Comfort in 1950-s-1960-s

[chornedsnorkack]

It is said that the propeller liners were hugely more comfortable and luxurious than the modern jetliners.

Why was it so?

For example, take the Boeing 377 Stratocruiser. It could accommodate 100 people in tight coach seating. And it was used, e. g. to travel to Hawaii, in about 8 hours.

On those trips, the airlines deliberately fitted it out to carry only 60 people, in better comfort.

Now, from the end of 1950-s, Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8 could fly to Europe, also in 8 hours or so. And Boeing 707 was suitable for less than 190 people maximum in coach.

How was the comfort on the early - 1950-s, early 1960-s - jetliners? What comforts were offered to say, 60 best paying passengers, and how did that compare to comfort aboard Stratocruisers?

[WHBM]

Propliners in the 1950s :

More legroom
No chavs on board; no Ryanair
Wonderful nostalgia

But :

Much worse noise in cabin
Much worse vibration
Much worse turbulence due lower flight levels and no weather radar
More unreliable due going tech
Hotter in tropics due poor cabin air-con
No sleeper seats (except a very few on key long haul)
Far fewer flights or choice of carrier
Fares proportionately well above today's
Double/treble journey times (slower and more stops)
Accident rate 10x nowadays

[Rollingthunder]

My first flight was in a BOAC Stratocruiser. Ringway - Prestwick - Shannon at midnight - off-loaded for a full course meal in the terminal - Gander - Montreal. Aircraft was "Canopus". Was fun. Loads of noise and hairy vibration on run-up.

Wish I'd been around for the flying boat era.

[Avman]

I flew quite a number of flights on board SABENA DC-6s and Cv-440s in the mid 50s to mid 60s. The seat width and leg room in ECONOMY was terrific, especially on the Convair. The meal service would put today's Business Class service to shame. Granted, it was noisy and you flew through the weather rather than above it, but it was a great and exciting adventure compared to flying today.

[chornedsnorkack]

Flatbeds...

No sleeper seats (except a very few on key long haul)

Er, yeah. There were at least some.

For example, am I correct that the Stratocruisers on Atlantic crossings had just 33 places in space enough for 100? And that they had 28 berths - not lie-flat seats, berths - so the only non-sleeper places were 5 lower panorama deck seats?

And I have heard that the sleeper seats are pretty new things. That they were only invented sometime in 1990-s, first for First Class, then for Business Class, too.

If it is true, then does it mean that after the passing of the propliners and before the coming of lie-flat seats in 1990-s, there was no way to lie flat on scheduled flights - not in First Class and not for any money?

Sure, the jetliners are faster, so the travel is over sooner and there is less need to sleep. The propliners did not have berths on shorter routes, either - like the Hawaii Stratocruisers. But then again, I suppose Boeing 747 and later other widebodies had long range so they could travel long, like the propliners had done on shorter ranges.

For example, I have heard that when Boeing 747 entered into service in 1970, it had piano bar upstairs. And the seat width was great all the way to rear bulkhead - 9 abreast, not 10, and 2-4-3, not 2-5-2 or 3-3-3 in Economy.

What was the nosecone and first class like at that time? Were there lie-flat berths or seats?

[slim_slag]

Father was headhunted as part of the brain drain and family nearly moved to the States back in '62. Remember him saying we would have gone over on an ocean liner as it was a lot cheaper than flying.

[WHBM]

The sleeper berths in the Strat (and a few similar ones in the Constellation and DC-7) were swung down and round in place of the day seats. Some of the berths were stowed overhead against the upper fuselage wall in the daytime. It was an arrangement passengers were well used to from the old overnight Pullman cars on US railways, and some of the airlines actually called them Pullman berths.

Very few Strats were built (about 60) and not all were sleeper-equipped. Even then it was seen as a bit of a gimmick, and it didn't last a day past the jets' introduction. The Strat itself was an unwieldy beast, notably slower than it's Douglas or Lockheed competition and the R-4360 engines with 28 cylinders each meant 112 cylinders on the aircraft. The chances of them all still being in perfect order after a transatlantic trip were not brilliant (the B-29 and KC-97 with the same engines but built earlier were even worse for coming home with a prop feathered)

Making the transition from day to night accommodation was one of the tasks for the stewards on board. You went downstairs to the bar while it was going on.

So you could have seats OR berths in any one part of the aircraft. Most airlines only operated berth services (which had a substantial fare premium) on only a small proportion of even their most mainstream routes.

The pre-war Empire flying boats took 12 days from London to Australia (actually day 1 was in a train London to Southampton) as they didn't fly at night and only had a range of less than 1,000 miles. Seem to have usually flown at about 3,000 feet. Must have been amazing for the remote population of Africa or Asia to see one coming overhead.

Regarding early 747 accommodation the First Class seats were not even as good as current business class international ones - think current US domestic first class. Looking at pictures of the early 747 seating the first and economy seats even look similar, with the same upholstery material. The first class ones are just wider and have more recline and legroom, and footrests. F was in the nose. Upstairs was initially no revenue seats at all but a "dining table" with about 12 seats (with many more F seats than that meals must have been in sittings like an ocean liner, again what the clientele at the time was used to).

[forget]

Does anyone have actual flight times and routes for Stratocruisers, say New York-London; San Francisco - London?

[WHBM]

Typical BOAC Summer 1952 daily Stratocruiser:

London Heathrow - 20.00
Gander - fuel stop
New York Idlewild - 08.25

New York Idlewild - 17.00
Gander - fuel stop
London Heathrow - 10.30

The refuelling stops were changed by the day; Shannon, Prestwick, Keflavik, Halifax, Boston, even Santa Maria in the Azores might come into play, especially westbound.

BOAC had 16 flights a week from London to New York, 10 Stratocruiser and 6 Lockheed Constellation. The daily schedule above was the prestige service.

You needed 3 or 4 aircraft to keep each transatlantic daily service going reliably. Timing the arrival in New York to the nearest 5 minutes was a joke, of course !

[B Sousa]

All that is mentioned here has one bottom line. Its all about the money.
I also remember flying even in coach with a Bar area in the rear. Flight times were also a bit longer.
Back then they looked for profit. They still do today. You have to crunch the numbers to see the differences. Airplane costs, fuel costs even the new technology of the comforts we enjoy.
Toss in inflation , buying power of the respective currency etc. and not much may have really changed.

[chornedsnorkack]

Comfort...

and it didn't last a day past the jets' introduction.

Regarding early 747 accommodation the First Class seats were not even as good as current business class international ones - think current US domestic first class. Looking at pictures of the early 747 seating the first and economy seats even look similar, with the same upholstery material. The first class ones are just wider and have more recline and legroom, and footrests.

So, it seems confirmed no flat seats from first jets to 1990-s. Was it generally the case that the First class on 1960-s, 1970-s was much worse than the propliner standards?

Also, as for flying boats... Is it correct that Boeing 314 Clipper is one of the best? Mind you, there were only ever 12 frames, they entered into service in 1939 and, I think, left scheduled service forever when the Second World War started... and as some legs were long, like San Francisco-Auckland 5 days travel, 2 days turnaround, it means few sectors ever flown!

[PAXboy]

A great aunt of mine (now long gone) used to talk about the Imperial Flying boats. She lived in Cape Town and, IIRC, the route was, Day:[list=1][*]to Southampton by train[*]fly to the Italian coast[*]fly to Egypt, landing on the Nile[*]fly to Kenya and land on Lake Victoria[*]fly to the southern part of the Transvaal and a lake there (for transfer to Johannesburg and Pretoria)[*]fly to Cape Town, landing in the bay[/list=1] Then her husband sent the chauffer with the car to pick up and carry the bags!!! This was against some 15 days on the Union-Castle Line.

Each night, they trooped off the flying boat and checked into a hotel. Dinner was served with the Captain's Table, the First Officer's Table and so on. By the end of the trip, everyone had dined at the Captain's table.

I sit to be corrected on the route and timings as it is a good 30 years since the conversation with my great aunt and she has been dead for about 28 of them.

[Pax Vobiscum]

I did a fair amount of trips across the pond in F back in the 80s (those were the days ). Mostly 747 Classics with an occasional TriStar. I can confirm the lack of flat-bed seats at the time, although the row in front was so far away, you had to get out of your seat to reach the in-flight mag.

IIRC a LHR-SFO return was £2,400 (a third of my gross salary at the time as a junior manager). Allowing for inflation makes that about £7,000 in today's money which compares with £4,000 for an equivalent ticket from BA. I wonder what the price would have been in the 50s?

[Foss]

Out of interest, how would any of this would that compare to a private jet 2005?

[aaaaa]

Worked for PanAm in the late 60's and went over one of the first 747s to arrive at LHR. It was amazing 2-4-3 and when I flew to JFK it never felt crowded and that was y class.

When PanAm were going to lay off staff in the early 70's we were given the choice of redundancy or three months unpaid leave. I took the latter and was given a free round the world ticket on QF. When the seat belt sign was off I moved to the back of the plane and acquired four empty seats which made a wonderful flat bed. I don't know why they never filled those seats up and the passengers never seemed to catch on. Great trip. Those were the days, mind you it is not too bad now, just always a bit more crowded so there are never four empty seats.

aa

[Skylion]

Sleeperseats were definately not a creation of the 90s!
BOAC First Class only Constellations and Argonauts had them in the early 1950s as did the mixed class Britannias in late 50s/early 60s. They then disappeared for a while with the introduction of the 707 and DC 8 and did not reappear until reintroduced on 747s in the mid/late 70s. They did not appear on the early 747s.

[PAXboy]

there are never four empty seats

And if there are, a youthful person will snaffle them before you are 2,000 feet off the deck! I have seen folks release seat belts and jump to the centre block of 2/3/4 empties just after rotation.

[chornedsnorkack]

Sleepers...

Sleeperseats were definately not a creation of the 90s!

They then disappeared for a while with the introduction of the 707 and DC 8 and did not reappear until reintroduced on 747s in the mid/late 70s. They did not appear on the early 747s.

So, from 70-s, Boeing 747-s with sleepers have been around.

Why then are they being advertised as something new and people who flew First in 1980-s complain of their absence?

[nkrid]

First Class in the early '80s

I have a very favourable memory of travelling first class on Swisssair, Lufthansa and Pan Am 747s between the ages of six and ten. My dad worked in the US and had an expat contract which meant my family got one first class flight home to Munich and back every year.

For a very lucky ten-year-old, the seats were huge and voluminous, and the leg-room, even when now adjusted to a significantly smaller body-size memory was more than generous, even for tall adults. You could walk between seat rows. However, I don't remember the seats being particularly comfortable for sitting stilll in over long periods- I guess the ergonomics of back-friendly seat design were not so well developed at the time. I do remember the seats reclining much further than any seats I've used since then, and having a rather comfortable flip-up leg rest. There certainly were no berths available.

I flew the JFK - Munich route as an unaccompanied minor twice at least, and I remember the Lufthansa flight attendants being particularly helpful. I certainly remember always getting a window seat and getting to see the flight deck! In fact, I almost always got a seat on my own since I can't imagine that small children classify as popular travelling companions for first class travellers...

I can't remember if this was always an indirect service from Frankfurt or if any of the airlines concerned (Swissair/Lufthansa/Pan Am) offered direct services from Munich at the time.

Other notable facts- Swissair had the best headphones I have ever been offered for in-flight entertainment. My father, being the crafty b****r he is, nicked a pair and we used them with the hi-fi for some time afterwards- they were one of the early Sennheiser lightweight models. Pan-Am's headphones weren't anything as good but they weren't the nasty stethoscope things that are still occasionally seen.

I remember that on the one occasion we flew Swissair, the first class section was upstairs, whereas it was in the nose with Pan Am.

On one or two slightly later first class Pan Am flights (around 1986), I remember the food -unfortunately I was too young at the time to raid the wine cellar- being exceptionally good, not at all the 'airline food' that is a byword for hideousness, sometimes unfairly. I have a vague memory of silver cutlery, linen serviettes, a carved roast and possibly something like a sweet trolley, although the latter could be fantasy.

I realize now that that must have been Pan Am on its last legs, and that they were still using their original 747-100s at the time for these services. The planes themselves were certainly showing their age. I have this vague memory that I saw a plaque near the door of one of the planes which was labeled 1972 or thereabouts, which shocked me at the time since the plane was older than me. I also acquired a rather nice collection of Pan Am menus with pictures of historical flights on them. No idea if I still have them today.

I remember only two bad experiences, one being violently ill on a particularly bumpy Air France flight returning to New York from Paris, and travelling back to Germany as an unacompanied minor on a Pan Am flight in 1984, which was cancelled with technical problems after a six-hour wait onboard.
The latter was very strange- during the whole six-hour delay the fasten seat belt signs were kept on, as the expectation was that a very minor technical problem had occurred and pushback would occur as soon as the engineers had been called to rectify it, which was only expected to take fifteen minutes. For some reason I think it was the navigation system (possibly INS). Might of course have been the _other_ sort of 'INS' problem with one of the passengers. Of course, having had far too many free soft drinks (first class!) in the departure lounge, I needed to go to the loo really badly, but the flight attendants shushed me back to my seat again. Stewardesses were naturally _scary_ in those days and not to be disobeyed...scarred for life, really

They were nice enough, though, when I had to call somebody to pick me up from the airport since I wasn't going to get a flight until the next day, although I got the impression they were seriously annoyed at my parents' arrangements. In retrospect I'm not sure that Pan Am officially had an unacompanied minor program in those days and I was something of a unwanted nuisance as a consequence.

Much to my current annoyance, my now retired father flew on Concorde about 4-5 times during the same era. I never had the opportunity, and it's one of the few things I envy him for- although he described the service as luxurious, his two observations on the aircraft (he is no air transport enthusiast) were that the seats were 'no wider than on a bus' and that the windows did indeed, warm up with friction during the flight. For him, it was merely a fast way to get to London for contract negotiations...

[WHBM]

I sit to be corrected on the [flying boat to Africa] route and timings

Here is the schedule towards the end of the flying boats, from 1949, with some nightstops in interesting places. It was BOAC rather than Imperial Airways by then.

BO 103

Southampton Docks Berth 50 1130 Tue
Augusta (Sicily) 1845

Augusta (Sicily) 0630 Wed
Alexandria (Egypt) 1230/1400
Luxor (Egypt) 1630

Luxor 0530 Thu
Khartoum (Sudan) 0915/1015
Kampala Port Bell (Uganda) 1700

Kampala 0800 Fri
Victoria Falls (Rhodesia) 1350

Victoria Falls 0830 Sat
Johannesburg Vaaldam 1200 Sat

The Jo'burg route operated 3 days a week, there were others to East africa as well. Aircraft was a Solent, an adaptation of the wartime Shorts Sunderland flying boat. You could also get as far as Yokohama, Japan in one, the same route as far as Alexandria. This took 8 days each way. About 2 flights a day left Southampton. The Solent had a better range than the old Empire flying boats (which on the initial leg, for example, would have stopped at Marseille), though the daily mileage seems the same. I am guessing the crew stayed with the aircraft for several days, possibly the whole trip, like on a ship.