Evacuated tube transport the end of Airlines?

Status
Not open for further replies.
They need to do something with the airlines. They are just pathetic. I hope something like this works safely. Those jerks made a two year old kid ride on his mother's lap after they took the kid's seat that they lady paid for. Such jerks. They all need to go bankrupt. This would help bring another sensible way to travel. Those idiots deserve to lose their jobs.
 
Originally Posted By: Syntheticuser
They need to do something with the airlines. They are just pathetic. I hope something like this works safely. Those jerks made a two year old kid ride on his mother's lap after they took the kid's seat that they lady paid for. Such jerks. They all need to go bankrupt. This would help bring another sensible way to travel. Those idiots deserve to lose their jobs.


Fascinating, how you can draw such firm conclusions without facts...

They did, in fact, go bankrupt. Most of them.

In your specious example, the real jerk was the guy that showed up, saw a seat duplication and then took the kid's seat, and said nothing. The mother who said nothing makes me wonder as well...then she immediately brings up her race and how she was "scared"...you don't see an agenda in that?

I've seen seat duplications, they happen, even with computers...and the folks involved are always quite loud about it...so, why was nothing said?

The ugly reality of airlines is this: they have provided what consumers demand.

Forbes: Airlines provide what consumers want

Every time an airline provides better service (more room, more amenities) it fails to sell. People don't want to pay for it. People look at pictures of air travel in the 60s and romanticize it. They see how roomy coach was back then. Well, of course it was. Because they were regulated, and a coach seat, round trip, cost over $1,000. When my Dad paid $2,800 for his new Ford wagon.

I sat next to a passenger the other day who made comments similar to yours. "The airlines are all terrible, they provide a lousy product, I wish Emirates flew in the US, like those Jennifer Aniston ads. You know, real air travel!" So, together, we looked up what it cost to book an Emirates suite to London...a whole suite to yourself...sounds great, right?

$30,000

Each way.

Sure, you can get better, but you, the traveling public, aren't willing to pay for it.

So, the airlines give you what you want: cheap. And they have to fill up the planes to make a profit. So, every overhead bin is full, and every middle seat has someone in it. Sorry for the experience, but it's what you want.

And the airlines have a 4-7% profit margin. Perilously thin. Far more thin than most industries.

So, I recommend that you look into fractional ownership of your own business jet. You can experience real air travel. Lots of room. Direct service. Exactly what you want when you want it.

Otherwise, you'll have to settle for what the public demands: cheap and crowded.

The market has spoken.
 
Astro,

You hit the nail on the head! Businesses must provide what the pubic demands.
 
Originally Posted By: wwillson
Astro,

You hit the nail on the head! Businesses must provide what the pubic demands.


Thanks Wayne.

The sad truth of the airlines is that they DO provide what the public wants...but the public doesn't want to accept that unpleasant reality.

That's why those news stories resonate; no one is happy with air travel.

But Spirit Airlines, by all objective measures, the worst airline in customer service, the worst in operational performance, the worst in passenger comfort and amenities, the airline that charges for checked bags AND for carry on bags, the poster child for every complaint about air travel...

Spirit Airlines is one of the fastest growing!

That's what the market wants!

Sadly...
 
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Back in 1988 I paid $220-$240 for round trip tickets from Hartford, CT to LAX....one stop over. The service was fine. That was 29 years ago. Hard to believe that same flight in the 1960's was $1,000.


Yep.

My Dad flew 250,000 miles on United from 1967-1969. They sent him a nice bronze plaque. He always flew coach, though his company paid for his travel.

His complaint: each first class ticket cost MORE than his new Country Squire. He just couldn't bring himself to spend that much, even if it was someone else's money.

Adjust your 1988 ticket for inflation, and you'll see that air travel remains cheap...
 
I dislike airlines with a passion. I've had god awful service the few times I did fly. It sucked. My experience, not yours. Some people on this forum hate guns, diesel trucks, good looking women...things that I say help make life more enjoyable.
Astro, you make it out to be that I had not paid for first class tickets the fee times i flew. I did, give me my monies worth is what I wanted...never got it. I pay more for quality, when I can get better products or services.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Syntheticuser
They need to do something with the airlines. They are just pathetic. I hope something like this works safely. Those jerks made a two year old kid ride on his mother's lap after they took the kid's seat that they lady paid for. Such jerks. They all need to go bankrupt. This would help bring another sensible way to travel. Those idiots deserve to lose their jobs.


Fascinating, how you can draw such firm conclusions without facts...

They did, in fact, go bankrupt. Most of them.

In your specious example, the real jerk was the guy that showed up, saw a seat duplication and then took the kid's seat, and said nothing. The mother who said nothing makes me wonder as well...then she immediately brings up her race and how she was "scared"...you don't see an agenda in that?

I've seen seat duplications, they happen, even with computers...and the folks involved are always quite loud about it...so, why was nothing said?

The ugly reality of airlines is this: they have provided what consumers demand.

Forbes: Airlines provide what consumers want

Every time an airline provides better service (more room, more amenities) it fails to sell. People don't want to pay for it. People look at pictures of air travel in the 60s and romanticize it. They see how roomy coach was back then. Well, of course it was. Because they were regulated, and a coach seat, round trip, cost over $1,000. When my Dad paid $2,800 for his new Ford wagon.

I sat next to a passenger the other day who made comments similar to yours. "The airlines are all terrible, they provide a lousy product, I wish Emirates flew in the US, like those Jennifer Aniston ads. You know, real air travel!" So, together, we looked up what it cost to book an Emirates suite to London...a whole suite to yourself...sounds great, right?

$30,000

Each way.

Sure, you can get better, but you, the traveling public, aren't willing to pay for it.

So, the airlines give you what you want: cheap. And they have to fill up the planes to make a profit. So, every overhead bin is full, and every middle seat has someone in it. Sorry for the experience, but it's what you want.

And the airlines have a 4-7% profit margin. Perilously thin. Far more thin than most industries.

So, I recommend that you look into fractional ownership of your own business jet. You can experience real air travel. Lots of room. Direct service. Exactly what you want when you want it.

Otherwise, you'll have to settle for what the public demands: cheap and crowded.

The market has spoken.


What I read was that the little kid's boarding pass wasn't scanned. I can see that happening; trying to get a 2 year old ready to board. Since the boarding pass didn't scan, the airline thought they had an empty seat.

The guy they gave the seat doesn't know any of this. He's on standby and given a seat. He sees a little kid in the seat doesn't know it was the kid's seat he took if no one tells him. I've sat next to mothers and their little kids on planes. Never occurred to me I was kicking the kid out of their seat.

The pubic doesn't demand crowded. Just cheap.
 
For the love of god, when I pay good money for a better product or service, I expect to get it. I don't go into Lowe's and tell the clerk that I want the CHEAPEST washer and dryer that they have in stock, then try to argue the price down even more. I will do 6 months worth of research and get the best quality I can...not the cheapest. I WILL pay for quality....But I expect to get it. With the airlines, that didn't happen.
 
The people working for the airlines are wonderful if you compare them with TSA people.

Last year a tiny little 4 year old girl came running out from a pat down pulling her mother along to the little girl's father crying and saying that lady touched my private place. The parents complained and the TSA people held them up just long enough to miss their flight. An airline person escorted them to the airline's first class lounge to give them some privacy and put them on the next flight with first class tickets for no extra charge. Score one for the airlines.
 
People like to complain about stuff plain and simple. Flying and airlines is very easy to complain about because most people have no clue how it all works or how expensive/heavily regulated commercial flights are and therefore it's easy to find a sympathetic response.

I just quickly googled a flight from NY to LA and the cost is roughly between $500 to $700 without any special deals. If one chose to drive something that gets about 25 mpg on the highway, you have to spend roughly $250 for gas alone. On top of that you have to arrange hotels/motels and it's not like these are all super clean, or free right? Not to mention spending several days on the road.
 
I do not understand how any airline stays in business or farmers/ranchers. It is a mystery to me. So much overhead.
 
Meanwhile... what about evacuated tube transit? Viable?

Seems to be it would require a lot of infrastructure and not just slap-it-together infrastructure, but precision fit and highly quality controlled layout of the concrete tubes, constant maintenance to maintain reliable vacuum throughout the structure and all sorts of other details that I don't know about. Looks like it may only ever reach boutique status as a transit method for the masses, because you would need one huge tube network to move the number of people airlines move.
 
Evacuated tube is the future, probably not for every route though.

I think high traffic continuous local highway can be replaced easily as it is fast with continuous traffic. Distance is short, the energy to vacuum the tube is not wasted, load is continuous. Seal tightness is moot if you need to open and close the door once every 30 secs instead of every 3 hours. They can probably also mix in cargo traffic to keep the tube occupied.

Air will still be cheaper for lower load longer distance traffic, they may fly higher with future improvement, or more people in longer thinner tube or double decker.
 
Overhead alone to say nothing of building infrastructure might cripple such a project. Politicians are very expensive. The cost involved to buy enough politicians to get a project started has to be factored into the overall budget. Next would be getting the unions in line before the first shovel of dirt is even turned. And finally the environmentalists have to be considered especially if there is an endangered cockroach or bunny rabbit in the proposed path. All that needs to be done to kill the project is a delay that makes the start date a moving target. A proposed project like this will cost hundreds of millions of dollars just to study the idea. At least this one won't leak oil.
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
Meanwhile... what about evacuated tube transit? Viable?

Seems to be it would require a lot of infrastructure and not just slap-it-together infrastructure, but precision fit and highly quality controlled layout of the concrete tubes, constant maintenance to maintain reliable vacuum throughout the structure and all sorts of other details that I don't know about. Looks like it may only ever reach boutique status as a transit method for the masses, because you would need one huge tube network to move the number of people airlines move.



It's interesting technology and based on a relatively old (several decades) concept. Lots of details to be worked out. Sealing, safety, etc.

Biggest detail of course is cost - who will pay the billions of $$ to get it up and running?

The promise: very high speed at low energy use, is compelling..but the up front challenges in cost and construction are daunting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top