Super-Constellations

[Rod Hagen]

They were the most beautiful commercial planes any airline ever used. I know it will date you, but if any of you had any experience flying on these planes, PLEASE tell me about it. I think they are absolutely gorgeous. They're my, and my Monkey's, favorite airplane. I bet it was WONDERFUL wasn't it?

[eastbayguy]

Rod,

 

>They were the most beautiful commercial planes any airline

>ever used. I know it will date you, but if any of you had

>any experience flying on these planes, PLEASE tell me about

>it. I think they are absolutely gorgeous. They're my, and

>my Monkey's, favorite airplane. I bet it was WONDERFUL

>wasn't it?

 

Never flown aboard a Super-C, but, if you're up for a trip to Kansas City, you can apparently fly aboard one yourself. Check out this link:

 

http://www.airlinehistorymuseum.com/connie.htm

 

This aircraft is still used on the air show circuit. I believe she is flown by retired TWA flight crews and others.

 

--EBG

[Guest RushNY]

Hagen-saw this thread earlier and was reading my latest book when i came across this-spooky !

From "Down Under"by Bill Bryson Pg163

basically for those that dont know the book is about travelling around Australia the author is talking about the amount of time it used to take to travel to Australia

"With the introduction by Qantas in 1954 of the Lockheed Super Constellation the price of air travel began to fall-The Super Constellations took 3 days to reach London and lacked the power and range to dodge most storms,When encountering monsoons or cyclones the pilots had no option but to put the seat belt signs on and bounce through them.Even in normal conditions they flew at a height guaranteed to produce more or less constant turbulence"

©2000 bill bryson

sounds as though they may have been nice to look at but not easy to be a passenger-thought you might find it interesting.

[chrismac]

A not-so-fortunate L1049:

 

http://planecrashinfo.com/w601216.htm

[trilingual]

OK, I'm dated. I'm not sure the Connies really were that beautiful; they were just bigger and more powerful than anything that had come before. What was nice about them was that in those days flying was an "occasion." You dressed up. Women put on their girdles and heels and smart hats. Men wore jackets and ties. There were enough stewardesses on board to provide personalized service, so you got nice food served on china with real silverware. Cocktails were complimentary. Seating, as I recall, was comfortable. It was like going to a nice party.

 

It was a far cry from the standard American airline experience of 2002, where you're squeezed into tiny seats on a plane with too few flight attendants to do much more than hustle up and down the aisle peddling drinks and, if you're lucky, tossing you a bag of peanuts like an animal in a zoo. (Not the flight attendants fault, by the way. It's the airlines that have cut back to the minimum.)

 

For a taste of what airline travel was like in the glory days, try a good Latin American or Asian carrier, where there are plenty of flight attendants, gracious service and good food, etc.

[chrismac]

>It's the airlines that have cut back to the minimum.

 

One of the chief reasons airlines have cut back after Deregulation is that people won't pay for many frills anymore. Food isn't free. Neither is union labor, nor aircraft leases. Airline stocks are rated at junk bond status, and poor debt ratings have caused borrowing rates to skyrocket. Not to mention insurance. Not much money left to add back service enhancements. Sure some of the blame can be layed at management's door - but even the best-run airlines today are only marginally profitable.

 

An article in a recent issue of the WSJ quoted AA's CFO as saying their "More Room Throughout Coach" has had a negligible, if any, positive effect on profits, while decreasing load factor, and thus market share. People enjoy those types of ammenities, but not enough to pay for them, especially when corporations that sign volume-discount contracts with airlines demand the lowest fares to cut their own costs.

 

Analysis of this country's most successful airline, Southwest, proves the point that the lowest-cost carrier is the most successful.

 

In order to keep the U.S. economy on the fast track, the country needs an aviation system that focuses on speed and frequency. So the airlines have become a sort of flying subway system, rather than the First Class Pullman Cars of the past.

 

Many, if not most of the foreign carriers are government-subsidized and less "profit-dependant". The European Union and some Asian countries have finally begun to cut the financial umbilical cord, with the result that some national carriers (SABENA, AOM French Airlines, Philippine) have been allowed to fail.

 

But the Lockheed Constellation, Boeing Stratoliner, and even the 707 and VC-10 harken back to a time when air travel was indeed a luxury, rather than simply another mode of public transport.

 

The piston-engined Constellation was the fastest commercial plane aloft in it's heyday - but it still took 8 hours for a non-stop flight from Idyllwild to Los Angeles. Not many businessmen today would put up with that!

[Guest DCeBOY]

SAS also has fabulous service, at least in first class. (i've not flown SAS in other classes.)

[+ deej]

>What was nice about them was

>that in those days flying was an "occasion." You dressed

>up. Women put on their girdles and heels and smart hats.

>Men wore jackets and ties.

 

It also used to be prohibitively expensive for the majority of the population. I well remember when my family pooled their money to fly grandma in for a visit. She was downright giddy: her first time on a plane, her first glass of champagne. It really *was* a major event in her life.

 

Even business travel was an "event" back then because of the cost.

 

These days, almost anyone can (and does) afford to fly.

 

>It was a far cry from the standard American airline

>experience of 2002, where you're squeezed into tiny seats on

>a plane with too few flight attendants to do much more than

>hustle up and down the aisle peddling drinks and, if you're

>lucky, tossing you a bag of peanuts like an animal in a zoo.

 

One of my least favorite airlines is Southwest but I fly them a lot because of schedule convenience and cheap fares. I *hate* their cattle-car approach to travel, but I put up with it.

 

One former employer had a "best fare" deal worked out with TWA that was sorta cool. We'd get automatic upgrades to first class if available. But I'd still book Southwest to get rid of connections.

 

>For a taste of what airline travel was like in the glory

>days, try a good Latin American or Asian carrier, where

>there are plenty of flight attendants, gracious service and

>good food, etc.

 

Another good one used to be Midwest Express. Not sure if they're even still flying. They had very limited routes, but every plane had the coach seats replaced with wider seats you'd normally associate with first class. Meals (actual meals!) were served on real plates. One of the stewardesses would spend most of the flight wandering up and down with a bottle of red wine in one hand and white wine in the other, topping off glasses. It was a real treat of a flight and cost exactly the same as the same trip on Continental.

[+ bigjoey]

midwest express still operates and is by all ratings the best us airline. fabulous service, good food, wide seats, etc. they put everyone else to shame.

 

i flew on the twa superG and loved it back in the 50's. i remember sitting in the tail section where the seats were in a "u" shape. people dressed up as it was a real occasion when you traveled. i recently saw the one in kansas city at their old airport and was shocked at how small it looked by today's standards. still, a great airplane.

[Rick Munroe]

When Derek and I flew home from SF in January, we had a very sexy flight attendant who lingered by my aisle seat and I got him hard. I wanted to go into a lavatory with him but he was kind of busy passing out honey-roasted nuts, so that's the only kind of nuts I ended up with on that flight.

 

I don't remember what airline it was.

[+ deej]

I can just see the chatter in the Flight Attentants-Only forum!

 

"Watch out for Munroe! He'll work you up but won't put out!"

 

:+

[Rod Hagen]

Chrismac, I understand what you're saying. Customers seem to prefer "No Frills" flying, hence the success of Southwest and JetBlue; JetBlue being a truly amazing way to fly (no food, no delays, leather seats). But it's also true that the ailines are quite arbitrary and often downright irrational in their choices of how to cut corners. The last thing they seem to think about is the customer, and they use the EXCUSE that surveys show customers want less stuff if it means they'll save money.

 

Let's look at United first. Remember the cookies in Business class? They got rid of them, citing costs. But the Business class FARES did not decrease at all as a result. They started handing out Godiva Chocolates toward the end of the flight in a shoddy effort to compensate for the end-of-the-cookies. I noticed that one box of chocolates was all any full business class cabin ever tore through. There was always an extra box or two (once the stewardess enroute back from Hawaii liked us so much she gave us that extra box of Godivas, as well as 2 bottles of wine, to take home). One box of Godiva chocolates would cost us, what $60? It probably cost United $20 per box. One box per 767 between LAX and JFK and Newark would run them $260/day. BIG FUCKING DEAL. They're charging between $2k and $4k RT per passenger for those customers who didn't upgrade and we all know how few seats they leave available for upgrades especially in this post-9/11 world (actually we DON'T know because the airlines are not required by law to disclose this information; another example of the Gov't unfairly protecting the goddamn airlines). Out of nowhere they dropped the chocolates. You ask them why and they tell you about all the millions it saved them. United has been threatening for some time now to stop using Linens in Business Class because of the cost of Laundry. Just because they haven't yet, doesn't mean they won't. Fuckers.

 

You see, that's where the airlines either don't understand how much they are cheating us, or as I suspect DON'T CARE, because let's face it we really don't have an alternative do we? Yes it does save them millions OVERALL to charge the same rate for Business Class, and offer less, but that's true of all business. If a restaurant doesn't offer ketchup, they'd be fucked right? UNLESS, of course, if customers did not have any choice.

 

And travelers really don't anymore. The airlines are all becoming the same. Especially when you compare the fun and frolic of the 60s and 70s and even early 80s, post deregulation, domestic airlines: funny outfits on the stewardesses-I REFUSE to say "Flight Attendant-bars and lounges in the back of the Dc-10s and 747s. Fun.) to today's mantra of "how much can we fuck the customers until we loose business?" JEtBlue has been pimping the hell out of their Long Beach/Newark cheaper flights with nicer seats and shorter security lines-they neglect to mention there's no food on their bilboards). They have amazing customer loyalty: everyone loves them. American Airlines announced they'll be flying out of Long Beach. One tactic in an overall strategy to KILL Jet Blue.

 

Midwest is very well reviewed, but the problem is, well, it's Milwaukee. It's not really convenient for too many travelers. Nevertheless, I'd love to give 'em a whirl.

 

Yes we all love the international airlines, Singapore Air being the best, but someone REALLY needs to bitchslap our domestic airlines.

 

Remembrer in October and November it was almost UnAmerican to speak ILL of the airlines? I LOVED the SouthPark episode where Mr. Garisson at the airport was screaming "I seem to remember a bailout check the american people wrote a few months ago". and "The airlines are going under because of their own incompetance, not because of September 11!"

[Guest Thunderbuns]

You learn something new everyday - I always thought Super-Constellations was a discription of a gathering of pros like at the Bad Boys Pool Party :-)

 

Thunderbuns

[Rick Munroe]

>You learn something new everyday - I always thought

>Super-Constellations was a discription of a gathering of

>pros like at the Bad Boys Pool Party :-)

 

I'm no size queen but if they have to use Super-Magnums, I'm there!

[chrismac]

>They're charging between

>$2k and $4k RT per passenger for those customers who didn't

>upgrade and we all know how few seats they leave available

>for upgrades especially in this post-9/11 world

 

I've got news for you Rod, over 80% of the seats in premium class today are either elite-FF member upgrades or corporate-discounted tickets for contracted corporations. Fewer people pay full-fare First or Business Class today than pay Rack Rate at hotels.

 

Midwest Express isn't profitable.

 

jetBlue has done a fantastic job and deserves the accolades it receives. Major network carriers could learn some lessons from them. But they've been able to keep their costs low by using only one type of aircraft (A-320), a low-cost non-union (largely) workforce; and have been able to pass these savings on to customers while maintaining a high-quality one-class product.

[trilingual]

>I'm no size queen but if they have to use Super-Magnums, I'm

>there!

 

Honestly, Rick, if there are two things I can't stand it's size queens and little dicks!!! x(