Funny enough, I prefer the cold food for everything but breakfast when flying (an ice cold Danish is not how I want to be informed that it is 0800 local time)
Part of that is a lot of what the article mentioned (overcooked and soggy food is not what I consider good), but it is also just for peace of mind. I don't need to balance a lot of liquid filled tray compartments and I don't have to worry about the person next to me somehow flipping theirs (it happened before...). As long as they still have hot water and can reheat week old Starbucks then I am set.
What I didn't see mentioned in that article but has come up on other sources regarding airline food[1] is that the altitude also negatively affects your sense of smell and thus taste since so much of our perceived taste is actually smell.
It's difficult to respond to anecdote but I do think it's worth mentioning that the effect can alter depending on the specific flavours - some are affected more than others. I also expect there's some physiological aspects in play as well (eg some peoples nasal cavities might close up more than others). So it's possible you might be accidentally eating the right foods or just less susceptible than most.
I read once in a magazine in an airplane that the 0% humidity in cabin greatly altered the perceptions of food and wine. But of course that could have been an apologetic article to try to justify why everything tastes the same when flying.
Not all airline food is bad. It is the worst in the States in my experience, but many of the Asian and Middle Eastern airlines serve food I'd gladly pay for at a restaurant.
I once got the western option on Japan Airlines. It was described as spaghetti with ketchup, a beef burger and a sausage. I assumed it was just a bad translation and it would be some kind of pasta con carne dish in a tomato sauce, but no it was literally as described.
My experience with asian airlines is that picking the western option is always doing yourself a disservice.
I had possibly the best Laksa in my life on a Cathay Pacific flight, a decent Bibimbap on Asiana, and Singapore Airline's Chinese food is always spicy and tasty.
Meanwhile I've never in my life had a airline omelette that I wouldn't have thrown out if I had made it at home.
One of the best airline meals I've had was with Korean Air: what you got was a bowl of plain steamed white rice, a bowl of vegetable soup, and a variety of cold pickles and sauces which you added to the rice (including a tube of really nice mild chili sauce which I've never been able to track down).
All of which, of course, worked fine on a plane --- there wasn't anything which could go... weird and crusty... the way a lot of airline food does. And it tasted good, too.
The worst meal I had was with Air 2000 in probably about 1990. It was a intra-European charter flight, from Glasgow to Cyprus, and the meal was hilarious. Everything that should have been dry was soggy, everything that should have been moist was dry. Teenage me was particularly impressed by the croissant, which was completely limp (and moist, and greasy).
It did come with a little pot of pink, though. I have a bit of a soft spot for airline pink, even though I have no idea what it was. You don't get it any more.
BTW, if you want to be able to eat on a plane without elbowing your neighbour in the ribs, take chopsticks.
>what you got was a bowl of plain steamed white rice, a bowl of vegetable soup, and a variety of cold pickles and sauces which you added to the rice (including a tube of really nice mild chili sauce which I've never been able to track down).
You most likely got Bibimbap, with Gochujang sauce (the chili sauce). Bibimbap is one of the Korean signature dishes, and Gochujang a staple ingredient of Korean food.
On flights to Korea with Korean Air, and other airlines, Bibimbap is pretty much guaranteed. I agree that it works very well.
I had a similar experience with Asiana airlines, except they offered one authentic Korean and one American style dish as the entree. My girlfriend got one and I got the other to share and compare. Both were awesome. Minus discovering the tiny pink squares are not watermelon. They were a form of beet, I think.
Blamange. I'm trying desperately to remember the bit, it was Doug Adams or someone, the gist was:
He glared balefully down at his pressed aluminium tray. Upon it sat a cube of pink. He didn't know what it was called, but it was coloured pink, it tasted pink (if indeed pink could be ascribed a behaviour), and it was, therefore, simply, pink.
I paraphrase grotesquely but I can't recall the source and google fails me.
"Anyone want some of this" --- he prodded a dish vaguely, not sure of what was in it --- "stuff?"
The others shook their heads. The dish contained something shiny and wobbly and pink with a cherry on it, and in some strange way it managed to look like something you wouldn't eat even if it was pushed onto your plate after a week's starvation diet.
"What does it taste like?" said Masklin, after Gurder had chewed a mouthful.
"Tastes like pink," said Gurder.
(Little dishes of strange wobbly stuff tasting like pink turn up in nearly every meal on all airplanes. No one knows why. There's probably some sort of special religious reason.)
I haven't read that in twenty-five years - it evidently stuck somewhere up in the mental attic. I think I keep the Adams and Pratchett piles next to each other, under T for Turtles and Towels.
Thai Airways food, even economy class, has been consistently good the from 6 flights I've flown with them in the past two months. Good curries with rice :)
I was going to say something along these lines, but with pretty much every airline I've been on.
Aeroflot, Icelandair, KVM, Lufthansa, Condor, Delta, all of the inflight food was acceptable. It wasn't great, but it wasn't horrible either.
I didn't start flying international flights with meals until very recently (last 4 years), but I've never been dismissive of the meal offerings. If there was some change recently, it seems like it's that the airlines have figured out the best options for foods that are easy to store/move and have acceptable taste. Usually this seems to be rice+meat in sauce or vegetarian pasta with a few side dishes (salad, bread + cheese, etc), and for me this is fine. I don't relish the idea of trying to have a full meal on the tiny seat tray anyways, I'd rather just kill time with a book or sleep
Interestingly Thai Airways served some kind of chicken curry burrito for the recent flight I took from Bangkok to Northern Thailand, which was only an hour flight. I was surprised--it wasn't a full meal but way more than the stereotypical peanuts.
Also I'd like to note that all these meals were included (or free in a way) which probably makes them taste much better.
And on that, a friend of mine recently flew on American Airlines from London to New York and had to buy a meal, which I thought was strange
I am also traveling in asia too, brother! Cheers to a fellow world-traveler! Aren't we lucky we get to live such exciting and fulfilling lives? Good on ya, kinda gentlesir!
Wait... is the beeb starting a stand-up career in the 90s?
Also, I've no idea why they bother with full meals. Just keep feeding people chips, cookies, nuts... the occasional scotch... I'm much happier with these than a wet pile of matter that you insist is beef bourguignon.
That must be completely on the whim of whoever pays the bill. It can be absolutely anything from a bag of chips to a Michelin-starred professional cook.
I don't understand why airlines need to try to serve full meals in the first place. Even on a twelve hour flight why can't people just eat before boarding and after getting there? You certainly don't need to eat two meals on a short eight hour overnight flight. And the drinks service in economy on a 45 minute domestic flight really is a waste of everyone's time.
In first when it's tractable it's a great way to pass the time. In economy I usually turn it down.
The entertainment system is also a waste of time and space. If I wanted to watch some movie or listen to an NPR programme I could download it to my iPad before I boarded.
A meal before and after a 10 hour flight wouldn't work for me. Not even for an overnight flight. I tend to need to eat frequently otherwise I get light headed. I'm not even a large person - just have a faster metabolism than most I guess.
I flew a ten hour flight from Europe to LAX on Norwegian and no meals were served (you could buy food though). First time I've been on a flight that long with optional food.
It's not uncommon for people to be in a rush to or from a flight, so having no food whatsoever wouldn't work for a lot of people. Leaving quality aside, eating on the plane is rather time efficient considering all the other tasks and stress involved in a long trip.
That's quite a lot of 'my way works for me, why not for everybody, I don't understand' so I'll try to explain.
> Even on a twelve hour flight why can't people just eat before boarding
Even then some people would get hungry again after a couple of hours, and our instincts made feeling hungry rather unpleasant. So we want to eat. Granted if I knew a plane wouldn't serve me any food I wouldn't bother and just take my own. To avoid not having ay food for twelve hours.
> You certainly don't need to eat two meals on a short eight hour overnight flight.
Same argument: when not a sleep it's not really uncommon to get hungry within that timestamp.
> The entertainment system is also a waste of time and space
Not everyone has an iPad or bothers to carry it. Watching whatever movie, no matter how crappy, together with others can be a nice way to make time pass.
It's not about you feeling hungry, or you needing entertainment, it's all about the Airline not having problematic passengers.
By providing stodgy food, they are hoping that the passengers will get docile and sleep (especially on overnight flights) - also eating the food every x hours gives bored passengers something to do. A busy passenger is a passenger that won't annoy others.
Likewise the entertainment options, it's all there to keep you in your seat and disengaged from the plane (and other people) around you.
If the airlines could get away with doping everyone during the flight[1], they would.
--
[1] The Passenger Spaceplane en-route to The Fhloston Paradise, Fifth Element.
I tend to agree that it's not about having problematic passengers. The routing of service food, consuming food, clearing up helps break down long journeys.
I personally haven't experienced bad airline food. I'm not fussy and quite enjoy the experience.
Spoken like someone that has never traveled with a child.
Kids don't really care for NPR programs. and they won't care for what movie you picked in the iPad, even if they're the ones that picked it out themselves. The seat back entertainment systems are great for kids.
I've had pretty decent food quite many times on airplane. I don't think there are therefore any specific reasons why the food has to be "bad". If the food is bad, then bad choices have been made somewhere. One typical issue seems to be to try too hard. Keep it simple chef. Pasta bolognese, meatballs with rice etc. I'm not expecting culinary experience in coach, I just want to get something to eat.
One trick I learned from a million-miler was to preorder the vegetarian option. It usually arrives first as part of "special meal" handling and usually tastes great. Also much less chance of illness. I haven't had a bad airline meal since 1999 due to that advice...
This is worthwhile. Often the vegetation option is some Indian curry with rice (dal, chickpea, etc), or something else simple that stands up to reheating a bit better than average.
One time the person booking the flight for me thought it would be funny to choose a Halal meal. Jokes on them, it was spicy and delicious. Got funny looks when I ordered a beer to go along with it though.
I am big, so I dislike having a seat tray in my lap for an hour or more. Nowadays I just skip the airline meal and pack a sandwich in my carry-on. Bad airline food is just not worth the 5$ savings.
I think the trick to good airline food in economy is to specify a dietary restriction. I have been doing this for a while now and the end result is that you typically get slightly better food and you definitely get it faster no matter where in the plan you sit.
Also it turns out that you can have asian style food on most routes in the world even if it's typically not offered otherwise.
(Experience comes from mostly Lufhansa, Austrian and Swiss flights)
Vegan suits everyone, and it simplifies things for the airline and the cabin crew. On a flight from New York I requested a vegetarian meal. The passenger next to me was Muslim, and he requested a halal meal. We compared what we got,and they were both the same. If there were any Jewish or Hindu passengers on the flight that's what they'd have got too. And if they simply ran out of meat dishes, they would just apologize and offer the vegan dish instead.
The first rule of ordering a special meal is bring your own food just in case they don't have it. The cabin crew can usually scrounge up something if necessary as well.
My wife and I use this trick as well. We still laugh at the slightly confused look and comment from a male Lufthansa flight attendant. When serving our food before everyone else, he looked down at the label and asked "Hindu?". Lufthansa has some of the best airline food I've had.
Why do they feel the need to serve full lunches anyway. Maybe its necessary for transocean flights, but i dislike food beyond snacks in shorter flights. Bad eating experience, smells etc. I didn't pay to fly on a packed moving restaurant. And the worst are people who drink a few glasses of wine.
>I didn't pay to fly on a packed moving restaurant.
I don't understand this line of thinking. Ultimately, you did pay for that. If you didn't want the inclusives there is usually a budget airline that let's you select every line item as required, and gives nothing for "free".
I think the basic problem is simply that the food is "free". People choose flights on the basis of schedules and routes, and won't actually pay more for a better meal. Given the volumes of food involved, and the competition in the industry, shaving a few dollars or cents off each meal is always going to be an attractive option for airlines.
If it were like on the ground, where you could choose nothing for $0, something cheap but edible for $10, of something nice for $30, then the quality would probably be rather better.
I agree. I am price sensitive on flights but would love an option to pay an extra amount for decent food. As it is food quality is something I take into account when selecting an airline.
I listened to a documentary a little while ago about British airlines and the trend and pressure on their supply companies to hit a budget of £1 per meal per passenger.
That's a really good idea, but I wonder about the logistics of it: how do you ensure the right customer gets her meal? People swap seats all the time, so seat assignment doesn't work. Require ID or your plane ticket to get your pricey meal? That's a pain. I dunno.
I think some airlines have that option. I seem to remember Virgin America in 2011 had inflight touch-screens where you could order meals (for a price) and have it brought to your seat on demand. Air Berlin also had an option to pre-order a meal on your flight for extra cost - it wasn't amazing, but I was happy with it.
On flights where the meal has been free (Singapore & Qantas), I've also been happy with the food provided.
It's been a while since I've been on a non-European carrier that fed you anything for free. The last few times I've flown American or United or US Air, even long, cross-country flights, the only sustenance available has been these little shoeboxes with some crackers, nuts, beef jerky and what-not that they sell for some exorbitant price.
Last year, I went from Frankfurt to SF with United and food was bad. The plane was old, service was sloppy, no seat-back entertainment etc, almost everything was bad.
Went SF to Zurich to Istanbul in return with Swiss and food was quite good for my taste, Swiss also served quality chocolate twice which was a nice surprise. Along with presents to kids (books, coloring book, crayons etc.) it was more than OK IMO. Last month, went Istanbul - Bangkok with Turkish Airlines[1] and upgraded to business in return flight. Food was delicious both in economy and business.
I don't know Swiss, but Turkish Airlines' profitability fluctuates quarter to quarter and I know that they're heavily subsidized by government for political reasons, so the food they serve might not be of reasonable quality for a company totally moved by market forces.
[1] I'm Turkish. I don't like Turkish Airlines for political reasons.
It does depend, and the article address the biggest varying factor - price.
United is a low cost airline, by American standards (united is an American airline), and thus you get a low cost meal with low cost seat entertainment.
Swiss, is not a low cost airline and prides themselves on quality not quantity.
They used to hand out Turkish Delight after take off. They didn't the last time I've flown with them though (October 2016, economy).
Did they stop doing that altogether?
I usually fly on Air France cross Atlantic and the food is always horrible. With air Canada it's slightly better. But once I took a flight on emirate airlines in Asia, in one way I was in economic class and the food was really good, on my way back I was upgraded to
First class and I was literally eating in a Michelin stared restaurant. The food was cooked in the plane, the menu is varied and you have real dishes and forks and knifes. The food was so tasty.
So my conclusion it's just another way for air companies to save money, period!!
Praise to Emirate Airlines. My best flight experience was with them. I can confirm that their food in the economy class was pretty good, in comparison to other airlines they were serving the real meal.
I've flown 4 flights with Emirates and the food was remarkably good. I was also impressed and surprised with the metal cutlery too (which was chilled for some reason)
(I know that HN discourages "me too..." posts but in this context I think it's pretty valid)
I swear to god, Air France bakes all their "bread" for the year during whatever month wheat is cheapest. Half the food they serve you is brick-like rolls with frozen butter or cheese-product.
I usually fly British Airways, Germany to Canada, and found their food to be pretty decent even in economy class. Although, after a couple mini-wines it doesn't matter so much anymore.
105 comments
[ 1.1 ms ] story [ 177 ms ] threadhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3081285/Why-a...
Part of that is a lot of what the article mentioned (overcooked and soggy food is not what I consider good), but it is also just for peace of mind. I don't need to balance a lot of liquid filled tray compartments and I don't have to worry about the person next to me somehow flipping theirs (it happened before...). As long as they still have hot water and can reheat week old Starbucks then I am set.
[1] http://www.channel4.com/programmes/hestons-mission-impossibl... (Episode 3 - British Airways)
1.BBC Two - A Very British Airline http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01yyh99
So basically, airline food is:
* Overcooked
* Reheated
* Eaten at high altitude which affects the flavour
* Eaten in a loud environment which affects the flavour
Given all that, I'd say it's really not that bad!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umami
I had possibly the best Laksa in my life on a Cathay Pacific flight, a decent Bibimbap on Asiana, and Singapore Airline's Chinese food is always spicy and tasty.
Meanwhile I've never in my life had a airline omelette that I wouldn't have thrown out if I had made it at home.
All of which, of course, worked fine on a plane --- there wasn't anything which could go... weird and crusty... the way a lot of airline food does. And it tasted good, too.
The worst meal I had was with Air 2000 in probably about 1990. It was a intra-European charter flight, from Glasgow to Cyprus, and the meal was hilarious. Everything that should have been dry was soggy, everything that should have been moist was dry. Teenage me was particularly impressed by the croissant, which was completely limp (and moist, and greasy).
It did come with a little pot of pink, though. I have a bit of a soft spot for airline pink, even though I have no idea what it was. You don't get it any more.
BTW, if you want to be able to eat on a plane without elbowing your neighbour in the ribs, take chopsticks.
You most likely got Bibimbap, with Gochujang sauce (the chili sauce). Bibimbap is one of the Korean signature dishes, and Gochujang a staple ingredient of Korean food.
On flights to Korea with Korean Air, and other airlines, Bibimbap is pretty much guaranteed. I agree that it works very well.
I miss Korean food [sad face]...
He glared balefully down at his pressed aluminium tray. Upon it sat a cube of pink. He didn't know what it was called, but it was coloured pink, it tasted pink (if indeed pink could be ascribed a behaviour), and it was, therefore, simply, pink.
I paraphrase grotesquely but I can't recall the source and google fails me.
The others shook their heads. The dish contained something shiny and wobbly and pink with a cherry on it, and in some strange way it managed to look like something you wouldn't eat even if it was pushed onto your plate after a week's starvation diet.
"What does it taste like?" said Masklin, after Gurder had chewed a mouthful.
"Tastes like pink," said Gurder.
(Little dishes of strange wobbly stuff tasting like pink turn up in nearly every meal on all airplanes. No one knows why. There's probably some sort of special religious reason.)
-- Terry Pratchett, Wings
I haven't read that in twenty-five years - it evidently stuck somewhere up in the mental attic. I think I keep the Adams and Pratchett piles next to each other, under T for Turtles and Towels.
I was missing the cultural reference.
Aeroflot, Icelandair, KVM, Lufthansa, Condor, Delta, all of the inflight food was acceptable. It wasn't great, but it wasn't horrible either.
I didn't start flying international flights with meals until very recently (last 4 years), but I've never been dismissive of the meal offerings. If there was some change recently, it seems like it's that the airlines have figured out the best options for foods that are easy to store/move and have acceptable taste. Usually this seems to be rice+meat in sauce or vegetarian pasta with a few side dishes (salad, bread + cheese, etc), and for me this is fine. I don't relish the idea of trying to have a full meal on the tiny seat tray anyways, I'd rather just kill time with a book or sleep
Also I'd like to note that all these meals were included (or free in a way) which probably makes them taste much better.
And on that, a friend of mine recently flew on American Airlines from London to New York and had to buy a meal, which I thought was strange
Wait... is the beeb starting a stand-up career in the 90s?
Also, I've no idea why they bother with full meals. Just keep feeding people chips, cookies, nuts... the occasional scotch... I'm much happier with these than a wet pile of matter that you insist is beef bourguignon.
Don't forget your Gell-Mann amnesia when you click on the next BBC link [1]
[1] http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gel...
I like full meals...
In first when it's tractable it's a great way to pass the time. In economy I usually turn it down.
The entertainment system is also a waste of time and space. If I wanted to watch some movie or listen to an NPR programme I could download it to my iPad before I boarded.
Some people can survive on one meal a day. Others, like me, need multiple. Trust me when I say my appetite is an unavoidable inconvenience.
I've been seeing wildly low prices from them ($283 RT LAX to Oslo) for instance and been wondering about quality.
> Even on a twelve hour flight why can't people just eat before boarding
Even then some people would get hungry again after a couple of hours, and our instincts made feeling hungry rather unpleasant. So we want to eat. Granted if I knew a plane wouldn't serve me any food I wouldn't bother and just take my own. To avoid not having ay food for twelve hours.
> You certainly don't need to eat two meals on a short eight hour overnight flight.
Same argument: when not a sleep it's not really uncommon to get hungry within that timestamp.
> The entertainment system is also a waste of time and space
Not everyone has an iPad or bothers to carry it. Watching whatever movie, no matter how crappy, together with others can be a nice way to make time pass.
By providing stodgy food, they are hoping that the passengers will get docile and sleep (especially on overnight flights) - also eating the food every x hours gives bored passengers something to do. A busy passenger is a passenger that won't annoy others.
Likewise the entertainment options, it's all there to keep you in your seat and disengaged from the plane (and other people) around you.
If the airlines could get away with doping everyone during the flight[1], they would.
--
[1] The Passenger Spaceplane en-route to The Fhloston Paradise, Fifth Element.
I personally haven't experienced bad airline food. I'm not fussy and quite enjoy the experience.
I'm not paying airport food prices, which means accounting for security and transport it could be 12+ hours between meals.
Kids don't really care for NPR programs. and they won't care for what movie you picked in the iPad, even if they're the ones that picked it out themselves. The seat back entertainment systems are great for kids.
Don't expect filet mignon to be thrown in on Big Mac priced tickets with any carrier though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yex-WMaJTjg
Also it turns out that you can have asian style food on most routes in the world even if it's typically not offered otherwise.
(Experience comes from mostly Lufhansa, Austrian and Swiss flights)
I don't understand this line of thinking. Ultimately, you did pay for that. If you didn't want the inclusives there is usually a budget airline that let's you select every line item as required, and gives nothing for "free".
If it were like on the ground, where you could choose nothing for $0, something cheap but edible for $10, of something nice for $30, then the quality would probably be rather better.
I listened to a documentary a little while ago about British airlines and the trend and pressure on their supply companies to hit a budget of £1 per meal per passenger.
At that price it's no wonder we get fed crap.
On flights where the meal has been free (Singapore & Qantas), I've also been happy with the food provided.
Last year, I went from Frankfurt to SF with United and food was bad. The plane was old, service was sloppy, no seat-back entertainment etc, almost everything was bad.
Went SF to Zurich to Istanbul in return with Swiss and food was quite good for my taste, Swiss also served quality chocolate twice which was a nice surprise. Along with presents to kids (books, coloring book, crayons etc.) it was more than OK IMO. Last month, went Istanbul - Bangkok with Turkish Airlines[1] and upgraded to business in return flight. Food was delicious both in economy and business.
I don't know Swiss, but Turkish Airlines' profitability fluctuates quarter to quarter and I know that they're heavily subsidized by government for political reasons, so the food they serve might not be of reasonable quality for a company totally moved by market forces.
[1] I'm Turkish. I don't like Turkish Airlines for political reasons.
United is a low cost airline, by American standards (united is an American airline), and thus you get a low cost meal with low cost seat entertainment. Swiss, is not a low cost airline and prides themselves on quality not quantity.
They used to hand out Turkish Delight after take off. They didn't the last time I've flown with them though (October 2016, economy). Did they stop doing that altogether?
Qantas has excellent food.
(I know that HN discourages "me too..." posts but in this context I think it's pretty valid)
I wonder if it was just stored in a place that isn't heated. The atmosphere gets pretty cold up there.