Fifty years later, the same flight takes longer. Why?

Pretty interesting to see the costs of First Class vs. Coach are not that different.

Regular transcontinental 707 service began around 1959 so adjusted for inflation, a first class fare of $160 equals close to $1300 in 2017 dollars - so not too far off what is charged today. However, the $145 coach fare is close to $1200 in 2017- and that’s ONE WAY. No wonder regular people couldn’t afford air travel back then.

Edit: Noticed the schedule date in the video is from 1968 so first class would be $1139 in 2017 dollars and coach is just over $1000. Still a lot of money considering economy fares JFK-LAX today run about $200.

4 Likes

I am amazed the thing could land at Dulles. Of every trip to VA/DC, only once has the landing been less than pretty rough. Always strong crosswinds on a short runway. I recall one time the plane landing what felt like diagonally.

1 Like

You just need a good travel partner. Mile high club nothing, join the thousand mile long club :wink:

7 Likes

10 Likes

The 707 had a significantly faster cruising speed than modern jets. That pretty much explains things. Burned a hell of a lot more fuel per passenger mile too.

4 Likes

Sure you don’t mean National?

http://www.airnav.com/airport/

Dulles (IAD):

Runway 1C/19C

Dimensions: 11500 x 150 ft. / 3505 x 46 m

Runway 1R/19L

Dimensions: 11500 x 150 ft. / 3505 x 46 m

Runway 12/30

Dimensions: 10501 x 150 ft. / 3201 x 46 m

Runway 1L/19R

Dimensions: 9400 x 150 ft. / 2865 x 46 m

National (DCA):

Runway 1/19

Dimensions: 7170 x 150 ft. / 2185 x 46 m

Runway 15/33

Dimensions: 5204 x 150 ft. / 1586 x 46 m

Runway 4/22

Dimensions: 5000 x 150 ft. / 1524 x 46 m

Never flown into national. Just IAD.

1 Like

Everyone needs to do it. Once. :scream:

1 Like

If IAD is any indicator, I’d be down. Once.

1 Like

I wonder how the price compared to a cross country train trip in coach?

1 Like

Fifty years ago I could have skimmed this article in a couple of minutes (possibly less). Now it has to be a video, which is much harder to glean salient points from without viewing the whole thing.

Progress has its price…

5 Likes

maybe grapes?

2 Likes

The downfall of the Concord means it’s too ripe. They should stay on the vine until they’re ready to be picked.

5 Likes

You know when you see something that’s an error and it makes you doubt the whole of the rest of the presentation?

Yeah, that.

When he starts talking about turboprops, he talks about the being used on ‘most propellor aircraft’, which considering the number of piston driven single and twin engine light aircraft, seems a bit dubious to me. However, he then makes it worse by illustrating turboprops with some footage of a twin piston-engined aircraft, and then really rubs it in by concluding “they’re not as fast” while showing three WWI-era biplanes.

Also, he seems to be confusing ‘drag’ with ‘coefficient of drag’. I suspect that some of his conclusions are correct, but I also think he doesn’t have very much in-depth knowledge of the subject.

2 Likes

I could not agree more.

But if I had a little more time and know-how, this response to your comment would be a link to a video of me saying so on youtube.

And hilarity would ensue.

4 Likes

With an unskippable 30 second advert first right?

3 Likes

PBS today has a show called “Traveling in the 70’s” . .

"Journey back to a simpler time-before the Internet, GPS or airline security lines. In this nostalgic special, host Dean Cycon explores how travel has changed over the past 50 years. A remembrance of how people traveled during the 1970s, when maps were paper and airline security was much less thorough; and road trips and hitchhiking were commonplace. "

2 Likes

Past 50 years? How do you get … er … ah, right. Never mind.

Gah. I can still remember when 50 years ago was a long, long time …

8 Likes

Somewhere in the back of my mind, I hear “50 years ago” and think Great Depression.

5 Likes

I just tried watching it: It only covered the past 40 years ! (or at least in the first 15 minutes I saw… The host was just too obnoxious / trying to be cute and funny that I couldn’t continue.)

2 Likes