-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
THE "PAN AM" THREAD
- Thread starter gregg75
- Start date
dhett said:
I took my first airplane ride the day I joined the navy in 1962. It cost $13 to fly me from San Francisco to San Diego on the remarkable PSA. Fares didn't change for the next two years (on that route anyway).
And I remember paying $160 for a one-way coach ticket from NYC to SF in 1971. In today's dollars that ticket would cost just short of $900.
recto101 said:
Actually, that's not how it went recto. But, given that you're 25, I can't blame you for the misinformation.
Pan Am flight 103 from London to New York was a continuation of a flight which started in Frankfurt. Different plane, but same flight number - so the luggage was transferred automatically from the 727 (FRA-LHR) to the 747 (LHR-JFK). A Libyan guy (agent of Ghadaffi) managed to get a bomb on the plane in his checked suitcase. He then exited the plane when it stopped in London. The bomb was set to go off at a certain time and that happened over Lockerbie, in southwest Scotland, killing all on board and 11 on the ground.
It wasn't a hijacking and the bomber was eventually arrested. He was tried, found guilty, and (in an incredible bit of idiocy) made a claim for clemency based on the "fact" that he had a terminal disease and was in his last days and wanted to go home to be buried. The bleeding heart dunces in the UK granted this, he flew to Libya three (?) years ago and has laughed his a$$ off at us ever since. That murderer is still free - and alive.
Google this if you don't believe me - I wouldn't blame you.....
And yes, that incident was the straw that basically broke Pan Am's back. They'd been fading for years in the face of deregulation and greater competition and the bombing and its aftermath pretty much put them out of business. A sad ending to a once great airline.
recto101 said:
During the 60's most of the aircraft highjackings were overseas in the Middle East and were more oriented towards the US relationship with Israel than anything else. Not much happened domestically other than the occasional side trip to Cuba.
After DB Cooper's famous flight the only response I remember is that 727's (the aircraft from which he departed in-flight via parachute) were modified so that the rear hatch (it had a rear stairwell under the tail for boarding) could not be opened in flight. It was from this perch that Cooper made his exit.
Flying in the 60's was both a more formal and more party-like experience than anything you'll find today outside the Playboy aircraft. Airlines advertised the stewardesses dressed in mini-shirts and go-go boots with "Fly Me" slogans and alcohol was pretty free flowing once underway. Flying still had some of the 50's glamour attached to it and was also breaking ground as the "hip" way to travel for young adults. Western Airlines advertised a bird sitting on the fuselage drinking a martini and saying (in his best Jim Backus voice) "It's the ooooonly way to fly".
landtuna said:
Wow - Somebody else who remembers PSA! Pacific Southwest Airlines..not "public service announcement." ;D In the early 70s, I'd fly regularly from LA to SF and back. If you took the midnight stand-by flight, it was $9.00 one-way. I did it about a dozen times, and there was only one time I didn't get a seat.
Lkeller said:
As a 6 year old boy, I still vividly recall flying on PSA from LAX to SFO one afternoon and my dad bringing me up to the cockpit of the 727 to meet the captain and crew! They were very nice, showed me the various instruments and sent me off with a set of metal wings as a souvenir.
That was a great flight and I still remember it well - and yes it was back when The Real Don Steele, Charlie Tuna and Robert W. Morgan were on Boss Radio KHJ on one end of the trip while kYa and The Big 610 ruled the airwaves at the other. I remember those well too.
Which is exactly why flying isn't as glamorous as it was 40 years ago. Delta (and a cadre of other airlines) will fly you round-trip coach from JFK to SF for $366 over Halloween. Tack on $100 in fees for a checked bag, and are still paying half the price you did then (in 2011 dollars).
Your $13 flight would cost $70 in today's money. That SD->SFO now costs $79 on United, so not everything has become cheaper in real dollars.
secondchoice said:
There were two other incarnations of Pan Am since the original airline folded:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_American_Airways_(1996%E2%80%931998)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_American_Airways_(1998%E2%80%932004)
Though in recent years, Pan Am had better luck not as an airline, but as a railroad, owned by the same company that owned the last version of the airline:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Systems
Speaking of leaving baggage, I recently - just before 9/11 - reported to a drive up clerk that while I didn't want to freak anyone out, some guy just put a full shopping bag in front of their door and walked away. I had seen the guy with some girl walking the highway. The girl was standing close by and got on her cell phone, as I observed in my rear view mirror while talking to the clerk, who was telling management. Within seconds of the girl getting on the phone the guy picked up his bag and they walked away together, back into the highway traffic, which I also rang in and told the clerk, who told the management.
If you see it say it; you hear it say it.
If you see it say it; you hear it say it.
Well, tonight's the night. We'll see if the show really takes off, since those banners have been showing up on this message board.
I was really disappointed in this show. I thought the pacing wasnt good. The score wasn't appropriate. But the biggest problem was that it didn't seem to know what kind of show it wanted to be. If they were trying to catch some of the early 60's/Mad Men flavor, they really missed the boat, or should I say, plane?
It reminded me of one of those cheesy disaster movies from the 70's without the disaster. I don't like to be critical because I know that no one sets out to produce a show that isn't good. Maybe they can re-tool a bit and find their footing. It needs a lot of work. Problem is nowadays they will only be given a few airings to prove themselves. Too bad.
It reminded me of one of those cheesy disaster movies from the 70's without the disaster. I don't like to be critical because I know that no one sets out to produce a show that isn't good. Maybe they can re-tool a bit and find their footing. It needs a lot of work. Problem is nowadays they will only be given a few airings to prove themselves. Too bad.
Would like to have heard more '60s music and other elements from that time frame dropped into the show. They used "Mack the Knife," but at least they didn't use music that had not been recorded yet in 1963.
We will probably be watching again next week.
We will probably be watching again next week.
Can't blame it on the Pan Am stewardesses who acted as consultants, because they were all first class.
Then you see the interview with one of the actresses, a slovenly girl, slouched on a sofa, the whole mini dress thing with legs crossed going on...basically someone who did not bother to take the time to become the role, but told us, "It was like, you know, like, like, like.". An interviewer in his garbage clothes with high top sneakers. Did you expect anything different from the program?
My suggestion would be for the actors and actresses to learn, understand and become the roles, but what does this old gal know from class and grace? The slouch said that she knew she was inferior to the real deals who were consultants. The real deals knew how to cross their legs and sit properly. The interviewees could take basic lessons from the stewardesses themselves during their own interviews.
In short, when your heart isn't in it, you aren't going to give a good performance, because you don't care to learn. You do it by rote, memorize a line, take your money and run. That's the generation portraying the generation that had class and meant it.
Then you see the interview with one of the actresses, a slovenly girl, slouched on a sofa, the whole mini dress thing with legs crossed going on...basically someone who did not bother to take the time to become the role, but told us, "It was like, you know, like, like, like.". An interviewer in his garbage clothes with high top sneakers. Did you expect anything different from the program?
My suggestion would be for the actors and actresses to learn, understand and become the roles, but what does this old gal know from class and grace? The slouch said that she knew she was inferior to the real deals who were consultants. The real deals knew how to cross their legs and sit properly. The interviewees could take basic lessons from the stewardesses themselves during their own interviews.
In short, when your heart isn't in it, you aren't going to give a good performance, because you don't care to learn. You do it by rote, memorize a line, take your money and run. That's the generation portraying the generation that had class and meant it.
As I suspected it would be, this is a series set in the 1960's as filtered through people who were never there--and it shows. At best the producers probably went on their computers, looked up the 1960's in Wikipedia and cribbed some notes. They could have just as easily put the actors in modern-day costumes and called the show "Qantas."
The CGI is some of the worst I've seen for television. The least the producers could have done is gotten a real vintage jet, changed decals (or even match move with CGI. They did that with the Pan Am building) filmed a few take offs and landings, taxis, a few fly-bys and chase plane shots and put the footage in storage for later use.
As is typical of these shows, its all about hot-shot boy toys and beautiful women put in improbable situations for the benefit of a generation who likes its drama shallow and immediate.
The CGI is some of the worst I've seen for television. The least the producers could have done is gotten a real vintage jet, changed decals (or even match move with CGI. They did that with the Pan Am building) filmed a few take offs and landings, taxis, a few fly-bys and chase plane shots and put the footage in storage for later use.
As is typical of these shows, its all about hot-shot boy toys and beautiful women put in improbable situations for the benefit of a generation who likes its drama shallow and immediate.
Having once married a woman who began flying in 1969 I think the "classier" moments were pretty much true to form. They obviously didn't show the other side of flying such as coming home hours late on a regular basis and stinking of jet fuel and spilled coffee.
I doubt this show will last though. It seems to be nothing but a billboard with no worthwhile content. If its intent was to show the glamorous side of a flight attendant they've done it. Now what?
I doubt this show will last though. It seems to be nothing but a billboard with no worthwhile content. If its intent was to show the glamorous side of a flight attendant they've done it. Now what?
Great music! I'm hoping for a soundtrack, mainly because I hope this music will help rejuvenate the radio format.firepoint525 said:
I thought the girls looked good. I will continue to watch.
Did anyone in 1963 actually say "crash" to refer to staying at someone's place?
- Status