jsloan

1960s dollars, I think.

findark

Yes, I was was using 1969 dollars because the conceit is always "things were better and cheaper back in the good old days". Inflation tends to make people completely unaware of how insanely cheap it is to fly these days. For your typical time when plans had 34-36" pitch, good meals with real silverware in Y, and every middle was empty unless your child was in it, you can buy F or J today for that Economy price.

dilanesp

You know what else was true back in the 1960's? If you owned a small business you only had to pay your workers $1.60 an hour! You could hire a plumber for $10 an hour!

And heck, what were stewardesses and pilots making back then?

Money not adjusted for inflation is completely meaningless. What good is a cheaper fare if people make less money to pay it?

It is of course true that back in the day tickets were fully refundable. You know what else is true? Back in the day airlines found it very difficult to make a profit and went out of business all the time. Back in the day there were fatal plane crashes involving major American carriers every year, despite there being far fewer total flights. Back in the day a lot of flights were on slow, wobbly, propeller driven planes. Back in the day there was no space for carryons on planes- you had to check all your stuff and wait for it at the destination airport.

As for paying for extras, even after you pay for the extras, air travel is still much cheaper now than it was then. If you buy regular economy (not basic economy) and throw in a checked bag fee, you are still way cheaper on many many routes than typical 1960's fares. My parents flew a lot in the 1960's, and it was a very expensive proposition. They have photos and the planes were filled with rich guys in suits.

eng3

You can't make blanket statements. Somethings are better, some are worse. IFE went from nothing, to those tapes, to the central screen, to a screen to each set. Ofcourse then it went backwards to bring your own device (and/or content). Seats went from the recliner to the lay flat up front. In the back, they got smaller, thinner, closer together. Meals have gotten worse and smaller (or non-existent). Cost has come down, fees have gone up. But overall, if you are just going by value, I'd say the value is better these days if you look at the whole picture. And that doesnt even include the massive improvements in safety if you exclude the random animal attack.

dilanesp

Meals have not "gotten worse" when you include what you can buy at the airport.

And of course since ticket prices are so much lower you still end up ahead.

eng3

Ofcourse, you can bring anything onto the plane. I do not include airport as the thread had "on UA" in the title.

dilanesp

To be more clear, I think there is a much stronger argument for inflight meal service in a world where airport terminals just had a hot dog stand or something.

In the modern world you can buy far better food especially at major airports. So "we no longer get overcooked filet mignon on a 3 hour flight" seems less than crucial.

eng3

I don't recall what airport terminals had in the 80's. If there were restaurants or if it were just hot dog stands. However, you have to pay extra for it and you don't always have time to stop to buy food. Regardless, the OP seemed to be asking about the difference between the 80's on UA and what you get now on UA. Just looking at that, I'd think it has gotten worse in the food/value department.

dilanesp

Take my word for it, even into the 1980's, airport food was pretty basic.

As for "you have to pay extra for it":

Correct. After paying much, much less for your airline ticket, you have to pay extra for food. Not nearly as much as you saved on your ticket, but still, a small amount extra.

My general theory of all airline complaints is that a percentage of the population prefers, psychologically, to get something "for free" than to "pay extra". Of course, in reality, you pay for everything. Just because it is built into the ticket you still pay. But psychologically, it seems "free", and a significant percentage of the population simply prefers anything "free" to something carrying a charge.

But rationally, you are going to get better food at the airport than you will on the plane, because meals on planes have a bunch of logistical difficulties. Yes, you have to pay a bit extra for this. But good things are actually worth paying for, and as I said, there is still a massive overall savings.


And if you don't have that time, you can buy on board or book F. And still pay less than 1968.

The point is it is invalid to ignore food on the ground. What upsets people isn't that they aren't getting to eat-airport restaurants are often crowded!- but it isn't "free". Which is just irrelevant.

moondog

I completely agree with you on this, and think the point is relevant. While I realize that some people are fundamentally opposed to forking over $15 for a salad or a sandwich when they know they are going to be fed for free on the airplane, this small amount of money makes for a more enjoyable flight.

Sykes

I think that it's fair to say that catering on United has gotten worse. Having said that, while there are occasional bright spots, airplane food has always been derided. Given the choices in the terminal, a passenger has much more ability to have a good meal on the plane than they did before, but they have to take the initiative and pay to do so.

eng3

As for cost, it is relevant because I am defining "On UA" as what you get for your ticket price.
I suppose in the 80's you could buy a steak and lobster dinner with wine to-go from a restaurant and bring it with you to the airport and on-board the plane. In that case, you could say it was better too.
The seats are thinner and harder now, but I suppose you can buy a better seat cushion and bring it with you on the plane too.
There's not much you can do about legroom and seat width these days, but you can get very cheap seats on private jets sometimes so you could say that is better too.
I'm just trying to answer the original question:

Were The Early 80's Really That Much Better On UA Than Now?
On UA, In terms of food, it's worse. In terms of value, it is better.


But in the end, I think we are in agreement.
W/R to the whole air travel experience, It is better because you have the option to bring on board (or buy on board).

cerealmarketer

There were restaurants in the bigger ones...just not nearly as many

SFO where the Yankee Pier is now was a place called the Crab Pot from the late 70s to early 2000s - and not much different of a concept

MSP had a 'Cheers' bar and grill in what's now the Stone Arch Brewery

radonc1

As far as cost is concerned...
In the early 1980s, my wife and I had to fly to N. Carolina from IAH for a wedding . Either AA or UA wanted $700 pp for the flight (over a weekend). However, People's Express was flying IAH-ORF for $69 each if we were willing to fly through EWR and pay for the flight on board and receive a cash register receipt (from a real on-board cash register no less ).
It didn't take us much convincing to choose People's Express and rent a car and drive from Norfolk to N. Carolina.

The flight itself went off without a hitch and certainly was no worse than the budget flights of today (with the exception of bigger seats, no charge for luggage and dirtier planes).

So flying back then certainly was more elegant but far more costly on routine airlines.

moondog

Did those restaurants design takeaway meals that were well suited for onboard consumption? I was rather young then, so maybe I didn't notice if they did. But, I used to fly out of SJC (not a big airport) in the late 90s, and the restaurants there were not up to speed on this at that point in time.