2 ms·
Unless you're flying overseas having in-flight meals doesn't really make sense. There are far more food options in both airports you will be in and it will be a
by Sargos 9y ago
Unless you're flying overseas having in-flight meals doesn't really make sense. There are far more food options in both airports you will be in and it will be a lot more comfortable. In-flight food should be reserved for when it's required by length of flight. (This is already pretty much the case. I never see meals on planes during domestic travel really.)
- munificent 9y ago> There are far more food options in both airports you will be in and it will be a lot more comfortable. Counter-argument: If I eat at the airport, I'm cutting into useful time either at home or at my destination. On the plane, I've got nothing to do but kill time anyway. In practice, I pad time before my flight to deal with traffic and security hiccups. When things go smoothly, that usually leaves me enough time to eat before the flight, so I do that. Sometimes I'll buy food at the airport and carry it on, though I try to avoid that since my fellow passengers might not appreciate the aroma. Once I reach my destination, the last thing in the world I want to do is hang out in the airport longer. I'd much rather stop at a restaurant on the drive to wherever I'm going.
- nunez 9y agoIdk, if given the choice between eating in the airport and eating in first, I always take eating in first, even though there are better options on the ground. It's part of the experience of being in first. Re: "I never see meals on planes during domestic travel really": You'll get food (complementary in first, for purchase in main) if your flight is over 2 hour long AND you're not flying a regional jet (which you don't want to do for more than an hour anyway).