important life impacting advice sought

Archived From: Off Topic
  • Page :
  • 1
  • Text Only
rated:
i can fly in n out of airport close by (15min) and fly 1.5 hr outbound & 3 hr more return or fly non stop but drive 1 hour each way. same fare but the airport closer will be miles on a program i collect miles on, the non stop will be with an airline i do not collect miles on and do not plan on flying regularly...
OMG, what to do?!

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.
take airforce one. duh.

ask the lady at bidding for travel

Take a cab and have a sandwich.

what sort of car is it?

If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.

soundtechie said:   If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.


Flying 1.5 hours could easily be 6-8 hours of driving.


Wabbit Season!
Disclaimer
Thumb it!

i parked air force one kinda far away, so can't use it.
it's a transcon flight so 5 hours eastward and 6 hours westward, when non stop.
i have to buy my own sandwich.

miserly said:   i parked air force one kinda far away, so can't use it.
it's a transcon flight so 5 hours eastward and 6 hours westward, when non stop.
i have to buy my own sandwich.


1 hour drive to get non-stop transcon is a no-brainer, IMO. (unless you are likely to get worthwhile perks by flying your usual carrier)

miserly said:   i parked air force one kinda far away, so can't use it.
it's a transcon flight so 5 hours eastward and 6 hours westward, when non stop.
i have to buy my own sandwich.
When someone asks you to go on a long trip, they should at least spring for business class if not first class. Plus the sandwiches are free!

Take a plane. Your arms won't get as tired that way.

take the one with the biggest boobs

Send me the money.
Stay home.
done

arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.


Flying 1.5 hours could easily be 6-8 hours of driving.


Driving 6-8 hours is more preferable (and faster than) flying 1.5 hours.

soundtechie said:   arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.


Flying 1.5 hours could easily be 6-8 hours of driving.


Driving 6-8 hours is more preferable (and faster than) flying 1.5 hours.


I have never had a 1.5 hour flight (and all of the security BS, etc) take anywhere close to 6 hours.

It only makes sense to drive that distance if you are traveling with multiple people (or children/pets) with more than carry-ons.

There is probably also an exception for chain smokers, the morbidly obese, and the abnormally tall.

Since neither seems easier then the other, go with whatever's cheaper. If someone else is paying and they'd pay gas or flights either way, go for the miles. If you really want the extra 2.5 hours of your life back, drive and don't worry about anything else.

arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.


Flying 1.5 hours could easily be 6-8 hours of driving.


Driving 6-8 hours is more preferable (and faster than) flying 1.5 hours.


I have never had a 1.5 hour flight (and all of the security BS, etc) take anywhere close to 6 hours.

It only makes sense to drive that distance if you are traveling with multiple people (or children/pets) with more than carry-ons.

There is probably also an exception for chain smokers, the morbidly obese, and the abnormally tall.


For some strange reason, SW Airlines doesn't have a direct flight from Dallas to Corpus Christi. As a result, the flight from AMA to CRP often has a layover of a couple of hours in Dallas, a stop in Houston where we do not deplane, and finally arriving in Corpus about 7-8 hours later. This doesn't include the early check in, security lines, etc. Just time on the plane.

There is one scheduled flight from AMA to CRP which does not require a plane change, but does require stops in Dallas and Houston. If we can book that one, the flight is just under 4 hours.

For a frame of reference, direct flight from DFW to CRP on AA is 1hr 20mins.

All of that to say that we do, quite often, drive rather than fly. It's 9-10 hours to drive, we have a vehicle there, and we have no baggage restrictions. Nor are we paying inflated airport prices for food and beverages.

^^^ Doesn't really conflict with what I'm saying.

You're talking about multiple people, plus avoiding a rental car, with the drive only taking an hour or two longer than the bizarro flight arrangement.

The OP is asking about driving 6-8 hours versus a 1.5 hr direct flight. On business travel, so the rental car (if needed) is covered by the company.
It would be stupid to drive it.

arch8ngel said:   The OP is asking about driving 6-8 hours versus a 1.5 hr direct flight. On business travel, so the rental car (if needed) is covered by the company.

i'm unsure why people keep misreading my posts, but i've said it's a transcon flight from one coast to the other. nonstop is 5 hours one way, 6 the other (jet stream) from an airport 1 hour away. or i can fly with 1 stop each way for 6.5 hours one way and 8.5 hours the other. the local airport airline will give me miles i am collecting, the non-stop will give me miles for an airline i never fly, so basically worthless. fare is about the same.
at the end of the day, time is about the same, taking time to get/from the airport into consideration. non-stop is more convenient and less likely to have scheduling issues. the stopover opens up additional risk of delays. the flight with stops have slightly better departure times as the non-stop is only one flight per day. so driving to my final destination was never in the cards. it still isn't.

as for the texas two step, you can thank Jim Wright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Amendment

arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   arch8ngel said:   soundtechie said:   If you're flying for 1.5 hours, you should drive.

ETA: not drive to the airport, drive the entire distance.


Flying 1.5 hours could easily be 6-8 hours of driving.


Driving 6-8 hours is more preferable (and faster than) flying 1.5 hours.


I have never had a 1.5 hour flight (and all of the security BS, etc) take anywhere close to 6 hours.



If that's true, then you're a very lucky person, 'cuz every other flight I take gets delayed until 3 in the morning.

miserly said:   arch8ngel said:   The OP is asking about driving 6-8 hours versus a 1.5 hr direct flight. On business travel, so the rental car (if needed) is covered by the company.

i'm unsure why people keep misreading my posts, but i've said it's a transcon flight from one coast to the other. nonstop is 5 hours one way, 6 the other (jet stream) from an airport 1 hour away. or i can fly with 1 stop each way for 6.5 hours one way and 8.5 hours the other. the local airport airline will give me miles i am collecting, the non-stop will give me miles for an airline i never fly, so basically worthless. fare is about the same.
at the end of the day, time is about the same, taking time to get/from the airport into consideration. non-stop is more convenient and less likely to have scheduling issues. the stopover opens up additional risk of delays. the flight with stops have slightly better departure times as the non-stop is only one flight per day. so driving to my final destination was never in the cards. it still isn't.

as for the texas two step, you can thank Jim Wright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Amendment


You should probably make your original post more clear, then, because it definitely sounds like a 1.5 hour flight is being discussed (even though you say trans-con in a later post, and there are no transcontinental flights that short).

My advice stays the same, though. Direct. Screw the layover and chance for missed connections.

I'm glad you started this thread.

arch8ngel said:   (even though you say trans-con in a later post, and there are no transcontinental flights that short).

i define transcon as transcontinental, though debates rage http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_polls/read.mai...
i'd say SFO-MCO qualifies, as would SAN-BWI...

I've done the texas 2 step. Coming in was just a stop at dallas, going back I had a transfer. Midland - dallas - houston - orlando.

ganda said:   what sort of car is it?
In typical FW fashion, it has to be a Crown Vic...

miserly said:   arch8ngel said:   (even though you say trans-con in a later post, and there are no transcontinental flights that short).

i define transcon as transcontinental, though debates rage http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_polls/read.mai...
i'd say SFO-MCO qualifies, as would SAN-BWI...


I'm not saying that you were not taking a transcon flight.

I was saying that we should have known better since there are no 1.5-3hr transcon flights in existence.

Your OP read as if you were taking a 1.5-3 hr flight, total flight time, and made no mention of the transcontinental nature of the flight.
If it had, then Soundtechie should have never posted about driving, since a transcon drive takes multiple days.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014