Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SeattlePI)   This slideshow of airlines that no longer exist will make you long for the days when beautiful Trans-World Airlines stewardesses would offer you some of their famed TWA Tea   (seattlepi.com) divider line 59
    More: Interesting, TWA Tea, US Airways, radars, airlines  
•       •       •

3572 clicks; posted to Business » on 15 Feb 2013 at 7:51 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-15 06:58:20 AM  
ic.pics.livejournal.com

/Obligs.
 
2013-02-15 07:46:48 AM  
ww2.hdnux.com

N.W.A had their own airline? Not bad for being straight outta Compton.
 
2013-02-15 07:51:02 AM  
Article with still more failed airlines


Ozark Airlines. Krazo spelled backwards is...
 
2013-02-15 07:52:41 AM  

dickfreckle: [ww2.hdnux.com image 628x386]

N.W.A had their own airline? Not bad for being straight outta Compton.


I bet it went out of business because of Fear of a Black Airline.
 
2013-02-15 07:58:40 AM  
fark the TSA?

100 Miles and Flying?

Alwayz Flying Into Something?
 
2013-02-15 08:01:18 AM  

dickfreckle: [ww2.hdnux.com image 628x386]

N.W.A had their own airline? Not bad for being straight outta Compton.


CSB
I was on NWA flight 420

I still have the ticket

/CSB
 
2013-02-15 08:04:27 AM  
Then, on July 17, 1996, a TWA 747 exploded shortly after taking off from JFK, killing all 230 people on board.

Yeah, good times.
 
2013-02-15 08:19:39 AM  
Worked for Southern Airways back in the 60's.   Atlanta-Chicago SIX stop service, including breakfast AND lunch!  True story....
 
2013-02-15 08:34:11 AM  

CarnySaur: Then, on July 17, 1996, a TWA 747 exploded shortly after taking off from JFK, killing all 230 people on board.

Yeah, good times.


My parents thought my sister was on that flight for a few hours. That was a real shiatty night.

/she's fine
 
2013-02-15 08:34:20 AM  
I did not realize that there was a trans-friendly airline that existed for so long.
 
2013-02-15 08:53:36 AM  
I notice theme for a lot of these airlines was "deregulation."
 
2013-02-15 09:16:48 AM  

verbaltoxin: I notice theme for a lot of these airlines was "deregulation."


Yup. The modern hub-and-spoke route map. How American and Southwest really changed the industry in the 1980s. Ironically there was only room enough for one sheriff in town. American ran into quite a few other problems though.

Before deregulation, airlines had to petition the government for a route. Think of the FCC handing out radio frequencies -- routes to fly were considered a limited resource and it was up to a panel at the FAA (I think?) to assign them. So some airlines; PAN AM, United, TWA .. had really good routes.

Others like Eastern found once their routes weren't protected, they couldn't compete. That was the single common theme in 1980s airlines wars -- some were adapting and creating the new model, and some were just clinging to their old routes (too long without enough passengers).

Thats the thing. Back then, with protected routes, airlines charged a bunch more in terms of real dollars per flight. It was a pretty usual thing to see planes half-empty on many routes -- but the airline didn't care, because nobody else was allowed to compete for the same routes. So they'd just charge whatever they wanted.

Think of your local regional airline how much more per mile it charges. Now apply that rule to the entire nation.

Deregulation gets a bad name because of the cattle call that ensued, but in reality more people afford more flying now than at any time in history. Which in a way is sad if you were one of the ones affording air travel back when; but otherwise, airlines really have made it possible so anyone can fly reasonably affordably now. That was not the case before reregulation.

The only problem now is might only end up with one airline. Which we'd then need to tear the whole thing down and start over again. Maybe this time with bullet trains? Please?
 
2013-02-15 09:21:50 AM  
Fortunately I don't see Southwest or JetBlue on that list.  If I ever do, I'll likely never fly again.
 
2013-02-15 09:24:23 AM  
No compliments on the headline? Well, I appreciate it, subby
 
2013-02-15 09:31:10 AM  

SmackLT: No compliments on the headline? Well, I appreciate it, subby



i.imgur.com
Nicely done, subs.
 
2013-02-15 09:32:19 AM  

Generation_D: verbaltoxin: I notice theme for a lot of these airlines was "deregulation."

Yup. The modern hub-and-spoke route map. How American and Southwest really changed the industry in the 1980s. Ironically there was only room enough for one sheriff in town. American ran into quite a few other problems though.

Before deregulation, airlines had to petition the government for a route. Think of the FCC handing out radio frequencies -- routes to fly were considered a limited resource and it was up to a panel at the FAA (I think?) to assign them. So some airlines; PAN AM, United, TWA .. had really good routes.

Others like Eastern found once their routes weren't protected, they couldn't compete. That was the single common theme in 1980s airlines wars -- some were adapting and creating the new model, and some were just clinging to their old routes (too long without enough passengers).

Thats the thing. Back then, with protected routes, airlines charged a bunch more in terms of real dollars per flight. It was a pretty usual thing to see planes half-empty on many routes -- but the airline didn't care, because nobody else was allowed to compete for the same routes. So they'd just charge whatever they wanted.

Think of your local regional airline how much more per mile it charges. Now apply that rule to the entire nation.

Deregulation gets a bad name because of the cattle call that ensued, but in reality more people afford more flying now than at any time in history. Which in a way is sad if you were one of the ones affording air travel back when; but otherwise, airlines really have made it possible so anyone can fly reasonably affordably now. That was not the case before reregulation.

The only problem now is might only end up with one airline. Which we'd then need to tear the whole thing down and start over again. Maybe this time with bullet trains? Please?


In this country? No, you'll always see us dependent on flight. Bullet trains are something I support, but implementing them is a multibillion dollar, multi-decade endeavor. That doesn't make it impossible by any means, but it's a no-go for any politician that wants to keep their job. I'm sure UP would love to be back in the passenger train business (And I would like them to be too, because I have UP stock that's been good to me). There's no will to expend the capital though.
 
2013-02-15 09:32:22 AM  

Generation_D: verbaltoxin: I notice theme for a lot of these airlines was "deregulation."

The only problem now is might only end up with one airline. Which we'd then need to tear the whole thing down and start over again. Maybe this time with bullet trains? Please?


Now that the cheap airfare genie is out of the bottle, high speed trains won't be able to compete except for short routes (i.e. northeast corridor, etc).  Even at high speeds, planes are still faster and more flexible in adjusting routes to fit consumer demand.  Trains can only go where the tracks are and high speed trains can't run on the the majority of tracks today.
 
2013-02-15 09:37:29 AM  
Interesting slide show. What I found most fascinating was over and over again you saw "soandso was hurt by the airline deregulation" wikipedia sums it up as killing a regulation that made it nearly impossible/extremely expensive for new companies to enter the market. Heh. Fark em.

/F-F-F-FREE MARKET GUISE!
 
2013-02-15 09:40:03 AM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: Interesting slide show. What I found most fascinating was over and over again you saw "soandso was hurt by the airline deregulation" wikipedia sums it up as killing a regulation that made it nearly impossible/extremely expensive for new companies to enter the market. Heh. Fark em.

/F-F-F-FREE MARKET GUISE!


Well this is one of those cases where deregulation wasn't automatically horrible. It did a lot to streamline how airlines ran their routes, and it made airfares cheaper. It did come at a cost to many regionalized airlines though.

Generation_D explained it pretty well. The problem we're experiencing now is one, giant airline (*ahem* American) gobbling up everyone else.
 
2013-02-15 09:43:34 AM  
i1151.photobucket.com
Back when planes had private sleeping quarters, smoking lounges and windows that opened (as Mitten's remembered).
 
2013-02-15 09:46:57 AM  

verbaltoxin: Dr. Goldshnoz: Interesting slide show. What I found most fascinating was over and over again you saw "soandso was hurt by the airline deregulation" wikipedia sums it up as killing a regulation that made it nearly impossible/extremely expensive for new companies to enter the market. Heh. Fark em.

/F-F-F-FREE MARKET GUISE!

Well this is one of those cases where deregulation wasn't automatically horrible. It did a lot to streamline how airlines ran their routes, and it made airfares cheaper. It did come at a cost to many regionalized airlines though.

Generation_D explained it pretty well. The problem we're experiencing now is one, giant airline (*ahem* American) gobbling up everyone else.


Which is why it should just be nationalized. There isn't enough people going every route every day to make money flying everyone everywhere, which is why the small ones fail.

Amtrak is the same way, If it wasn't for government backing keeping it alive we wouldn't have it, because it is not always profitable, but is always necessary. This is a bad industry to try to make into a capitalistic business, you just end up struggling and farking over the people you are trying to serve.

/Nationalize mass transit, natural resources, and life essential services(phone, internet, electricity), Then we have function properly without stabbing each other over a nickel and can prosper due to lowered costs of living.
 
2013-02-15 09:49:40 AM  

syberpud: Generation_D: verbaltoxin: I notice theme for a lot of these airlines was "deregulation."

The only problem now is might only end up with one airline. Which we'd then need to tear the whole thing down and start over again. Maybe this time with bullet trains? Please?

Now that the cheap airfare genie is out of the bottle, high speed trains won't be able to compete except for short routes (i.e. northeast corridor, etc).  Even at high speeds, planes are still faster and more flexible in adjusting routes to fit consumer demand.  Trains can only go where the tracks are and high speed trains can't run on the the majority of tracks today.


Not if you include the following: 1) traffic clusterfark to get to the airport, park, shuttle, airport, TSA line, TSA itself, and finally, the required double shot of bourbon before boarding.

// Managed to execute all of the above in under an hour at Orange County airport recently. Slammed that shot and made last call, like a boss.
 
2013-02-15 09:50:55 AM  
Oh God, they had to remind me about Eastern Airlines.
 
2013-02-15 09:52:23 AM  
Generation_D


I'm glad somebody else remembers Ozark.

/Still pissed at how American swallowed up TWA and then shut it all down, basically killing air travel out of STL until Southwest came along
 
2013-02-15 10:09:20 AM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: verbaltoxin: Dr. Goldshnoz: Interesting slide show. What I found most fascinating was over and over again you saw "soandso was hurt by the airline deregulation" wikipedia sums it up as killing a regulation that made it nearly impossible/extremely expensive for new companies to enter the market. Heh. Fark em.

/F-F-F-FREE MARKET GUISE!

Well this is one of those cases where deregulation wasn't automatically horrible. It did a lot to streamline how airlines ran their routes, and it made airfares cheaper. It did come at a cost to many regionalized airlines though.

Generation_D explained it pretty well. The problem we're experiencing now is one, giant airline (*ahem* American) gobbling up everyone else.

Which is why it should just be nationalized. There isn't enough people going every route every day to make money flying everyone everywhere, which is why the small ones fail.

Amtrak is the same way, If it wasn't for government backing keeping it alive we wouldn't have it, because it is not always profitable, but is always necessary. This is a bad industry to try to make into a capitalistic business, you just end up struggling and farking over the people you are trying to serve.

/Nationalize mass transit, natural resources, and life essential services(phone, internet, electricity), Then we have function properly without stabbing each other over a nickel and can prosper due to lowered costs of living.


sfcitizen.com
 
2013-02-15 10:20:24 AM  
What's more interesting IMHO is how seats have changed...

Old first class (similar to new premium economy on non-US carriers)
ursispaltenstein.ch

New first class
farm8.staticflickr.com

New first class Asian/Middle East
images.canberratimes.com.au

Old coach
img.webmd.com

New coach
www.ryanair.com
 
2013-02-15 10:22:41 AM  
bhcompy:
[sfcitizen.com image 600x358]

You're right. It is better that useless CEOs collect and sit on millions of dollars each while fleecing any/all taxes they can instead of that money turning around and bettering the world around us. You are so thoughtful and have convinced me to change my ways.

Thank you.
 
2013-02-15 10:28:07 AM  
Back in Jr High (think '70s) TWA gave away shirts that were emblazoned with their logo repeatedly.  One of my classmates got one and we laughed our 13 year old arses off.
 
2013-02-15 10:39:02 AM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: bhcompy:
[sfcitizen.com image 600x358]

You're right. It is better that useless CEOs collect and sit on millions of dollars each while fleecing any/all taxes they can instead of that money turning around and bettering the world around us. You are so thoughtful and have convinced me to change my ways.

Thank you.


Air travel is not a right or a biological necessity, for anyone.  Nationalizing it for the sake of nationalizing it is stupid.  Deregulation has improved air travel in many ways and there is no compelling reason to nationalize it.
 
2013-02-15 10:41:15 AM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: verbaltoxin: Dr. Goldshnoz: Interesting slide show. What I found most fascinating was over and over again you saw "soandso was hurt by the airline deregulation" wikipedia sums it up as killing a regulation that made it nearly impossible/extremely expensive for new companies to enter the market. Heh. Fark em.

/F-F-F-FREE MARKET GUISE!

Well this is one of those cases where deregulation wasn't automatically horrible. It did a lot to streamline how airlines ran their routes, and it made airfares cheaper. It did come at a cost to many regionalized airlines though.

Generation_D explained it pretty well. The problem we're experiencing now is one, giant airline (*ahem* American) gobbling up everyone else.

Which is why it should just be nationalized. There isn't enough people going every route every day to make money flying everyone everywhere, which is why the small ones fail.

Amtrak is the same way, If it wasn't for government backing keeping it alive we wouldn't have it, because it is not always profitable, but is always necessary. This is a bad industry to try to make into a capitalistic business, you just end up struggling and farking over the people you are trying to serve.

/Nationalize mass transit, natural resources, and life essential services(phone, internet, electricity), Then we have function properly without stabbing each other over a nickel and can prosper due to lowered costs of living.


Yeah, sorry, no. I'm liberal but not that leftist. I agree with better regulation, but not nationalization.
 
2013-02-15 10:45:37 AM  
No PSA? I guess they're still operating, just under the US Airways Express umbrella.
But they sure don't look like this anymore:

cruiselinehistory.com
 
2013-02-15 11:03:59 AM  

bhcompy: Air travel is not a right or a biological necessity, for anyone.  Nationalizing it for the sake of nationalizing it is stupid.  Deregulation has improved air travel in many ways and there is no compelling reason to nationalize it.


Amtrak, US Highway system, bridges, and border gates aren't either. It is for the sake things getting done properly, completely, with cohesion, and the betterment of the citizens in mind. These are all at odds with maximum profits every quarter. The regulation you speak of was put in place so existing companies had the best chance to make the most profits.

verbaltoxin: Yeah, sorry, no. I'm liberal but not that leftist. I agree with better regulation, but not nationalization.

But as shown here and also with telecoms, at a certain point you regulate a monopoly or duopoly into existence at everyone's expense. It's like winning the lottery for a few people, and an extra added cost of living for everyone else.
 
2013-02-15 11:07:16 AM  
I had one uncle who worked for Branniff and another who worked for Eastern. In fact, the second uncle was the guy who came up with the name WhisperJet.
 
2013-02-15 11:07:44 AM  
Dr. Goldshnoz: But as shown here and also with telecoms, at a certain point you regulate a monopoly or duopoly into existence at everyone's expense. It's like winning the lottery for a few people, and an extra added cost of living for everyone else.

Forgot to also mention stagnation in technology and utilities/services. You think Verizon and AT&T do enough R&D and infrastructure investment to justify what people pay? Do you think the fact that we wind up with massive monopolies running crucial aspects of everyday lives is somehow indicative that the "market" works?
 
2013-02-15 11:09:21 AM  
i147.photobucket.com

Makes Ryan Air look like Emirates Air First Class

/if the pilot is serving sodas -- then WHO'S FLYING THE PLANE??
 
2013-02-15 11:09:56 AM  
Air West is open for business and eager for you to board.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-15 11:22:18 AM  
Always remember these ads for Western Airlines:

i.ytimg.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfmRKHtzfFs
 
2013-02-15 11:29:37 AM  
www.marketplace.org
 
2013-02-15 12:10:21 PM  
 
2013-02-15 12:37:52 PM  

bhcompy: Dr. Goldshnoz: bhcompy:
[sfcitizen.com image 600x358]

You're right. It is better that useless CEOs collect and sit on millions of dollars each while fleecing any/all taxes they can instead of that money turning around and bettering the world around us. You are so thoughtful and have convinced me to change my ways.

Thank you.

Air travel is not a right or a biological necessity, for anyone.  Nationalizing it for the sake of nationalizing it is stupid.  Deregulation has improved air travel in many ways and there is no compelling reason to nationalize it.


Improved how?  Last I checked, since deregulation, prices and fees have only gone up while service for non-first class passengers has gone down.  If fact, we would still be in the era of sitting on the tarmac for 4-8 hours with no food or bathroom breaks if it weren't for FAA regulations.
 
2013-02-15 12:59:50 PM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: Forgot to also mention stagnation in technology and utilities/services. You think Verizon and AT&T do enough R&D and infrastructure investment to justify what people pay? Do you think the fact that we wind up with massive monopolies running crucial aspects of everyday lives is somehow indicative that the "market" works?


It's your position that government monopolies are efficient and invest in innovation?

Have you considered investing in an innovative head-ass deassociator?
 
2013-02-15 01:15:56 PM  
Back in the day, the only way to fly was Ghetto Delta (NSFW language).
 
2013-02-15 01:38:32 PM  
YixilTesiphon: It's your position that government monopolies are efficient and invest in innovation?

Have you considered investing in an innovative head-ass deassociator?


They can be when not farked over by the same people preaching free market deregulations. The government invests millions of dollars in innovation. Whether through DARPA, NASA, or any of the programs that have advanced medical science, the government has a huge proven track record of creating good things.

Have you considered investing in a counter-point?
 
2013-02-15 01:45:54 PM  
Anyone else remember these guys?

upload.wikimedia.org

I flew Independence Air all the time back in the day. Great prices, pretty good service. The day they ceased operations in 2006 I was actually flying with them. Like all their flights, it connected through Dulles. And that day, I was stuck in Dulles and never made the second half of my trip with them, instead overpaying horribly with some other airline to get to my destination. Very thankful I hadn't checked any bags with Independence that day, who knows what would have happened to them.

/csb
 
2013-02-15 02:04:19 PM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: Amtrak, US Highway system, bridges, and border gates aren't either. It is for the sake things getting done properly, completely, with cohesion, and the betterment of the citizens in mind. These are all at odds with maximum profits every quarter. The regulation you speak of was put in place so existing companies had the best chance to make the most profits.


Let's look at the US Highway system for a second.  This is a means of travel, not the carrier.  Who are the carriers on those roads?  Private industry/people.  Who  The FAA polices and maintains the airways and their use, like the DoT manages the highways.

DSF6969: Improved how? Last I checked, since deregulation, prices and fees have only gone up while service for non-first class passengers has gone down. If fact, we would still be in the era of sitting on the tarmac for 4-8 hours with no food or bathroom breaks if it weren't for FAA regulations.


More flights, more destinations, more efficiency, etc.  Prices fluctuate with fuel costs, but, regardless, inflation adjusted prices are much lower than they were prior to the deregulation act.   I can deal with the fact that I'm cattlecarred around and I don't get free peanuts from hot stewardesses since I can get more flights to more places at a reasonable price compared to the preregulation days
 
2013-02-15 02:19:09 PM  

bhcompy: Let's look at the US Highway system for a second. This is a means of travel, not the carrier. Who are the carriers on those roads? Private industry/people. Who The FAA polices and maintains the airways and their use, like the DoT manages the highways.


I'm all for everyone and their mother owning a private aircraft and being able to fly to and from where they want just like with a car. However, without the government, the US highway system would not exist and thus government owning, maintaining, and updating infrastructure is good for all. And mass transits, like city bus systems, run on those roads for the benefit of all at the small cost to all. I'm suggesting that our air mass transit needs to be in the same position. Because a private company ferrying people around town and trying to give everyone access to the bus system for a low price would be at odds with maximum profits every quarter.

More flights, more destinations, more efficiency, etc.  Prices fluctuate with fuel costs, but, regardless, inflation adjusted prices are much lower than they were prior to the deregulation act.   I can deal with the fact that I'm cattlecarred around and I don't get free peanuts from hot stewardesses since I can get more flights to more places at a reasonable price compared to the preregulation days

Again you are referencing regulations that were lobbied in by the major airlines of the time to allow them to keep their monopolies. Deregulating crooked regulation is not an example of "good deregulation = better for business", it is making things how they should have been in the first place.
Ya know, free market and all that.
 
2013-02-15 03:19:42 PM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: Again you are referencing regulations that were lobbied in by the major airlines of the time to allow them to keep their monopolies.


Money and power will always find each other. The only sorts of regulations that ever get through are the ones favored by the big players.

Look at toy regulation after the Chinese lead scare or Dodd-Frank.
 
2013-02-15 03:50:21 PM  

flux: No PSA? I guess they're still operating, just under the US Airways Express umbrella.
But they sure don't look like this anymore:

[cruiselinehistory.com image 600x434]


And the planes don't have the smiles painted one them.
 
2013-02-15 04:24:02 PM  

Dr. Goldshnoz: I'm all for everyone and their mother owning a private aircraft and being able to fly to and from where they want just like with a car. However, without the government, the US highway system would not exist and thus government owning, maintaining, and updating infrastructure is good for all. And mass transits, like city bus systems, run on those roads for the benefit of all at the small cost to all. I'm suggesting that our air mass transit needs to be in the same position. Because a private company ferrying people around town and trying to give everyone access to the bus system for a low price would be at odds with maximum profits every quarter.


Airplanes aren't for that, though.  They're larger scale, longer distance.  Airplanes aren't city busses and that's a crappy comparison.  A better comparison would be Greyhound, which is a private company.  As far as US highway comparisons, there is no transport infrastructure other than a landing strip.  The government owning, maintaining, and updating air doesn't really do much.  There is no problem with airports or their locations, currently, and many of them are municipal anyways, which already meets what you're asking for(the infrastructure be maintained by the government).

Again you are referencing regulations that were lobbied in by the major airlines of the time to allow them to keep their monopolies. Deregulating crooked regulation is not an example of "good deregulation = better for business", it is making things how they should have been in the first place.
Ya know, free market and all that.


Yes, they bullied Roosevelt to create a federal agency in 1938 to regulate air travel with an iron fist.
 
2013-02-15 06:42:28 PM  
home.comcast.net
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report