going bankrupt. Those empty planes you experienced back in the day were not better customer service- they were airlines failing to persuade customers to buy tickets.

4. Reductions in seat pitch are way, way overstated. Yes, if you go back to the 1960's, you will find some 36 inch seat pitch in coach and things like that. But when I started flying, in the late 1970's, seat pitch was already 31 or 32 inches on most American carriers. The reduction to 30 on some planes is significant, and we can have an argument about slimline seats (I like them better, but some people prefer the old ones). We now have adjustable headrests in coach, which we didn't have before. And more importantly, WE HAVE ECONOMY PLUS. Economy class flyers on every flight can pay extra money- as they should- and receive 34 to 35 inches of legroom (even more in an exit row!), which is better than coach class had offered for decades before that.

Seat pitch hasn't gone down. It's gone up. It's true that for very frugal travelers who refuse to pay for seat pitch, it has gone down a little. But, as I said, the overall situation with seat pitch is a great improvement.

5. Actually, we always needed good food at airports. We just didn't have it. I remember changing planes in airports like St Louis and Denver in the early 1980's and having little to do and little to eat. The notion that the only reason good food is needed is because of TSA security is absurd. The food at airports is a massive improvement over the past and, again, worth paying for with all the money we are saving because tickets are so much cheaper now.

Nor is airport food "crappy". A lot of it is either fast food of exactly the same quality as is available outside or decent diner/restaurant food. Again, back in the early 1980's, we were looking at greasy hot dogs and stuff.

6. I realize it is to each his (or her) own, but I love airport shopping malls. They are brighter, more colorful, and give me more to do and to spend on. And I can't see how it hurts anyone- if you don't like the mall, you can go sit at a gate or (if you are eligible) a lounge!

7. The only decent restaurant at LAX 35 years ago was what we now call "Encounters", the theme restaurant. And you had to exit security and walk a distance of ground to go to it. All the rest of the food was snack bars. Meanwhile, JFK was a gigantic construction site.

8. They used to push travel insurance at airports back in the day! There were boxes for it in every airport I remember.

9. I think modern technology is great as well. We've never had it so good. The good old days were terrible.

findark

I am too. It's partly because I'm introverted and don't chat up strangers much, but also I think part of the modern world in general - social media and electronic devices with cellular data and wifi mean you can go anywhere without leaving your "bubble" and so interaction between strangers in any setting is becoming increasingly rare. But I am 100% guilty of this myself.. I am texting 2-3 friends at any given point while boarding and not talking to my seatmate. And my seatmate is probably doing the same thing

This is 100% true in premium cabins as well, where the trend is towards things like the Polaris seats where you don't even have to see another human on the plane if you don't want to.

seat38a

Then you sometimes end up with the yapper the whole flight who can't take a hint even with the earbuds in and will continue to yap about crap you have no interest in. Generally, if earbuds are in, I make no effort for conversation. I take it as a hint they don't want to be bothered. And when I do start talking with people, it seems that they don't know how to steer clear of sensitive topics like their political views. And then there's the ability to accidentaly offend someone. More often than not, I have to now refer to someone as baby momma or baby daddy and not ask about their husband or wife. It's just easier to stay quiet.

JimInOhio

One thing that certainly changed for the better is baggage is almost never mis-routed.

GrayAnderson

If I'm not mistaken, this really hit a nadir in the 1990s (as did overbooking issues, I think). I'm not sure how much of this was down to the consolidation/hub-and-spoke process hitting a rough patch and/or bad computers, but I do seem to recall that the baggage situation got (statistically) worse before it started improving.

747FC

Very good observations. Tracking society as a whole, an emphasis on work productivity (work on laptop or sleep).

bosman

I totally agree. Back in the 80s "in flight entertainment" was books, magazines or talking to the person next to you. Today with individual IFE and/or personal electronic devices, one can while away many hours with no interpersonal interaction.

dilanesp

I think baggage charges improved things.

You are going to take more care not to lose bags if it will require the company to process a refund.

This is actually a classic example of why unbundling is good.

The last thing I want to do is be forced to interact with strangers.

DELee

There are probably a few more elements to this such as the now potential of being called out for annoying and/or harassing others/that stranger sitting next to you.

One other piece I'd add is, recalling some of those onboard discussions was how, once a conversation started, you felt a bit of pressure to keep it going and be somewhat witty and fully engaged. I remember feeling a bit exhausted after a number of cross country flights just from the conversations and discussions between seatmates.

Or maybe it was just me.

David

ExplorerWannabe

And I disagree with a lot of this:

I agree, in an unregulated era, prices should track with demand but my recollection is that fare prices during the regulated era generally did track with distance.

Not in my experience going back to the 1970s. Of course, I was a bit ... smaller ... in the 1970s and 1980s but not shorter. Adjustable headrests make the seat more comfortable (if you're tall enough for them to matter -- a lot of people aren't) but they don't increase the pitch. There was absolutely more knee room or ability to get to my carry-on under the seat in front of me in the 1980s and this was flying coach on United, Northwest, TWA, American, and Delta (and comparing directly to being in Economy Plus today). Which major American carrier from the 1980s was I missing? The overall situation today WRT seat pitch is MUCH worse; I can't imagine under any circumstances how you could think it's a great improvement from 30-40 years ago.

We didn't "need" good food at airports but the options today are certainly more varied than they were 30+ years ago and there are often non-mediocre options. With some exceptions, airport food has always been expensive compared to eating before you get to the airport. Whether it's worth paying for is up to the consumer -- I will generally eat before I go or wait until I arrive and get out of the airport.

I hate them. I'm not a shopper and they're taking up space that could have more seating or make the existing seating more comfortable or put in additional recharge stations. Heck, I'd rather have more historical or local artwork displays. The absolute worst change I've seen in overseas travel has been being funneled through "Duty Free" shopping as I enter or exit the country. I've got all I need to do (without spending additional money) on my ereader, iPad, laptop, etc. I rarely see anyone buying anything except at the convenience store (or Duty Free on those international trips) so I've always been a bit befuddled at how the economics of most of those airport stores work. They're paying huge airport leasing fees to get how many sales per day? Just how does that work?