4 ms·

The concord was heavily subsidised. Those ticket prices didn’t cover the cost of the service. It was also far less pleasant a ride than even most economy class

The concord was heavily subsidised. Those ticket prices didn’t cover the cost of the service. It was also far less pleasant a ride than even most economy class tickets for long hall flights. The space was more cramped and it was much louder inside the cabin. Personally, Id rather spend more for nicer seats on a longer flight than worse seats on a shorter flight. And a lot of people with money felt the same. Design changes might help with the passenger comfort problem but when the plane is already running at a loss, it’s a hard sell asking for more R&D costs (which would be massive) to redevelop the concord.

sho_hn 1y ago
This is something I've really flipped on when I started taking trains more to replace domestic flights (in Europe) to improve my personal CO2 footprint. I used to be really impatient with travel and tried my best to save travel time, and never took the train. Then I forced my self to change my ways. Nowdays, I find thst plan the train travel days as part of the trip: Sure, it takes me a whole day to get somewhere, but I allocate that time for hacking on the laptop on a side project, reading a book, or playing a game on the Steam Deck, things I normally don't find that much time for. I find e.g. my vacation satisfaction actually has gone up. Train travel is also easier with (my) kids than air travel despite the longer duration, because you can roam the train more, change location to the restaurant, etc.
- nucleardog 1y ago
  Hard agree. If you lean into it, it's a much more pleasant way to travel in many cases. Everything about air travel is rushed, stressful, and unpleasant. Yeah, I can get there in 3 hours (if you account for the "show up two hours early in case we understaffed the check-in desk" thing), but by the time I get there I'm _wiped_. Plus I'm probably going to end up either leaving or arriving at some ungodly hour that means my sleep schedule's screwed and that's basically all I'm getting done that day anyway. The train I take instead runs every 30 minutes. You can rock up 6 minutes before the train leaves and walk right on after someone scans a QR code. You can bring a drink! There's tons of space for people and luggage. The seats are huge. Your legs fit. The tray is big enough to actually work on. You can get up and go for a walk. There's a water fountain and water bottle filler. The washroom is bigger than some bedrooms I've had. If you're traveling with kids you can actually book seats at a full-fledged table and have lots of room for activities and colouring and such. And it takes 5 hours. So sure, in theory it's two hours longer. In reality, I've got back almost 5 hours of my day. And I can arrive at a reasonable hour and not tired and stressed to shit and actually do things with the rest of my time. Last trip I used the way there for some relaxing. Did some reading, played some games, generally just wound down. On the way back I was able to get some work done effectively so actually got paid for my travel day. Either way, it was a much better experience.
para_parolu 1y ago
As a someone who recently spent 13h in economy I would pay double for 6 hours
- hnlmorg 1y ago
  The types of people who could afford the concord weren’t the types of people who’d fly economy on a 747. Also, concord is still louder and more cramped than economy on a typical long hall 747.
  - adastra22 1y ago
    It was not more cramped than economy. I’ve been in a Concorde. Every seat was like domestic first class in the USA.
    - hnlmorg 1y ago
      “In a” Concorde or “flew” Concorde? The ones at air shows felt more specious than the commercial ones. Or at least that’s how it was from my admittedly very limited first hand experience.
      - adastra22 1y ago
        Ok I don’t know the origin of the one I was in. It is the one exhibited at the Museum of Flight by the Boeing campus in Tacoma, Washington.
    - rkomorn 1y ago
      That doesn't at all match my experience. I was fortunate to fly an Air France Concorde between JFK and CDG and, while the seats were leather (which was not the case in economy at the time), they were no larger than economy seats. The windows were tiny and the cabin itself was also quite small. It definitely felt cramped.
- rkomorn 1y ago
  I'm very unconvinced that real world pricing would actually work that way. The price difference between direct and connecting flights, for example, already shows how much more expensive the convenience can be.
sehansen 1y ago
No, the Concorde was profitable for the airlines up until 9/11: https://simpleflying.com/did-british-airways-make-a-profit-flying-concorde/ https://simpleflying.com/did-british-airways-make-a-profit-f... https://etonomics.com/2025/05/14/the-economics-of-concorde/ https://etonomics.com/2025/05/14/the-economics-of-concorde/ The Concorde was a loss for the manufacturer, though.

sho_hn 1y ago

This is something I've really flipped on when I started taking trains more to replace domestic flights (in Europe) to improve my personal CO2 footprint. I used to be really impatient with travel and tried my best to save travel time, and never took the train. Then I forced my self to change my ways. Nowdays, I find thst plan the train travel days as part of the trip: Sure, it takes me a whole day to get somewhere, but I allocate that time for hacking on the laptop on a side project, reading a book, or playing a game on the Steam Deck, things I normally don't find that much time for. I find e.g. my vacation satisfaction actually has gone up. Train travel is also easier with (my) kids than air travel despite the longer duration, because you can roam the train more, change location to the restaurant, etc.

nucleardog 1y ago
Hard agree. If you lean into it, it's a much more pleasant way to travel in many cases. Everything about air travel is rushed, stressful, and unpleasant. Yeah, I can get there in 3 hours (if you account for the "show up two hours early in case we understaffed the check-in desk" thing), but by the time I get there I'm _wiped_. Plus I'm probably going to end up either leaving or arriving at some ungodly hour that means my sleep schedule's screwed and that's basically all I'm getting done that day anyway. The train I take instead runs every 30 minutes. You can rock up 6 minutes before the train leaves and walk right on after someone scans a QR code. You can bring a drink! There's tons of space for people and luggage. The seats are huge. Your legs fit. The tray is big enough to actually work on. You can get up and go for a walk. There's a water fountain and water bottle filler. The washroom is bigger than some bedrooms I've had. If you're traveling with kids you can actually book seats at a full-fledged table and have lots of room for activities and colouring and such. And it takes 5 hours. So sure, in theory it's two hours longer. In reality, I've got back almost 5 hours of my day. And I can arrive at a reasonable hour and not tired and stressed to shit and actually do things with the rest of my time. Last trip I used the way there for some relaxing. Did some reading, played some games, generally just wound down. On the way back I was able to get some work done effectively so actually got paid for my travel day. Either way, it was a much better experience.

para_parolu 1y ago

As a someone who recently spent 13h in economy I would pay double for 6 hours

hnlmorg 1y ago
The types of people who could afford the concord weren’t the types of people who’d fly economy on a 747. Also, concord is still louder and more cramped than economy on a typical long hall 747.
- adastra22 1y ago
  It was not more cramped than economy. I’ve been in a Concorde. Every seat was like domestic first class in the USA.
  - hnlmorg 1y ago
    “In a” Concorde or “flew” Concorde? The ones at air shows felt more specious than the commercial ones. Or at least that’s how it was from my admittedly very limited first hand experience.
    - adastra22 1y ago
      Ok I don’t know the origin of the one I was in. It is the one exhibited at the Museum of Flight by the Boeing campus in Tacoma, Washington.
  - rkomorn 1y ago
    That doesn't at all match my experience. I was fortunate to fly an Air France Concorde between JFK and CDG and, while the seats were leather (which was not the case in economy at the time), they were no larger than economy seats. The windows were tiny and the cabin itself was also quite small. It definitely felt cramped.
rkomorn 1y ago
I'm very unconvinced that real world pricing would actually work that way. The price difference between direct and connecting flights, for example, already shows how much more expensive the convenience can be.

sehansen 1y ago

No, the Concorde was profitable for the airlines up until 9/11: https://simpleflying.com/did-british-airways-make-a-profit-flying-concorde/ https://simpleflying.com/did-british-airways-make-a-profit-f... https://etonomics.com/2025/05/14/the-economics-of-concorde/ https://etonomics.com/2025/05/14/the-economics-of-concorde/ The Concorde was a loss for the manufacturer, though.