Air Travel
I took my first commercial airline flight in the summer of my 25th year, on a carrier that no longer exists. This was before the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was signed into law by President Carter. I was lucky: I was able to sample air travel before airplanes became the Greyhound buses of the sky.
There are pluses and minuses to deregulation. On the plus side, deregulation resulted in lower air fares. I doubt that I could have afforded to fly my family of six around the country at the fare levels that existed before deregulation. No longer is air travel reserved only for the wealthy.
Now, the minuses.
Most airlines have a “pack ‘em in” mentality. The distance between seats has been shrinking steadily since 1979. At six feet one inch (at least, before gravity began to work on me) I find the distance between the seat back in front of me and my kneecaps to be vanishingly small, so much so that if the person in the seat in front of me reclines, I am trapped, and quite possibly in need of orthopedic surgery.
Then there is the “yoga pants” problem.
Back when airfares were dear, and air travel was a treat, we dressed accordingly. For many years I was a “coat and tie” traveler. The dress code certainly has changed. I no longer travel in coat and tie, but I do take care to be fully dressed. I do not show skin: I don’t want to scare the children. Alas, many men and women seem not to follow Batten’s rule.
As I am not yet dead, I have no objection to women who dress alluringly when traveling. My objection is to both men and women who, because of their body types or BMIs, are dressing the very opposite of alluringly. There probably should be a law that allows airlines to remove men and women dressed in such a manner as to cause nightmares for any rugrats on the plane. Yoga pants are not for everybody.
Airport security is a major reason why I despise flying. The airports are packed, and the lines to clear security are excruciatingly long. Worse, the TSA is retroactive, not proactive. Years ago, some nitwit decided to pack a bomb in his shoe, and for years thereafter we ended up taking our shoes off before going through security. I am glad that has finally changed, but it should have changed eons ago.
Another retroactive rule has to do with liquids: each liquid has to be less than 100 mL in volume (roughly 3.5 fluid ounces), and all liquids must fit in a one liter (roughly one quart) Ziplock bag. We used to have to take the Ziplock bag out of our luggage and run it separately through security, but that appears to have changed. I haven’t had to pull the old Ziplock out during my past several flights, but the rule that all liquids must fit in the one liter bag remains. It really does seem to be observed in the breach. On my last seven flights I had two Ziplock bags filled with liquids or pastes. The second bag contained the liquids I could do without if security asked me to throw away one of the bags. No one in the three countries I visited said a word about the second bag.
I have reached the point in life where I will avoid flying if at all possible. Put me behind the wheel of my F-150, point me in the direction of the open road, and let me go. But I can’t drive to Europe, and I don’t always have the time to drive long distances, so flying does become inevitable at times.
That is enough complaining for now. In my next discourse I will reveal what I have learned not to do from my 48 years as an airline passenger.