Daily Mail - nostalgia in the skies
 

At last something interesting from the DM. I certainly remember wearing my white jacket and 'dicky bow' wheeling the caviar trolley when there were 27 seats on a classic 747.

Flying-high: Stunning images reveal bygone era of glitz and glamor in the skies long before mass travel, budget airlines and heightened security took over air travel | Mail Online

A colleague of mine flew BOAC to Rome on an ID ticket and was upgraded to First. After the meal he was asked if he wanted dessert and settled just for a few grapes. A silver bowl was produces, a quarter bottle of champagne was emptied into it, and the grapes dipped in the champers before being handed to him. Now that’s class.

Excellent stuff and not a shell suit, onesie or pair of jeans in sight......Hooray!!

One thing apparent is how tight-pitched the long-haul F seating was compared to nowadays with suites etc.

I have a BOAC 1950s timetable with a photo of in-flight service in progress. The (inevitably) 60-something couple are seated there, the man in dinner jacket and black tie, the woman with all her pearls on. Quite how this equated with flights in only semi-reclining seats, invariably overnight, and one/two day total journey time I am not quite sure. They would have been a crumpled mess disembarking.

My parents used to dress up to the nines even to travel in MiserY class. They could never understand how I could travel on intercontinental trips in jeans and a loose shirt and casual shoes!

Nor today's typical Aussie bogans on Jetstar or Virgin "dressed" in the obligatory construction worker black singlet, board shorts, baseball cap reversed with sunnies over the top, flip-flops (foot-thongs), at least two water bottles and not forgetting tattoos on arms, neck and calves..:ugh:

Can't decide which I like most - the "scale model" Concorde or the "portable alter". :O

I'm rather puzzled by the "scale model" Concorde photograph. Certainly, if it is a non-flying mock-up, it's a very, very large one, maybe even full size. The only "scale model" I can think of was the reduced scale advertising one which used to be on the roundabout to Heathrow. But I find it hard to believe that it might be an actual airworthy example, for these reasons:

• The critical vortex-generating strakes below the cockpit windows seem to be absent.
• The small protruding sensors on the nose cone also aren't visible.
• The paint scheme (white and natural finish) looks rather odd.

Anyone else have thoughts on this conundrum?

Found it, thanks to Google.

Concorde mock-up at the 1967 Paris Air Show:

http://media-cache-ec6.pinterest.com...c1293ec0a5.jpg

Thanks, DaveReidUK. So it seems that it wasn't a "scale model" at all, it was a full-size mock-up. Very definitely non-flying!

I wonder what happened to that? With a reasonable number of actual Concordes now permanently grounded and exhibited at widely dispersed venues, it might be thought that the impressive-looking mock-up could be scrapped, but I would imagine that there would be some interest in preserving it for public showing.

I recall 'dressing up' even to travel home to Menorca on charter flights in the 1970s. One respected correct behaviour back then.

What I do find surprising is the way that 'pensioners in pink pyjamas', all of whom are considerably older than I am, choose to dress when flying these days. Bloody peasants! Some even sport visible tattoos.

Regrettably, the LoCo airlines have encouraged such untermensch to emerge from their appalling hovels to lower the standards of reasonable society. A quite appalling state of affairs.

I have to fly to Dublin in a few weeks. To avoid the worst excesses of the travelling public, I have chosen to fly with one of the more expensive airlines. I'm looking forward to a traditionally pleasant experience, rather than non-stop ear-battering advertising and uncomfortable seats covered in chewing gum.

A typical attitude of the Daily Hate reading 'elite'.


Jeesus!:mad:

I am most certainly not a Daily Mail reader.

Sorry if the truth hurts.....:rolleyes:

Yes indeed. How dare the less well off be allowed to fly.

They'll be wanting the vote next. :ugh:

Quite so. Actually, not so much the less well-off, more the lower social orders.

Perfectly happy for the less well off to fly but can't they get dressed before they leave for the airport? Mind you it's pretty much the same in many towns and cities. Slob gear seems to be very much the norm.

Indeed, airsmiles.

By 'lower social orders', I do NOT mean 'working class', incidentally. I mean those of a loutish, "Wan't it now, don't care how" disposition.

Agreed BEagle.

I've no quibble at all with everyone enjoying the benefits of travel where they previously couldn't (me included), but I wonder whether the 'herd mentality' and the fact that air travel is so crowded and mundane now is partly because that's how we treat it ourselves.

It's all about pride, lack of personal respect etc. What would happen if people did start dressing smartly for air travel, even on the LCC's, or even walking into town come to that? i.e. treated it as something they enjoyed the experience of and felt good about. Generally people like an excuse to dress-up (nights out, weddings, family gatherings) and IMHO actually enjoy doing so. In our glum, stressed times, would it be something to give us some cheer?

So, as a hypothetical social experiment, if people re-awakened their pride and dress-sense, and despite the crowds in airports/airlines, what would happen to air travel? Would it start to become enjoyable again?

Interesting, this subject of dressing standards. Speaking personally as a retired former professional man, I wouldn't be seen dead in 'pink pyjamas' even at bedtime, let alone for air travel in public! And tattoos of any hideous shape or form are anathema to me. But my attitude to other people's bizarre apparel and 'tribal markings' is rather more liberal than some views expressed here. If they wish to dress like clowns in our blessedly free society, who am I to dictate otherwise? I will continue to dress for air travel as I have always done, in my own interpretation of what is widely termed 'smart casual'. In temperate climates, this generally includes a shirt with collar and tie, slacks with blazer or sports jacket, and brogues or hush puppies for footwear. For hotter regions, no tie or jacket perhaps, or maybe my summer lightweight linen jacket.

Having worked or holidayed in various parts of the world, my own creed is to dress appropriately to the local conditions, but always with an eye to style and smartness. But my experience of the astonishing range of clothing worn by the indigenous population overseas makes me much more tolerant of what the folk around me choose to wear, wherever I am.

I can't help feeling there is a rather unpleasant air of snobbishness and class distinction being shown here ... :(

603DX - not snobbishness, but pride and respect for oneself (& others) as I mentioned.

I was in travelling in business class to the USA a while back and there was a woman of maybe 40-45 years. Clearly not short of a penny or two and probably spent a fair bit of on herself I guess. However, she had an ill-fitting tee-shirt on and jogging trousers with stripes down the side on and no shoes. Christ, she was ready for bed for god's sake. She had the money to look so different but chose not to. This is what I mean by pride and respect and we are collectively a society that is what we choose to make it.

Some say if you don't like travelling with the everyone in economy at low cost, pay the price and upgrade but money doesn't change this attitide, as the example above shows.