Most flights, aside from those grueling transatlantic flights from NYC to India, are short enough that a "meal" really isn't necessary.
Take a flight from from LA to NYC as an example. It's approx. 6 hours. Eat a meal beforehand and then eat when you land. You should be fine.
Will you really suffer from starvation if you don't eat anything for 6 hours? I mean, really, it's not like you're doing anything grueling for those 6 hours, right? Sitting there and fidgeting with those silly lap belts isn't exactly enough exercise to work up a real appetite, right?
Plus, do you really want to eat anything -- much less a "meal" -- in a germ infested place like an airplane cabinet? Who knows what the prior passenger did on those armrests, or how flatulence-inclined that person was?
Long way of saying, most flights aren't long enough to really justify the need for a full meal. Plus, most people could stand to skip a meal, or two, or three ...
Updated 1 year ago | 37
Updated 2 years ago | 11
Updated 2 years ago | 27
Updated 1 year ago | 22
Updated 2 years ago | 106