Hacker News Reader

Comment by s_m_t | Hacker News Reader

How exactly is this a bad thing? When I buy a plane ticket I only buy it for the privilege of being flown from one area of the country to the other, I don't care about anything else and I don't want to pay for anything more.

View on HN

I don't think it's a bad thing. But the experience of flying has now became more than awful. Between the 2 hours TSA lines that make people miss their flights, the "you have to walk bare foot to pass the security" while we shout at you, the lack of space when you're sitting at your seat, ...

Have you flown recently? I don't think flying is as bad as you describe, at all.

If you have you flown domestically in other countries (such as Japan), you'll be surprised how easy and fast it is. It was like the 90s in the U.S.

I flew domestically in Japan, Sapporo - Tokyo. It was pretty bad, I almost missed the plane standing in the super-long line to registration. To be fair, I think it's considered to be one of the most congested domestic routes in the world. But especially in Japan I'd take train over plane any time.

Is it that bad over there now? I have never flown domesic in the us, i mean i had heard it was bad, but i had assumed tey were just the worst of the worst horror stories.

I just took a flight DCA - ORD the other day. Stood in line maybe 5-6 minutes. I regularly get sub-10 minute trips through security at BWI.

I think people confuse airport congestion with security holdups. Carry-on x-rays have been mandated for a very long time (long before 9/11). And people always had to walk one-at-a-time through the metal detectors. What's happened over the last 25 years or so is a massive increase in air travel in the U.S., without a corresponding increase in airport capacity.

I went to ORD 7 times this last year, plus went there to pick up people 6 other times. I think maybe once I didn't have to wait for more than 30min. Also waited 3 hours for someone to cross the border last time I was there (obviously non-american, after she had spent 13 hours in a plane). This is just backwards.

> Carry-on x-rays have been mandated for a very long time

You didn't have to wait so much. You didn't have to go barefoot. You didn't have to go through the "get naked" machine.

I don't remember it really being any better in the 90's. The only difference was you walked through a metal detector instead of a millimeter wave machine.

And you could bring a drink and keep your shoes on and nobody was swabbing and bomb testing your toothpaste. The cumulative effect made the lines move about four times faster.

Edit: I think there's also a lot of inefficiency. So often I see a huge line, half the equipment sitting idle, and half the TSA agents standing around talking to each other. I don't remember that sort of thing in the before times. Maybe because the security people were employed by private companies motivated to get their money's worth.

True. If you get TSA Pre, though, then you get something very much like the 90's experience.

+1 for TSA Pre-Check. Also, Global Entry. Well worth the trouble to apply for.

But then you are giving money to the TSA.

Plus fingerprints and the benefit of being entered into another government database.

There is also no guarantee that the precheck line will be open at the airport for the time you visit.

Yeah I fly quite often, I hate it. I guess it also depends where you are flying? I've flied in Asia and Europe without a problem this past year, but as soon as you're in the US you get TSA.

I agree with you. I have not had an issue flying in years.

> When I buy a plane ticket I only buy it for the privilege of being flown from one area of the country to the other

Sure you want to pay for a confortable flight that will not make you feel totally exhausted or in bad shape once you land. Would you travel from US to UK while standing up because it would be 50% cheaper? with no toilets ? and a 100% fee for luggage ? because after all, you "only buy it for the privilege of being flown from one area of the country to the other".

I remember a time when consumers believed their interest was the best possible value for their money. Now we have a generation who justifies the worse business practices "because corporations must maximise profit for their shareholders" ? How is it in the interest of the consumer ?

I think it depends on the length of the flight. I'm happy to go with Ryanair in Europe (not sure you can go with a worse airline), because it's max 2-3h. But there's no way I'd do that for a longer flight for a number of reasons.

For a 23h trip, I'll definitely get the better option I can reasonably afford.

Transavia - the Dutch competitor of Ryan Air and owned by KLM is one to avoid as well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com