by Richard Foss
Everything about the Concorde was different because of the obsessive focus on weight; every pound of plates or cutlery was estimated to cost $400.00 over the course of a year, as opposed to about $25.00 aboard a 747. As a result, extra-lightweight crockery and silverware were used; in the years since the aircraft went out of service, these have become collector’s items. The meals also had to be made differently because of the tremendous G forces during takeoff. For instance, cakes collapsed under their own weight or were smashed to the side of whatever container they were packed in.
Air France and British Airways were the prime users of the aircraft, though Singapore Air and the American carrier Braniff used it on short-term leases. All users began their service with caviar, and British Airways continued with any of four entrées—grilled lamb cutlets, veal steak, crepes with morel sauce, or a Mediterranean vegetable salad appear on one menu.18 Afterward there was a passion fruit tart dessert, followed by a choice of three cheeses. On a representative flight on July 30, 1968, Air France served a surprising menu that was designed according to a theory called “sequences”—the idea was to reflect the speed of the flight with items that were cold, hot, then sweet.19 Unusually, this had three vegetable courses—salad cache, spinach subric, and buttered carrots—along with spiny lobster “Cote d’Emeraude,” before serving petits fours and a fruit salad. Five wines and a selection of liqueurs were available, if there was time to serve them.
When orders were first accepted for the Concorde, sales of 747s and other wide-bodied aircraft fell because it was considered first of a new generation, and airlines wanted to wait until the promised supersonic widebodies were ready. Though over one hundred Concordes were ordered, only fourteen ever flew in commercial service, and the reign of the fast-flying needles was brief. The future would be slower, more crowded, and much more financially turbulent, because the era of deregulation was dawning.
chapter 15
The Elusive History of Special Meals
For decades, many airlines have offered meals for people with dietary restrictions, whether these have been occasioned by religion, health, or otherwise. It is difficult to trace the earliest instances of these meals for a good reason—the airlines may have had them available, but have never really wanted people to order them. They cost more in terms of money and staff time and add to the complexity of catering, and as such they were offered but never promoted.
The earliest special meal that was based on a religious diet predates World War II. Practicing Catholics could be assured that some fish meals would be boarded on most aircraft on long-haul US routes, as well as on Pan Am, their South American subsidiary Panagra, and BOAC worldwide. Other carriers also offered seafood on Friday as an option, but I have been unable to conclusively document when they started. A TWA Flight Operations manual dated October 10, 1964, notes that “on fast days” a choice of fish or meat may be offered—making it obvious that on other days, there was no choice. A United Dining Service Checklist from the same year also shows no other options. Note that during this period seafood meals were not apparently an item that could be reserved in advance—some were boarded with the other meals on Fridays, and if you were Catholic or just preferred fish, you requested one and hoped they still had them.
The first meals available only by advance order were kosher platters, which were first mass-produced in response to the international services offered by El Al. Israel’s national airline had a commitment from the beginning to serve only kosher food, so when that airline started scheduled international services in 1950, caterers had to be found. This was no problem in the United States, because kosher meals had been available on some US flights at least as early as 1945 when Borenstein Caterers went into business. Prior to this time, passengers who kept strict kosher aloft had to bring their own food and utensils. Borenstein’s market was small, but they had all of it—no other US airline caterer was certified until 1962, when Siegel’s of New York entered the market.1
Borenstein’s pioneered several patterns in kosher airline catering, including having separate washing machines for the meat and milk silverware that is used on El Al. When Borenstein caters for other airlines, they provide disposable silverware for coach flights and brand new silverware for first class. After the kosher passenger uses it, it goes into general use.
Interviewed in February 2014, Borenstein’s manager Chris Medina said that the meals served in the early days are nothing like what is offered now. “It has evolved as we have tried to keep up with the non-Kosher market. Thirty years ago it was very simple—breakfast was a bagel, cheese, and lox, and that was it.”
The airlines were not eager to promote their kosher meal services for two reasons. First, they are more labor intensive for flight attendants who have to serve them. One of the problems with kosher meals inflight was impressing on eager or busy airline staff the fact that these had to be treated differently than other meals. Angela Waller, who wrote a book about her experiences as a stewardess in Britain in the 1950s,2 remembered, “Kosher meals were delivered directly to the aircraft in a box, and we were told never to open that box.”3 The rules of special handling and separate utensils were not well understood outside the Jewish community at that time, and even with special training, mistakes were made.
The second reason airlines didn’t want to promote kosher meals was that they always cost much more than standard meals.4 As such, Pan Am was concerned in the late 1960s when there was a sudden spike in the number of passengers ordering kosher meals to and from Puerto Rico, despite the fact that there was not, as far as they could tell, a larger number of traveling Jews. Pan Am’s vice president for catering services, James Kellites, explained in a 1974 interview,
Passengers would see that the regular snack service was not equivalent to the quantity or quality with [sic] any of the kosher meals. At the time we didn’t have Kosher snacks, so nonkosher meals would consist of a little sandwich while Kosher service was an entire meal. Mr. Rodriguez, let’s say, eating a sandwich, would be sitting next to Mr. Goldberg, who would be eating a steak or piece of chicken. The next time Mr. Rodriguez took a trip he would order kosher.5
Kellites also described a practice he called kosher roulette:
Out of New York City, Pan Am rotates its meals monthly in a three-month cycle. The veal is served for 30 days, beef for the next 30 days and then chicken, the least popular among travelers, for a month. . . . Seasoned travelers have gotten to have a pretty good idea of the schedule. A traveler will say to himself, this is chicken month, so I’ll order a kosher meal. The passenger is gambling. If the kosher meal has steak and the regular meal is chicken, he’ll own up to the stewardess that he’s the one ordered a kosher meal. If it’s the other way around, he’ll tell the stewardess that there must be some mistake, he didn’t order a kosher meal.6
Kellites estimated that the average economy-class airline meal at that time cost between $2.00 and $2.25, while kosher meals ran between $6 and $13. During the interview he was evidently trying to encourage people not to order kosher meals unless they were religiously required, but the reporter’s enthusiasm for them gave the final article the opposite effect.
Internationally, kosher meals were available aboard a carrier that might not have been expected to serve them, since they were the airline of an officially atheist state. Aeroflot historian Polina Kurovskaya reported that
According to Aeroflot’s veterans (former employees of the ground handling complex), special inflight meals appeared in the early 60s. A more precise date can not be established yet. The choice was between lean and kosher food. A special meal had to be ordered no later than 3 days before departure but such demands were very rare—a veteran we interviewed could only remember two such cases in ten years.7
When the kosher service was utilized, it was probably by tourists or foreign diplomats. It would have taken courage for anyone who was a Soviet citizen to identify themselves to the airline and their fellow passenge
rs as observantly religious.
The strictness of kosher standards at airports around the world has occasionally been a matter of controversy among observant Jews. In 1982, El Al was embarrassed when the ultraorthodox Grand Rabbinate of Jerusalem charged that their inflight meals made in Israel were not sufficiently kosher because some employees of the catering firm worked on Saturdays.8 El Al’s management and the catering company angrily denied the claim. This is a reminder, in case any is needed, that even an astute flight attendant can’t just look at a meal and be sure that it meets religious dietary standards.
Internationally, many airlines have offered other religious meals since 1945, or made them standard for all flights in the case of national airlines of countries with a state religion. Saudi Arabian Airlines, Kuwait Airways, Iran Air, Emirates, and Pakistan International are among the carriers that serve only meals that meet Muslim halal standards, and they also do not serve alcohol on board. On flights into Saudi Arabia, other carriers are not allowed to serve alcohol when actually in Saudi airspace. A posting from 2007 on the Airliners.net civil aviation discussion board mentioned that on an Air France flight from Riyadh to Paris, as soon as the announcement was made that they were no longer in Saudi airspace, “out comes the drinks trolley to the applause of the passengers, Saudis included (who have just been to the toilet to change out of their traditional gear into a western suit).”
Other aspects of Islamic law have caused religious disputes about food in flight, particularly issues regarding fast days. Fasts usually begin and end based on the local sunset, and someone aboard a high-flying aircraft may experience one that lasts for hours if going westbound. When questioned about when that person may break their fast, the modern Islamic scholar Ibn Abideen quoted several paragraphs of religious laws and commentary before delivering the following decision, which begins with a reference to an ancient question about when the sun goes down:
the one who is in a high place, such as the lighthouse of Alexandria, should not break the fast as long as the sun has not set there (as witnessed from above the lighthouse), while the people down in the town are allowed to break the fast if the sun sets according to them before it sets according to him (the person on the lighthouse). . . . Accordingly, breaking the fast for those who travel by plane is due when they witness the sunset, according to the position where they themselves are. They are not allowed to break the fast according to the timing of the country over which the plane is flying, the country for which they are heading, or the country from which they departed. Rather, they should break the fast upon witnessing the setting of the full disc of the sun. Thus, if—in this way—the duration of their fasting is lengthened in a way that makes fasting difficult for the one capable of observing the fast in the usual cases, then they are allowed to break the fast due to the additional difficulty accompanying the travel and not due to the ending of the daytime, and they are required to make up later for such day/s in which they break the fast. Consequently, what is claimed by some pilots that the fasting persons aboard are allowed to break the fast according to the timing of the place of takeoff or the place over which the plane is flying is incorrect. . . . Another case that is worthy of being explained is that in which the sun appears to have set and then resurfaces again in the west because of the high velocity of the plane. In this case, the fasting passengers are allowed to break the fast upon the “first sunset”; they are not required to consider the sun’s resurfacing.9
There are other controversies regarding how Islamic law may best be observed inflight, and airlines that serve a large religious clientele face unusual challenges. For instance, some sects allow the eating of only fruit while fasting, and airlines like Emirates stock special plates at that time.10 The same carrier also notes that during fasting periods, passengers who choose to eat may be served a cold meal rather than a hot one, so the scent of the warm food does not tempt those who wish to maintain their religious duty.
The dietary accommodations for Muslims are widely discussed, but it is much more difficult to get information about arrangements for observant Hindus. According to that religion’s traditional practices, it is forbidden for members of high-ranking castes to eat food prepared or even touched by those of lower castes—to the degree that a thirsty Brahmin may not accept a glass of water from someone of lower caste. This system lost legal status in 1950, well after the foundation of Air India, which already served Hindu-compliant vegetarian meals on all flights. The carrier seems to have a policy of not answering any questions about whether caste restrictions on food handling or airline catering ever were in place, and if so when they were removed. All aspects of the caste system are controversial in the multifaith country that is modern India, and at this time it is not possible to discover much about how this was or is handled.
It can’t even be said for certain exactly when Hindu and other special meals began to be available on flights to and through the United States, though it was some time in the late 1970s. Booking special meals required a call to the airline before 1976, when the first American travel agencies received computer systems. According to Flight Catering, “British Airways was a pioneer in introducing a vegetarian main course on Concorde in the nineteen seventies, which was then introduced in their first class, and later in WorldClass. Now it is also available in economy class.”11
The first article I have found that addresses the availability of special meals in detail is from the Post and Courier of Charleston, South Carolina, in 1981. Headlined “Restricted Diets No Longer a Problem for Air Travelers,” it treated the availability of special meals as a new and little-known phenomenon. After mentioning the availability of kosher, Hindu, and Moslem meals, the author went on to say,
The largest variety of special meals offered, however, are prepared for special health requirements. Air travelers now can special order such items as low-calorie, vegetarian, no-sugar, low-sodium and bland meals. Such esoteric selections as lacto-ovo (milk and eggs), gluten-free, low and high-fiber, and post-weaning infant meals are available on many airlines. Usually the larger the airline, the more varied the special meal service. However, often the smaller national flag carriers offer superior specialized meals associated with the cuisine of their countries. (Hindu meals on Air India, kosher on El Al, Japanese diet on Japan Airlines, etc.)12
He also noted the same tendency of savvy passengers to game the system:
some travelers order a special meal in the belief that they will get better food than those who are served the standard fare. However special meals are not automatically superior meals. Very often the special meal served in first class is identical to that offered in economy. The service may be different, but the food is the same.
The article finished with a list of the special meals aboard various carriers—American Airlines offered seven, Braniff thirteen, Pan Am nineteen. It was also noted that “some carriers can cross-reference to seat numbers, so announcements no longer need to be made at flight time.” This points to automation as something that enabled the proliferation of meals—prior to the widespread adoption of computers by airlines, it was labor intensive for the carriers and caterers to figure out what meal needed to be where, especially if a passenger changed their flight. European carriers were much slower to automate their systems and install terminals in travel agencies, and also to offer extensive meal choices. An article in the London-based Flight Magazine dated 1985 treated the ability to select a vegetarian meal for a repeat customer based on their profile in the system as something that might be available in the far future.13 It was available a year later to American travel agents.
By 1993 the major American carriers had the ability to book seventeen special meals—an edition of United Times, the airline’s employee magazine, lists them as follows:
Asiatic/Indian
Baby Bland
Diabetic Friendly Skies
Gluten-free
High-fiber
Hindu
Kosher
Lacto-vegetarian
Light Choice
Low-calorie
Low-cholesterol
Low-protein
Low-purine
Low-sodium
Moslem
Non-lactose Special meal
Vegetarian (pure)14
Another meal that was first offered by United in this year was the antithesis of all the healthy selections—the first children’s meals catered by McDonald’s. The “McDonald’s Friendly Sky meals” included “activities” (games and puzzles) and a toy and were offered on 80 percent of meal flights.
The long list of selections was a high-water mark for choice inflight, as the variety of meals would quickly shrink due to cost-cutting measures forced by deregulation of the industry.
chapter 16
Years of Chaos and Change (1975–1985)
The history of food in flight can not be decoupled from the economics of the airline industry, so when anything happened that fundamentally changed the way the system worked, the way airlines served passengers would change too. The changes in the 1960s and early ’70s had mostly been technological, but the change of the late ’70s was regulatory. A curious coincidence of timing led to most of the world’s governments rejecting the way that airlines had been operating, with calamitous results for some venerable carriers and fortunate outcomes for others.
The airline market in the United Kingdom in the mid-1970s was more competitive and creative than the one in the United States thanks to the proliferation of independent carriers that operated from secondary airports. London-Heathrow, the main airport for international connections, was closed to the independents, but from Gatwick, Luton, Manchester, and other airports around the country a vibrant market served British tourists seeking budget flights. Many lines started their existence as charter carriers serving package tour operators but evolved into a curious hybrid that never developed in America—they operated seasonal charters while simultaneously developing scheduled services on routes too minor to interest the government champions BOAC and BEA, which merged in 1974 to form British Airways.