Slashdot Mirror


When Flying Was a Thrill

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Bob Greene writes that flying, with jammed-to-the-groaning-point cabins and torture-rack legroom; fees for everything from checking your bags to being handed a paltry package of food; and the endless, we'll-X-ray-you-to-within-an-inch-of-your-dignity security lines, is too often such a dreary, joy-sapping slog that it's difficult to remember that it was ever any other way. But back in the 1930s, '40s and '50s — even the 60s, flying was a big deal. When a family went on vacation by air, it was a major life event. 'Traveling by air in those years wasn't like boarding a flying bus, the way it is today,' says Christopher Lynch, author of "When Hollywood Landed at Chicago's Midway Airport," a celebration of the golden years of commercial air travel in the United States. 'People didn't travel in flip-flops. I mean, no offense, Mister, but I don't want to see your toes.' The trains were still king in those years and the airlines wanted to convince people that flying was safe. 'People were afraid to fly,' Lynch says. 'And it was expensive. The airlines had to make people think it was something they should try.' That's where Mike Rotunno came in, photographer-for-hire at Midway Airport in Chicago where cross-country flights in those years had to stop to refuel. His pictures of Hollywood stars as they got off the planes made air travel seem to be glamorous, sophisticated, civilized, and thrilling. 'Think of his photos the next time you're shoehorned into a seat next to a fellow who's dripping the sloppy innards of his carry-on submarine sandwich onto your sleeve,' writes Greene. 'Air travel was once a treasured experience, exciting, exotic, something never to be forgotten. You, too, could travel like Elizabeth Taylor.'"

31 of 382 comments (clear)

  1. You can still fly this way if you want to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just buy a ticket for business class.

    1. Re:You can still fly this way if you want to by dintech · · Score: 5, Informative

      Louis CK - Everythings Amazing & Nobodys Happy

      Flying is the worst one because people come back from flights and they tell you their story. And it's like a horror story. They act like their flight was, like, a cattle car in the '40s in Germany. That's how bad they make it sound.

      They're like, "It was the worst day of my life. First of all, we didn't board, for 20 minutes. And then we get on the plane and they made us sit there, on the runway, for 40 minutes. We had to sit there."

      Oh really? What happened next?

      Did you fly, through the air, incredibly, like a bird? Did you partake in the miracle of human flight, YOU NON-CONTRIBUTING ZERO?

      You got to fly.

      You're flying!

      It's amazing!

      Everybody on every plane should just constantly be going, "Oh my God! Wow!"

      You're flying.

      You're sitting in a chair in the sky. . . .

    2. Re:You can still fly this way if you want to by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, just because lots of things have happened IN THE LAST 34 YEARS doesn't meane they are all due to deregulation.

      You'll find that lots of other big companies have bought up or weeded out most of their competitors in other fields too. Back in the 90's I used to buy Computer Shopper magazine, where there were thousands and thousands of companies building PCs for you to buy. Today almost all those companies are gone. I guess that must be due to some deregulation. That or maybe, just maybe business fields tend to change over time even without deregulation being the cause.

    3. Re:You can still fly this way if you want to by dywolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I love flying. sure I hate it when some sweaty fat guy/gal didn't buy two tickets or get put next to an empty seat and is half in my lap. sitting on the tarmac in the heat, sucks too.

      But its got its good points too.

      Always get a window seat. I stare out the window. I watch the towns drift past. I name the cities and geographic features I see. If I spot something interesting one of the first things I do once i get to a computer is fire up google maps and figure out what I saw.
      -Did you know the Mississippi river is down so low, the river thats a mile wide for a huge portion of its length, is down so low right now from teh drought, that flying over memphis and other portions of it, it looks like over half its width was dry as bone sandbars? Thats the drought were in right now....the mississippi, the river that drains ~80% of the entire countries watershed.
      -approaching Pheonix on a lfight from 29 Palms to Dallas, about 30 minutes west of pheonix (at altitude and speed, so ~300 miles or so, near the border with cali) was a quarry/pit mine in the middle of the desert. One that was absolutely HUGE from 30000 feet up. Dont know what theyre mining, but from google, and flight, it appears to be over a mile deep, the central pit. And a few miles wide. The civil engineer side of me looks at that and thinks, wow, thats a feat. Thats awesome.
      -I see hidden lakes and rivers and creeks near places Ive lived for years, that I never knew existed.
      -On flights out of San Diego, LA, and San Fran, when they have to loop out over the ocean before turning back inland on takeoff, I've seen whales, scores of them, swiming along. Big ones (grey or fin?) and small (dolphins and orca). Often only a mile or so from shore.
      -Flying into (and out of) turkminstan and afghanistan on my deployment, I swore I was flyinig across portions of nevada, the desert terrain is so similar. And again, there is no much hidden greenery around little water seeps, rivers and lakes. Bagram is in the middle of nowhere, thats why theres a base there. Just a few ridges over its like a huge valley oasis (relatively, for a desert), and naturally that's where the people, mostly farmers, are concentrated. They dont show you much of the rugged beauty and scenery of the place when they show the news. Everyone thinks its just sand and camels, but its familiar territory for anyone who's lived int eh southwest.
      -Flying across the desert of new mexico, I seen white sands test range
      -flying across so cal, i seen the muroc dry lake, with its giant rose compass, and the dry lake "runway" the shuttle landed on. as a aviation buff, that place is magic land anyway
      -had a flight once fly over near the tonopah test range and airfield due to storm forced divert. didnt cross the airspace, but apaprently we got pertty close to their flight paths over there, cause in a couple successive flashes of lightning, i saw a flight of F117s crossing our line of flight, a few thousand feet below us.

      There's magic out there still in flying.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    4. Re:You can still fly this way if you want to by JoeMerchant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's dropping from middle class to working poor. You've got to be really dirt poor to benefit (economically) from taking a bus across country compared to flying.

      4 days lost productivity is more than airfare, even at minimum wage.

  2. mostly because there wasn't room for 3rd class by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, rich people looked rich back in the good old days. Same thing with the ocean liners in 1st class: very upper-class, luxurious, glamorous. But most people who traveled on ocean liners didn't travel in 1st class, so it was hardly the norm. The difference with early planes was that there was basically only a 1st class, due to a lack of room to include a 2nd class or steerage section.

  3. I don't want thrills... by isaac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I want safe, quick transportation from point A to point B at a reasonable price. Modern air travel mostly delivers this. It didn't use to.

    Air travel was of dubious safety and blinding expense in the '30s, '40s, '50s - and wasn't particularly comfortable either. I don't wish to return to that era, one bit.

    -Isaac

    --
    I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
    1. Re:I don't want thrills... by ccguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I want safe, quick transportation from point A to point B at a reasonable price.667 Modern air travel mostly delivers this.

      Only if your definition of quick only includes time elapsed between take off and landing. Definitely not that fast if you time door to door and include everything.

      Also, why isn't a 'medium' class anymore? One would think that any company that provided decent legroom at a reasonable price would make a killing. Seriously, I don't want to pay business fares just so I can have a flight in which I'm not worried about the retard on the front row putting their seat all the way down (at the risk of breaking my knees), but I'd be happy to pay twice the coach fare if I could have the legroom from the seat in front on mine (ie half the rows at twice the price).

      A flight from Madrid to New York costs 400 euros in coach, around 3000 in business. Damn, give me something decent for 800! I don't need champagne, I don't need slippers, I don't need a private selection of movies. I just need the legroom.

    2. Re:I don't want thrills... by drsmithy · · Score: 3, Informative

      A flight from Madrid to New York costs 400 euros in coach, around 3000 in business. Damn, give me something decent for 800! I don't need champagne, I don't need slippers, I don't need a private selection of movies. I just need the legroom.

      Most airlines have a Premium Economy option these days. Expect to pay about twice as much as regular Economy.
      It's roughly equivalent in terms of legroom and service as Business Class was ~20 years ago.

    3. Re:I don't want thrills... by ccguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Eh? Door to door, flying from Denver to San Francisco, it's about half a day. 2.5 hour flight, an hour and a half on each side for getting to/from the airport, boarding, etc. Toss in some random stops to 7-11 or something and you're looking at spending about 6-8 hours of travel time.

      Am I missing something?

      Yes, high speed trains, but of course they may not be available in your country or for your desired trip.
      When available it's a no brainer. The total time is roughly is same (for distances up to 1000 km), and they go from city center to city center, and they're a lot more comfortable.

    4. Re:I don't want thrills... by SonnyDog09 · · Score: 3

      Seems to work well in Japan over similarly long distances and much more difficult terrain.

      Where do you get the idea that distances are similar? Japan is the size of California. Your trip from Tokyo to Osaka is a whopping 318 miles. A trip from Detroit to Denver is 1200 miles. That's only a two timezone trip. If I wanted to go to the west coast a trip from Detroit to LA is 2200 miles.

      --
      Your "fair share" is NOT in my wallet.
  4. It was a tremendously big deal. by dtmos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We would look forward for weeks to a flight, and wear our best clothes. There was no security hassle, and you waited in the departure area for your flight to be called, then walked outside to the gate in the chain-link fence that led to the planes. Somebody pointed out which one was yours, and you went up the stairs and got in. The rest of your friends and family who were there to see you off stayed behind the fence, and waved at you, and watched the door close, the engines start, and your plane taxi away. If it was a reasonably small airport your friends could wait and try to identify your plane as it took off.

    Ah, those were the days. (Sniffle.)

  5. Re:Slow-flying news day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdot is powered by your submissions. What have you submitted lately? If you don't like what's being submitted, submit something better yourself or go into 'recent' on the right hand side and down vote the crap. Stop whining about something you have control over.

  6. Re:Isnt it better now? by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Absolutely right. I found out a friend was very sick just a few weeks ago - I bought my ticket on-line for the next day, checked in on-line immediately after and was on a different continent the following evening. I am not wealthy (by developed world standards) and it'll stretch my budget a bit but it was completely doable. I made it home before my friend died and was able to see her and the family.

    I found out she was ill via a call on our Vonage phone - no additional cost to my friend calling me.

    I have no desire to go back to an earlier time when I probably would not have found out until after she had died and not been able to afford going back - and even if I could it would have taken a lot longer than a day.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  7. Not all that long ago by NetDanzr · · Score: 4, Interesting
    You dont have to look that far into the past. Back in the 1980s, I was flying about once or twice per year between Prague and Lisbon and back. Always used Czechoslovak Airlines. The plane was largely empty, so I got to sit in the front, in facing seats with a table between them. Even when I had to sit in the "regular" class (I hesitate to call it economy, because it was nothing like today's cattle pens), we got a stewardess taking orders for drinks and snacks. And we got linen napkins with the main meal...

    Ok, enough nostalgia. I'm now at the stage where speed is secondary to comfort. I want my zeppelins back!

  8. Re:No one could afford it. by ZankerH · · Score: 3, Funny

    By these standards Jobs and Gates are both slobs.

    Yes, yes they are.
    Is it really too much to ask that people dress in a way that makes it possible to estimate their financial standing without direct contact?

  9. Re:Toe bigot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you judge me by my appearance, I will judge you for being judgmental.

    Yes, but you will be judging me from outside the opera.

  10. Attention Kmart Shopper by jamesl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You too, could travel like Elizabeth Taylor.

    If you had Elizabeth Taylor's money. Today, if you have Elizabeth Taylor's money, you charter a jet.

  11. Yes, except the cutting edge always becomes normal by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Otherwise we'd all still be staring at a wheel or a flint axe and going "Woooow!" So its rather unfair to blame people for complaining about flying conditions when its a normal part of life no matter how amazing flying is technically.

  12. All driven by price, duh by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When it costs the same as bus fare, the experience is much like, well, a bus.

    The fact was that air travel used to be extraordinarily expensive. IIRC a Washington-Cleveland ticket was around $100 in the new, cheap "coach" class...which is like $900 today.

    Now I can get that flight for $100 2012 dollars.

    I guess my comment to the writer is that if he wants to travel comfortably, then he needs to pay for first class flights which have surprisingly not changed much over time (aside from inflation). Of course, most people think those are stupid expensive.

    --
    -Styopa
  13. I'll settle for pre-TSA days by bradley13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll settle for days not so far in the past. I used to fly out of Dallas Love Field, which is a fairly small airport. Park you car, walk to the check-in counter, walk to the gate, get on the plane. Somewhere in there you walked through a metal detector. Total elapsed time: 30 minutes.

    Now, in the US with TSA security theater, you have to allow 90 minutes. An entire extra hour, times 600,000,000 flights per year: TSA costs the equivalent of more than 1000 lifetimes of time each and every year. Add to that the monetary and social costs of paying an army of morons to humiliate everyone, and you can only shake your head in disgust...

    I want to go back to simple security measures, run by the airlines, who presumably have some interest in (a) efficiency and (b) customer service.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  14. Re:Yes, except the cutting edge always becomes nor by ciderbrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That bit was the build up to the punchline sort of pointing out how the cutting edge always becomes normal. We just put a nuclear power car on Mars and 100 years ago we could hear air and hope for not death. A chair in the sky is amazing and the phone in your pocket makes Kirk's look like a pile of crap.
    Adult should take stock and go WOW! Only children can say all your old stuff is shit.

  15. The past sucked - time to admit it by captainpanic · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly. The only people who flew in the 1930s to the 1960s were the rich. Why are we surprised that they flew in luxury?

    The fact the the middle class can fly today only means that the price to fly has dropped dramatically.

    Of course, that is obvious... this article just complains that we still don't have flying cars, free energy and everlasting happiness. So far, every article that claims that the past was better has been full of logical fallacies. Usually they compare a romanticised past with a pessimistic view of the present. The past sucked for most people, but some are reluctant to admit it.

    I have had lovely flights quite recently. Friendly stewardesses, nice view, decent seat with leg space (not too much, but enough), and a free drink + lunch + coffee. A minimal chech-in time (30 min before departure), only a metal detector as a security and very quick bagage handling. Also, public transportation to and from airports has vastly improved (in Europe, at least).

    And all that for 100 euro for a 2 hrs flight (i.e. 1200 km), which I booked online in a matter of 10 minutes.

    No way that was better in the 1960s.

    1. Re:The past sucked - time to admit it by CelticWhisper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The freaking rules," however, are in flagrant violation of at least the spirit, if not the letter, of the biggest "freaking rule" in the nation, the Constitution. Some of us take issue with this and so security becomes a big deal.

      --
      Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
      http://www.tsanewsblog.com
  16. Here's An Idea by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about we use this wonderful network of tubes to set up a method and system for organizing and grouping people who want to fly from point A to point B and combine their travel money to schedule/hire chartered flights?

    A project for Kickstarter, maybe? Crowd-sourced?

    I'm not sure precisely how it would work, but I see this system where you can use your phone or computer to post proposed charter flights and/or browse existing proposed charter flights by origin/destination/schedule/price looking for one that fits your travel plans that has openings.

    Handle the airlines (and the TSA) like how the internet was originally designed to handle damage...route around them.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  17. Re:Yes, except the cutting edge always becomes nor by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The human brain makes any of our technology look like amateur rubbish so do you spend your day looking in the mirror thinking how amazing you are? Unless you're a complete narcissist I suspect not but compared to it your smartphone and an aircraft are like childs lego bricks. So no , adults shouldn't take stock and go wow all the time - you deal with the world the way it is.

  18. AMTRAK by sycodon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think that AMTRAK is missing the boat here and there is a big opportunity for other companies to bring back traveling by train big time.

    First, there is a constant drone of opinion and advice to slow life down.

    Second, as mentioned in the summary, traveling by air is a giant PINA.

    I think that if done right, rail travel could be cheaper than air travel and much more pleasant.

    Done right =

    1. Non-stop routes.
    2. Good food at normal restaurant rates.
    3. Technology accommodations (Wireless, chargers, etc.)
    4. Of course sleeping accommodations.

    I've looked at traveling by rail instead of air before but at the moment it is much more expensive to go the same distance and includes and unreasonable number of stops (they have it like a stupid commuter bus). I seem to remember that I could have driven and saved almost two days over AMTRAK.

    Now, where can I get a few billion dollars for start up costs (not including the money to buy off politicians)?

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:AMTRAK by wulfhere · · Score: 4, Informative

      Man, I wish I had mod points. This is completely true. I recently looked at taking a train to Florida (family trip, thought the kids would enjoy the train, good for the environment, etc). It would have taken us over 2 days to get from Chicago to Jacksonville, and been more expensive than flying.

      --
      -- Sent from a computer.
    2. Re:AMTRAK by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Non-stop routes

      Not going to happen. Since Amtrak is government underfunded and mismanaged it uses freight rails and has to pull over for any freight traffic, and every congressdick in the country makes sure that it stops in their district so they can tell their constituents that they're bringing home the tax dollars.

      Aside from that, rail will probably never be fixable. The environmentalists pushing it live in abject terror of cars, and the people they want to use it live in abject terror of having to walk 10 feet unaided. Despite the fact that the Chunnel seems to operate just fine, the two groups won't meet in the middle with drive-on carriages, because of course that would come from them evil european socialists.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    3. Re:AMTRAK by darkHanzz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MMm, both the German ICE and the French TGV work just fine, allowing one to quickly travel large distances in comfort. Comparing that to Great-Brittain, it seems that railway systems fare better in 'socialist countries with strong government.

  19. Re:Yes, except the cutting edge always becomes nor by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That bit was the build up to the punchline sort of pointing out how the cutting edge always becomes normal.

    That's not it. The reason we are no longer impressed by it is not that merely that it has become normal. Even when the shuttle program eventually got scrubbed, you can't tell me that anyone in those record crowds watching the last few takeoffs thought of it as normal. Even the folks who live down there were always impressed.

    The reason we are no longer impressed with most technology like airplanes and cell phones is that we have come to depend on it, and it has let us down. When airplanes were relatively rare, you didn't have people depending on them for most of their travel. People drove cars. An airplane was an exotic experience because you didn't have to depend on it to get you somewhere that you had to be. In much the same way, nobody cared about dropped calls in the early days because they weren't using them for the bulk of their communication. It was too expensive.

    As soon as any piece of technology becomes a regular part of your life, however, anything that goes wrong becomes a road block for you. Now that people depend on air travel for much of their work and pleasure travel—now that people have grown to depend on being able to readily go long distances for work and vacation—the delays and other problems have more of an impact because they don't build in that extra day to accommodate things going wrong. Similarly, now that many people use cell phones as their primary means of communication, dropped calls are a frequent hassle that bothers people more.

    If you want people to be impressed by something that they actually depend on, you have to do the right thing every time. It has to "just work". Every time. As soon as that consistency starts to falter, people quickly lose patience. And for good reason. A flight delay can cause them to miss the next flight, which puts them stranded in an unknown city halfway across the country from home. That didn't happen nearly as much in the early days of flying, back when on-time performance was less important than getting you there. If your flight was late, to the extent possible, they held the next leg. Now, on many airlines, they're forbidden to do so, and as a result, there's a lot more uncertainty about the ability of air travel to get you where you're going, so when things go wrong, people get edgy. In short, people can't count on the airlines to do the right thing every time. Ditto for the cell phone companies who frequently seem to be in a battle to see who can screw the customer hardest while making it as hard as possible to get justice when they do so (with mandatory binding arbitration clauses, for example).

    And this, in a nutshell, is why technology ceases to thrill—not because it has become commonplace, but because what was once optional has become essential, and because the companies that provide the technology invariably take advantage of that fact to let them get away with poorer service, poorer quality, poorer longevity, etc.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.