Unsure which flight to choose... How difficult are layovers/switching planes?

[tigereye]

I know this is probably a stupid question, but I've only flown once before, and that was nonstop. How much "hassle" is it to have a layover and switch planes? I'm trying to choose my flight, and having trouble deciding which way to go.

Flight 1 leaves from my local airport - CVG - (10 mins away) and is a non-stop on Delta.

Flight 2 leaves from a non-local airport - DAY - (hour and a half away) and has a 45 minute layover in Atlanta for the "to-Disney" flight.

They both arrive in MCO around the same time, so that's not really a consideration.

The only reason that I'm considering flight 2 is that it's about $150 cheaper. It's probably closer to $100 if I factor in driving to and from and long term parking.

Just wondering how much difficulty or irritation layovers are? Trying to decide if that $100 is worth it.

Any thoughts?

Mike

 

[squirrel]

45 mins is not very long. You will have enough time to get to the next gate and hit the washroom on the way.

I don't find layovers much trouble, but I don't have a choice for a direct flight.

If it's just a $100 more for the direct, not $100 per person then I would just do the direct as it saves you trouble driving to the other airport and putting the car in parking.

 

[aleask]

Layovers/Switching planes is relatively easy, provided the first flight arrives at the connecting airport on time.

Unfortunately in your case 45 minutes really isn't that long of a layover.

If you do choose to take the cheaper route the very first thing I would do when I get off plane one is check the plane reader boards and make sure the connecting flight is still utilizing the same gate that is printed on your ticket. It is not uncommon that a gate change is made.

Another thing to consider is if plane one is a little behind and you still make it to connecting flight it is still possible that your luggage won't (that has happened to me).

For $100 I think I would go the safer more reliable non-stop route. If layover was longer and price difference was greater then I would consider the two planes, but it seems to me that Non-Stop in your case would make more sense.

I would hate you to lose fun time in exchange for trying to same a couple dollars and having things go wrong...

Good luck!

Adam

 

[Kim1964]

I'd take the direct flight. Layovers aren't a big deal, but it can be a nightmare if your first flight is late. When I am forced to do a layover, I try to have at least 2 hours to work with so that if that first flight is late, I still have good odds on making my connection.

 

[Manda]

I would be nervous about having only 45 minutes for a layover at ATL, especially if you're traveling with little kids, car seats, etc. If it's just adults who can move relatively efficiently, maybe. It's a huge airport. I'd be stressing my first flight being even a few minutes late. $100 wouldn't be worth the stress to me. And I wouldn't want to bother with driving to the airport first either. But I guess it's just personal preference.

 

[jodifla]

I know this is probably a stupid question, but I've only flown once before, and that was nonstop. How much "hassle" is it to have a layover and switch planes? I'm trying to choose my flight, and having trouble deciding which way to go.

Flight 1 leaves from my local airport - CVG - (10 mins away) and is a non-stop on Delta.

Flight 2 leaves from a non-local airport - DAY - (hour and a half away) and has a 45 minute layover in Atlanta for the "to-Disney" flight.

They both arrive in MCO around the same time, so that's not really a consideration.

The only reason that I'm considering flight 2 is that it's about $150 cheaper. It's probably closer to $100 if I factor in driving to and from and long term parking.

Just wondering how much difficulty or irritation layovers are? Trying to decide if that $100 is worth it.

Any thoughts?

Mike

Direct flights are always better. Every time you stop, you build in chances of delays and missed flights.

It wouldn't be worth it for $100 total, maybe $100 per ticket.

 

[1stvisit0909]

I would be nervous about having only 45 minutes for a layover at ATL, especially if you're traveling with little kids, car seats, etc. If it's just adults who can move relatively efficiently, maybe. It's a huge airport. I'd be stressing my first flight being even a few minutes late. $100 wouldn't be worth the stress to me. And I wouldn't want to bother with driving to the airport first either. But I guess it's just personal preference.

I've never had my second flight LEAVE on time from ATL. Always late. I always have delays there...like mega-delays. Maybe its just my dumb luck, but out of all the flying I have to do all over for work, I avoid ATL like the plague.

OP: But even if I didn't have bad experiences with ATL...45 mins literally is enough to deplane, book it to the next gate/terminal and maybe stop by the bathrooms. Thats not taking into consideration anything you may have gate checked, or moving with kids.
I would totally pay the $100 to fly N/S. Besides the gas getting to the airport, you'll have to pay parking..and that can add up to $100 in a hurry.

We have an 1:45 N/S to Disney on THURSDAY!!!

 

[tinkerbellmichelle]

I'd prefer to get there in the least number of stops as possible because every time you switch planes you have to factor in delays and lost luggage etc.

It takes us a min. of 2 flights to get to Florida and our layover is really LONG so that isn't much of a concern but even without kids I stress with really short layovers - especially if the first plane is even a little bit late.

GOod luck with your decision!

 

[LadyBeBop]

We must be neighbors. I also live about 10-15 minutes from CVG.

Under the scenerios you gave, it's a no-brainer. Take the nonstop from CVG. But have you considered Louisville, Columbus and Indianapolis. You might be able to get a nonstop cheaper from those cities.

It wasn't Orlando, it was Las Vegas. But several years ago, we were able to book a cheap nonstop to Vegas out of Indianapolis. It was cheaper to fly nonstop out of Indianapolis than CVG with connections. And that included travel to and from Indianapolis and a motel room by the airport the night before.

 

[squirrel]

We flew AT last year 3 adults and 3 kids. We had a layover of about 50 min. We had enough time to go to the bathroom on the way to the gate and that was it. They even changed gates on us and we had to back track a few gates to the right one. Maybe we were lucky that our first flight was on time and the connecting flight was late (I believe we did wait for it).

For only $100, I would still go with the direct flight.

 

[sk!mom]

If it's a $150 total savings then I'd go with the direct flight. If it's per person then take the savings. It's not really much trouble.

 

[tigereye]

Thanks for everyone's advice. Sounds like it's pretty much unanimous to take the direct flight.

We must be neighbors. I also live about 10-15 minutes from CVG.

Under the scenerios you gave, it's a no-brainer. Take the nonstop from CVG. But have you considered Louisville, Columbus and Indianapolis. You might be able to get a nonstop cheaper from those cities.

Yep, I checked all of the locals I could think of. Since Delta lowered their prices in Feb., they're pretty hard to beat, at least to MCO. The RT is $154 + tax, which is about $100 lower than when I priced it out last year at this time. Hard to argue with that.

Mike

 

[CLR4321]

If it is $100 more for all 3 people total, I would go with the nonstop. If it is $100 more per person, I would go with the stop in ATL. In ATL all of the Delta flights leave from the same terminal, it is easy to get from one gate to another. Good luck!

 

[crisi]

45 minutes is a tight connection even if its adults. I might do it with adults - you may not end up taking the route you planned or getting in at the time you planned, but you'd get there. And $150 is a pretty big difference.

If you are dealing with kids - no way I'd do a 45 minute connection. I'd avoid connections in general with kids younger than eight or nine. Kids don't understand urgency, they need to go potty at inconvienent times. If you miss your flight and end up waiting six hours for the next flight - on which your family is spread all over the plane because those were the only seats available...it can be hard for a family to cope.

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

Direct flights are always better. Every time you stop, you build in chances of delays and missed flights.

A direct flight may have stops. You are confusing this with a non-stop flight.

 

[flying_babyb]

Im gonna be travling with 2 adults and two kids (9 and 11). Will a flight with stops be a horbile thing?

 

[natnelliesmom]

If you are not a savvy air traveler- take the direct flight. Atlanta is a very busy hub and is not always easy to get around if you are not used to airports.

45 mins is enough time to find your gate- but there isn't much room for a delay- not to mention you run the risk of luggage getting lost if gates are changed last minute.

We have done this same thing on past trips- with 2 small kids in tow. We did not have any problems, our luggage arrived in Orlando with us, and we had no troubles finding the gate in time. BUT we do this often and we are pretty familiar with navigating through airports.

If you are in doubt- take the direct flight- otherwise give it a try! The worst that could happen is your luggage gets lost or you miss your connecting flight. But I think those odds are pretty slim.
-Sarah

 

[crisi]

Im gonna be travling with 2 adults and two kids (9 and 11). Will a flight with stops be a horbile thing?

Depends on the timing of the connection - and if its a flight with stops or a flight with connection.

A flight with stops but without connections stops in an airport, some passengers get off, others get on, plane goes again - sort of like a bus stop (I think you usually deplane so the attendents can give it a quick clean before the next passengers.

A flight with connections means landing, getting off the plane (which can take time), getting through the airport and catching the next plane. There are two potential issues - the tight connection - where you don't make it - and the six hours in O'Hare.....Both are survivable, neither is pleasant with kids or with anything important (whether that's emotionally important like catching Wishes that evening or important like a business meeting).

With kids, I'd go for at a connection not less than an hour plus, and not more than three hours. But sitting in an airport for three hours is three hours less pool time, three hours you could be spending the afternoon at Epcot, three hours you are traveling, and not yet on vacation.

 

[flying_babyb]

A flight with connections means landing, getting off the plane (which can take time), getting through the airport and catching the next plane. There are two potential issues - the tight connection - where you don't make it - and the six hours in O'Hare.....Both are survivable, neither is pleasant with kids or with anything important (whether that's emotionally important like catching Wishes that evening or important like a business meeting).
QUOTE]

I have flown before and taken flights with connections. It wasnt bad when it was 3 adults no kids. I guess im just worried about missing our connection with the kids being slow walkers.

 

[crisi]

I have flown before and taken flights with connections. It wasnt bad when it was 3 adults no kids. I guess im just worried about missing our connection with the kids being slow walkers.

And that is going to depend on your kids, the length of the connection and which airport you are going through. All of which only you can answer. As well as what the difference in fare is and if that's a meaningful amount to you. If you miss your connection, they'll put you on a different plane - but its a hassle.

I'd connect with my older kids if it saves us $400 as a family. My husband will spend an extra $100 on the tickets. So now, direct flights for us, saves on whiny husband.