direct or in direct that is the question?

[tony64]

we have opted for an in direct flight this time ,with a change at St. Louis out Bound and Fortworth on the return. This is solely down to the fact we can save just under £1000 which goes along way towards spending money with 2 teenagers in tow
It does however mean a journy time (home to Hotel )of about 24 Hrs. I was wondering if anybody else had an opion as to the merits of this or are we just going to arrive absolutely knackered.

 

[Tony Bush]

Tony,

Yep you'll be knackered!!
Outbound shouldn't be a problem though as excitement should outweigh tiredness.

Your basic choice is direct = speed but costs more -
Indirect = cheaper but takes AGES!

so is money more important than speed. For us we always go direct purely because we all (DD excepted) HATE flying and the least time on an aircraft the better !!

Tony

 

[BevS97]

I would do whatever I can afford, but I have a bit of a problem with flying to the midwest, then flying back to Florida. I was looking at some flights via Detroit but it's miles out of the way, I think St. Louis is pretty far west as well (but my geography is a little ropey) - Dallas/Fort Worth is definitely west of Orlando.

I would have no problems changing anywhere on the east coast.

We actually flew indirect last year, but via Amsterdam, I like this option a lot, a short 1 hour flight from our local airport (NCL) to Amsterdam which is a nice easy airport to transfer in, then a standard 10 hour flight to the states.

I have to say though, that for £1000 saved, I would fly via most routes!

bev

 

[trashcanman]

Although I've not been before, I talked to some friends and they said that the advantage of a change in the US before getting to Orlando is that you clear customs at the first point of entry and this is generally a lot quicker than customs at Orlando on a direct flight.

I'm therefore doing this and hoping they are right!!

 

[Wednesday till I die]

Hello Tony.

I think that you realise yourself that direct on a scheduled flight is option number 1.

However, a £1000 saving speaks for itself and if I were
you I would be really pleased.

Agree with Bev about the places you are changing flights being
a bit of a haul. Last November we did a flight out of M.C.O at 16.30 via Atlanta and were in Manchester for 9.00 the next morning.The direct Virgin flight is something like 18.15 out 7.30 in, so this worked out really well.

Still, £1000 is a great saving.
Enjoy your trip!

Barry.

 

[matty624]

We've never gone indirect before, but this year we saved £700 for the 4 of us by going via Washington from Manchester.
I notice we're leaving on the same day Trashy, which route are you taking?
I hope United are still flying without problems in another 4 weeks and a bit!!!
Ian

 

[vernon]

Saving a grand it's a no brainer IMHO, TAKE THE MONEY !!! LOL. IMHO anything more than £300 (with older kids) I'd go indirect and save money. With younger kids I think my "threshhold" would move to £500 but that depends on how young they are and how well they travel.

 

[floridalol]

Xmas 1991 we went via Fort Worth/Dallas - outward was fine and on the return we took advantage of a stopover and had 2 days in Dallas which was great (visited Grassy Knoll etc.). Would suggest this option because a 24 hour trip is a long time.

 

[Enright78]

We almost always go indirect now, we are tied to school hols and this gives us better availability. I'd agree with Bev that DFW is a bit out of the way for a Florida trip, we hav done most of our indirects via JFK, Atlanta and Boston. In our experience it barely extends the flight time at all, for eg, in October we fly out of Heathrow at 10am and via JFK arrive MCO at 5.30pm.

However, we did go via DFW to San Francisco in Feb, it is a nice airport, I'd agree about trying to do a stopover?
JMHO

 

[athurstance]

We are flying out via Fort Worth then back via St Louis at Easter. We saved over £1000 for 4 of us as apposed to going direct. It will take longer but I don't see it as a huge problem really and with the money saved we are going again at Xmas so it really was an easy decision.

Angela

 

[trashcanman]

they said that the advantage of a change in the US before getting to Orlando is that you clear customs at the first point of entry and this is
generally a lot quicker than customs at Orlando on a direct flight.

Sorry to barge in on your thread Tony but I wonder whether anyone out there can confirm or deny this?

 

[juliebro]

I suspect it may be getting through immigration as well as customs that is quicker on an indirect flight. We've always flown indirect (through Philadelphia), so have nothing to compare it with, though.


Julie

 

[tony64]

I have a friend who is a air stewardess and she informs me that you clear customs and immigration at piont of entry and as there is likely to be more American on the plane going into say Atlanta an English tourists then the queue (lines American speak) are going to be shorter

 

[UKANGEL]

yes, we've flown via washington with UA last couple of trips and the lines thru customs/immigration in washington were very short, taking no time at all. Then when we got to orlando of course you dont need to go thru immigration at all and it was a breeze!

 

[Enright78]

I'd confirm that, I suspect the only place where immigration etc queues would be about the same as Orlando would be JFK?

Our experiences in Atlanta and Boston were that it was much quicker, and no double baggage reclaim at Orlando.