Flying indirect with 4 kids - Mental?

[LeaversOnTour]

We are family of 6 who has flown to Florida quite a few times - ALWAYS direct.

We have always considered this to be the better option get it over and done with in one fail swoop.

However, we can save £500 on flights by doing a connecting flight which extends our arrival time by about 3.5 hours.

If we fly direct it will be with Virgin the 13:30 flight which we normally get because its cheaper gets us in 17:25

The indrect leaves at 12:05 with US airways gets us to Orlando for 20:53.

Are we nuts for considering this?? I should add our children are 5, 4, 2 and 1 (well will be when we travel)

 

[Elise79]

For me it wouldn't be the indirect that would bother me but the arrival time into MCO.

Personally, we like to arrive at MCO by about 5/5.30 so have time to get to the resort, get sorted and have something to eat.

Landing at nearly 9pm would put your resort arrival at gone 10pm which with kids that young would just be too late for me

 

[2Tiggies]

For me it wouldn't be the indirect that would bother me but the arrival time into MCO.

This. I prefer indirect, with the right connection times, but we were severely delayed one year and only got to our resort just before 10 pm. By the time we had put our things in our room we were too late to get anything decent to eat and DD was famished. If you plan accordingly and are prepared to pick something up on the way for your room or make sure your children eat on the plane not too long before landing you will be ok. Much as I advocate for indirect, I am not sure I'd want to do it with four little ones arriving so late at MCO. I think you need to try and envisage the scenario at 10 pm after a long journey and ask yourself "Would I pay an extra £500 not to have to deal with this right now?" The answer will vary. Some kids are well traveled and travel well. Others struggle a little more. I only have one.

 

[robinb]

We are family of 6 who has flown to Florida quite a few times - ALWAYS direct.

We have always considered this to be the better option get it over and done with in one fail swoop.

However, we can save £500 on flights by doing a connecting flight which extends our arrival time by about 3.5 hours.

If we fly direct it will be with Virgin the 13:30 flight which we normally get because its cheaper gets us in 17:25

The indrect leaves at 12:05 with US airways gets us to Orlando for 20:53.

Are we nuts for considering this?? I should add our children are 5, 4, 2 and 1 (well will be when we travel)

I live in the US about 150 miles north of Chicago. Almost all of our flights have connecting flights and certainly all of our flights overseas do as our small regional airport is not an International airport. IMO £500 is a lot of money saved for a relatively small amount of inconvenience and a 3.5 hour delay in getting to your hotel/resort. How long do you plan on spending in the US? Is that 3.5 hours and later arrival really going to make a difference? I would stick with what you have and maybe just plan on burning your first full day and getting adjusted. Jet lag will a pain in the butt anyway.

 

[wayneg]

We have absolutely no problem arriving at that time. Going direct just means have to find something to do on arrival, try stay awake so not to be up at silly o'clock on first morning. Arriving later indirect means we go straight to the hotel unpack and bed. Only ever done it with 1 child but its all down to price for me.

 

[scoobydooby]

To me the convenience with two kids is worth the cost of direct flights, let alone four!!!!!

 

[MrRomance]

We are family of 6 who has flown to Florida quite a few times - ALWAYS direct.

We have always considered this to be the better option get it over and done with in one fail swoop.

However, we can save £500 on flights by doing a connecting flight which extends our arrival time by about 3.5 hours.

If we fly direct it will be with Virgin the 13:30 flight which we normally get because its cheaper gets us in 17:25

The indrect leaves at 12:05 with US airways gets us to Orlando for 20:53.

Are we nuts for considering this?? I should add our children are 5, 4, 2 and 1 (well will be when we travel)

I have to be honest, with kids that young, I'd go direct. It's a lot of hassle and a really late arrival at MCO to save £500.

The connection isn't that terrible, although with so many little ones, it would be harder than it has been for us with our two, but the arrival time is really late for them. With the 5 hour time difference, I wouldn't want to do it.

 

[chmurf]

we fly in from Paris, no direct flight for us. We have the choice between cheaper flights with 8pm arrivals, and more expensive (still indirect) flights for an arrival around 5:30pm
we only have one child (6) and prefer to pay more for an earlier arrival.


£500 is a lot of money. but £500 for 6 passengers is only £80 per passenger.
even that is a lot of money, but I don't think it justifies 3.5hrs at a connecting airport

you don't only spend more time, you go through another security check, and with 3.5hrs you'll have time to kill at the airport, possibly with cranky kids.

Now the other thing to consider is the journey back to the UK
if you go indirect, chances are you come back indirect. In that case it's also down to the departure time.
In my experience with indirect flights, we take off from Orlando at 2pm, when other flights will take off at 8pm. This means that we don't do anything on our last day

So you have to add up all of the time you will trade for £80pp

I know it's not my money, and it's easy for me to say, but with 4 kids that young ... will you have strollers and stuff like that, because you're gonna walk, collect bags to go through customs, among other things at the connecting airport. I don't know if I would be brave enough to try that one ...

 

[Kath2003]

For 6 of you and just a £500 saving, fly direct. £100 per person is the minimum saving I would consider to make a stop (which we usually do) and that's as adults. The hassle of getting 4 small children & toddlers on and off a plane twice, through security twice and entertaining them in an airport twice (especially since domestic flights are far more likely to be delayed) doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. Oh, and the entertainment on domestic flights is pretty poor (short flight!) so factor that into your decision too.

 

[LeaversOnTour]

I live in the US about 150 miles north of Chicago. Almost all of our flights have connecting flights and certainly all of our flights overseas do as our small regional airport is not an International airport. IMO £500 is a lot of money saved for a relatively small amount of inconvenience and a 3.5 hour delay in getting to your hotel/resort. How long do you plan on spending in the US? Is that 3.5 hours and later arrival really going to make a difference? I would stick with what you have and maybe just plan on burning your first full day and getting adjusted. Jet lag will a pain in the butt anyway.

We will be in the US for 3 weeks so the 3.5 hours is a drop in the ocean really. The only down point is we are flying xmas eve so want to be able to go to SeaWorld xmas day,

 

[mum2two]

Have you looked at Norwegian airlines? They have some great direct prices at the moment.
I think you have to take in a number of factors e.g what kind of travelers are you? Are you the organized kind or the chaotic? Are the kids good travellers? How long is your transfer and how patient are you?!
Could you combine? We've done direct one way and indirect the other so you could do your 'worst' journey direct.

 

[wayneg]

I think you have to take in a number of factors e.g what kind of travelers are you? Are you the organized kind or the chaotic? Are the kids good travellers? How long is your transfer and how patient are you?!

All good points, we are good travellers, very patient and organized, we have even done 2 stops and 1 stops with 9 hours wait. No problems doing anything like this.
Its also to do with finances, for me £500 is approx. 60 hours work so I think nothing of using 3.5 hours of my time to save £500 to others its worth the money.

 

[disneyholic family]

We will be in the US for 3 weeks so the 3.5 hours is a drop in the ocean really. The only down point is we are flying xmas eve so want to be able to go to SeaWorld xmas day,

you're flying xmas eve????????????????????????

go direct.

Those airports are going to be a nightmare at that time.
You do NOT want to get involved.
Plus it's the winter and you can get snow snow snow snow snow.
You do NOT want to get snowed into the airport with wee ones.

Pay the money and fly direct.
when the kids get older you can go indirect. But go direct.

I say this as someone who has ONLY flown INDIRECT. We don't have the option of going direct. We fly in from tel aviv, so we always have to connect somewhere.
Over 30 years of flying to orlando from overseas, i don't want to bore you or frighten you with the tales of delays and worse.
of course, most of the time, we did make it without problems...sometimes without one or more suitcases (sometimes none of the suitcases made it)....sometimes we made it after a delay of hours and hours and hours in the connecting city due to bad weather.....sometimes we made it after sitting on the runway for 3 hours (due to bad weather ground stops)....sometimes after being delayed overnight due to weather and/or equipment....etc etc etc and of course, traveling during the holidays and in the winter, everything will be that much more overwhelming..

anyway..

go direct. With 4 children that young, you do NOT want to get stuck along the way.

one more time. Spend the money and fly direct.

 

[2Tiggies]

^^^^ Excellent point. Never even thought of that. It is fact that the more often you connect, the bigger your odds of a knock on effect caused by a delay.

 

[LeaversOnTour]

you're flying xmas eve????????????????????????

go direct.

Those airports are going to be a nightmare at that time.
You do NOT want to get involved.
Plus it's the winter and you can get snow snow snow snow snow.
You do NOT want to get snowed into the airport with wee ones.

Pay the money and fly direct.
when the kids get older you can go indirect. But go direct.

I say this as someone who has ONLY flown INDIRECT. We don't have the option of going direct. We fly in from tel aviv, so we always have to connect somewhere.
Over 30 years of flying to orlando from overseas, i don't want to bore you or frighten you with the tales of delays and worse.
of course, most of the time, we did make it without problems...sometimes without one or more suitcases (sometimes none of the suitcases made it)....sometimes we made it after a delay of hours and hours and hours in the connecting city due to bad weather.....sometimes we made it after sitting on the runway for 3 hours (due to bad weather ground stops)....sometimes after being delayed overnight due to weather and/or equipment....etc etc etc and of course, traveling during the holidays and in the winter, everything will be that much more overwhelming..

anyway..

go direct. With 4 children that young, you do NOT want to get stuck along the way.

one more time. Spend the money and fly direct.

lol

Stupidly we hadn't even considered the weather, and considering out connection would be Philladelphia pretty sure it would be snowing - And NO we DEFINATELY don't want to get snowed in.

Our kids are seasoned travellers, they have all been every year since they were born. They are good kids and this years US customs went reasonably well - This is the worst bit! As the year before the 2 eldest literally cried for 45 mins that they were tired. This year not a wimper

I think we will be flying direct - I think £500 is a small price to pay to make sure you don't get snowed in at a random airport. At least if it snows in the UK you can go home lol.

 

[disneyholic family]

lol

Stupidly we hadn't even considered the weather, and considering out connection would be Philladelphia pretty sure it would be snowing - And NO we DEFINATELY don't want to get snowed in.

Our kids are seasoned travellers, they have all been every year since they were born. They are good kids and this years US customs went reasonably well - This is the worst bit! As the year before the 2 eldest literally cried for 45 mins that they were tired. This year not a wimper

I think we will be flying direct - I think £500 is a small price to pay to make sure you don't get snowed in at a random airport. At least if it snows in the UK you can go home lol.

exactly!

we only have two and they've also flown to orlando every year since they were born (DS was 6 weeks old the first time he went to WDW).
And as i said, we've only flown indirect and have lived to talk about it.
But we have only 2. You have 4 under the age of 5. That is challenging.
And winter is winter.

We almost always flew in the spring or summer, but a few times we made the great trek in the winter and as i recall, we got weathered in every time.
One time on the way to orlando, we got stuck in new jersey for a very long time (even an hour would seem long in new jersey, but it was a lot longer than an hour). I remember the kids sleeping on couches in the business lounge (we paid to get in there so we would have a comfortable place to wait). after the long flight from overseas, to then be stranded in the airport with tired and hungry little ones wasn't the most pleasant thing. and you have 4.

another time we got snowed into windsor airport. where's windsor? a small town in ontario with a horrid airport that had no food.
we were stuck there the entire day as plane after plane to toronto was cancelled (as the snow swirled around us).
And we're talking canada where they know how to handle snow.
as the hours ticked by, we figured we were going to miss our flight out of toronto back to tel aviv. Then what? overnight in windsor? overnight in toronto?
finally, 12 hours after our cancelled flight, they decided to let the very last flight to toronto fly (through a raging snowstorm - in a little tiny wind up plane - oh yeah - that was one scary flight).

Then in toronto, it all started again...snow...delay...snow...delay....
hours and hours and then they finally put us on the plane....
and then we sat on the plane....snow swirling around us..

finally...after an eternity sitting on the plane, we rolled out....to the de-icer station....and you hope they're de-icing that plane really really really well...

they have very serious de-icers in toronto....

and then out to the runway...hoping they let us take off soon before we have to roll back to the de-icing station for another round...

and then up in the air for one of THE most turbulent take offs in my long history of take offs....so turbulent that a few people screamed and one man had a heart attack..

oh yes...fun times....that was definitely the worst connecting flight ever...

(though the crew on air canada was very nice )

the kids were about 11 and 13 on that flight....we all still talk about that one...

anyway....go direct...i would have had we been able to...

i just thought of another fun one....
we flew into JFK....this was when we only had DD....as i recall, she was about 9 months old at the time.
our flight into JFK was late, so we missed our connecting flight to orlando...
so the airline put us in a taxi to la guardia airport to get on a flight from there to orlando....
we didn't know it at the time, but DD gets car sick....(she still does today at age 29)... DH was holding her on his lap for the taxi ride to la guardia....
as we approached the airport, DD threw up all over DH....
now of course, i had a change of clothes for her, but not for him (since then i always have a change of clothes for everyone in the carry on bag)....
DH is 6'7" tall, so the poor man can't exactly pick up clothes anywhere...he needs special tall man clothes....go find tall man clothes in la guardia airport...(his shirt and trousers were a mess)...
we rinsed him off as best we could and that's how he flew on to orlando...fun...

by the way, we've missed our connecting flights a few times - the flight into the US was late causing us to miss the connection.
The airline arranges for another flight, but it might be a very long wait for the next flight that has enough open seats for your family.

 

[wayneg]

You worry too much Beth, weather adds to the adventure.

4 out of 5 of our Xmas trips were indirect, 2 thru NYC, 2 Philly with no problems but yes there is always a risk of disruption, something to consider, again I would rather save £500, others wouldn't.

 

[Elise79]

Wayne - you only have one son and he is older and that makes a big difference as to whether the money is worth saving. I only have to have some of DD friends over and I remember why we stuck to one!

I think flying on Xmas Eve I would minimise the risk and for a £80 saving per head I would fly direct.

You want to be there and in a reasonable state on Christmas Day.

And to be fair with 4 tired little ones to only 2 adults that late night arrival ain't going to be fun if you are on time - add even an hour delay and its going to be a mess

 

[wayneg]

Wayne - you only have one son and he is older and that makes a big difference as to whether the money is worth saving. I only have to have some of DD friends over and I remember why we stuck to one!

Been doing indirect since he was 5, or with our God Daughter same age.

I can't comment on 4 children, only done it with 1 but I just don't have a problem going indirect, £150(£50pp) saving is enough for me to go indirect. 10+ years ago then yes, VA were worth paying more for but I don't rate their service anymore, rather use a US carrier.

 

[disneyholic family]

Remember that on Xmas , if your flight into Philly is late and you miss your connection, the chances of there being 5 seats available on another flight are low
Xmas eve flights fly full and very few people cancel
You might have to wait until Xmas day to find five available seats

Wayne, flying with 4 children under the age of 5 is not the same as flying with one five year old.
Not even the same as flying with one infant
4 kids under the age of 5 is a challenge at home- forget traveling