3 ms·
Presumably the richest people also don't want to risk their lives flying on some sketchy aircraft, just to shave a few hours off their journey.
by zarzavat 11mo ago
Presumably the richest people also don't want to risk their lives flying on some sketchy aircraft, just to shave a few hours off their journey.
- sandworm101 11mo agoAnd they want comfort. A 5-hour flight sleeping on a flat bed is a thousand times better than an economy seat on a 3-hour flight. Part of concorde's problem was the rising expectations of first class travel in the 90s. It was never going to be compatable with today's huge first class seats.
- xhkkffbf 11mo agoIf I can have a lie flat bed, a decent chair and wifi, I'll take 20 hour flight. Wifi and beds change the equation.
- BobaFloutist 11mo agoRich people seem to spend a lot of times in helicopters and private planes, which is dramatically more dangerous than commercial air travel. I could off the top of my head name a few rich people that died from it. Hell, the titan submersible, while a very different animal, is a pretty clear indicator that vast wealth doesn't preclude a willingness to risk one's life in highly experimental "travel"
- scottyah 11mo agoMaybe not the richest of people, but there's a significant amount of people who got their wealth due to their love/acceptance of risk. Climbing Everest is not cheap, is still very risky, and I presume it is more expensive than a cross-Atlantic trip on these jets.
- roryirvine 11mo agoSure, but the main risk they'd be accepting here is that of spending an inordinate amount of time hanging around in an airport terminal waiting for a broken engine to be fixed. It'd be hard to spin that as being anything like as heroic as the risk of being killed or maimed whilst climbing Everest!
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]