What makes up your mind?

[wayneg]

I'd be interested to know how many of the posters on this thread that prefer indirect have children?

For me, it would be insanity to have to transport everything we need through two airports and two sets of imigration lines.

Hi Kevin
Been doing it with 1 child since he was 5 years old, never a problem.
You only do 1 immigration at the 1st airport you land at in US. usually a lot easier than MCO, you might have a 2 hour+ connection but you get immigration done with there, on arrival at MCO its then so simple just get off the plane collect your bags and go for the car, I prefer this to MCO immigration. Yes it takes longer than direct but with good flight times from leaving home to collecting car can be not much longer. As for luggage you collect and drop a few yards away, coming home it goes straight thru, all very easy.
Prices can be a massive difference, for this next Easter DW did not know she could have time off so left it a little late to book, Direct would have been £1000 each, just checked again now £1,410pp (£3,000 for us all) indirect has cost me £420 (£1,260)
Oct half term last year Virgin wanted £800 (again couldn't book early) indirect £240.
£3,420 saving on 2 trips.
Thankfully we have never had a problem indirect, might think differently if we had. I have almost given up hope for direct flights now, the price difference is getting bigger in school hols, next August they are over £800 again, just not paying it.

 

[suzybear6]

It's having children that stops me even looking at the indirect prices...this time anyway!

They will still be pretty young (8 & 7 years) and it will be their first long haul flight. The thought of having them get off a long flight, go through immigration/customs and then having to get back on a plane for another couple of hours just doesn't sound fun, along with all that extra stress of worrying if you will miss your connection. Nope not something I want to do this time, so I am willing to pay more for an easier time iyswim.

I'm not saying I wouldn't do it another time once the children are older and we've done the journey a few times if it meant we saved a few houndred ££. I think I'd set a minimum saving of £100 pp to opt for indirect over direct in that case.

Luv Suzy

 

[wayneg]

along with all that extra stress of worrying if you will miss your connection. Nope not something I want to do this time,

Thats probably the thing, how you handle stress and worry, for me its something I never do with travel, I know they will get me there and back. Even when we missed our flight(direct) from Heathrow to LAX I knew they would get us on the next, only 3 hours later.

 

[suzybear6]

LOL Wayne, you are right there! Being a control freak does tend to make things stressful at times!

Luv Suzy

 

[Kath2003]

I'd be interested to know how many of the posters on this thread that prefer indirect have children?

For me, it would be insanity to have to transport everything we need through two airports and two sets of imigration lines.

We don't, but there are plenty of families who connect all the way through to MCO with us. You don't have to clear immigration twice, only once, and you barely see your baggage between flights (on the return flight, once it's checked in at MCO, you don't see it again until back in the UK). We don't check luggage anyway so this doesn't affect us.

I don't worry about missing my connection; if you miss it and can show that you left a reasonable amount of time between connecting flights, then the airline will just simply put you on the next flight.

 

[kevin harrison]

As some of you are aware, my son doesn't eat and needs a feeding pump and lots of meds, this is on top of his Autism. I think it's not close to realistic for us, unfortunatly.

If it was just the two of us and not the four, I wouldn't give a monkeys where or how I got to Orlando.

 

[wayneg]

As some of you are aware, my son doesn't eat and needs a feeding pump and lots of meds, this is on top of his Autism. I think it's not close to realistic for us, unfortunatly.

If it was just the two of us and not the four, I wouldn't give a monkeys where or how I got to Orlando.

Of course special needs have to be taken into account but for the average family indirect is not as bad as it sounds.
For Easter I could have booked indirect Business class for same price as Virgin economy direct, decided not to pay it as its only supposed to be a cheap trip. To me thats a no brainer, a choice of direct economy or indirect Biz for same price, indirect wins easy.

 

[Kath2003]

As some of you are aware, my son doesn't eat and needs a feeding pump and lots of meds, this is on top of his Autism. I think it's not close to realistic for us, unfortunatly.

If it was just the two of us and not the four, I wouldn't give a monkeys where or how I got to Orlando.

Well then I'd imagine the extra cost of direct is worth it for you. However I think that most families with children - although possibly not toddlers - would cope fine with flying indirect. We definitely make the most of it and this Easter it saved us £600 between the two of us - which is the cost of our hotel and park tickets.

 

[JohnnySharp2]

I am with Kev, again mainly due to Joshua's autism in-direct flights are unthinkable.
If it works for anyone else and saves some money then fair enough - as ever it is down to personal choice and preference.

 

[Miffy2003]

We have two children and we actually prefer to fly indirect, even if there is no saving as it means we can fly from a more local airport rather than the 3-4 hour journey to LGW which I can't stand.

I've done direct 4 and indirect 5 times and can honestly say that I don't find it a hassle at all. Yes, it does take longer, but if I factor in saved travel times to the UK airport, actually it comes in at roughly the same travel time.

If I could fly scheduled direct from closer to home I would more than likely be happy to pay a little more for that - say £50 per head. As there are four of us any more than that starts to look pricey

ETA I won't do charter as the dates never suit our needs, though I am aware I could fly "direct" (sort of) from our local airport, I would never choose this option.

 

[orlandothebeagle]

I am 50/50,dont care, I cant go direct from my nearest aiport anyway, so if I go indirect I can go from edinburgh, I really dont mind at all as long as I am getting on holiday.I dont have kids, if you are easily stressed probably direct would be best, But I dont do stress all that much.

 

[Kath2003]

I just accept that it takes a whole day to get there. Within that day, it doesn't make a great deal of difference if I arrive in Orlando at 4pm or 7pm, I will still be tired of travelling and want a drink and a shower and an 'early' night.

When you wake up the next day, it's all forgotten anyway

 

[wideeyes]

If Virgin Atlantic didn't got direct I would most likely go indirect too. There is no way I would want to travel down south when Manchester Airport is only a few miles away. I don't drive so would have to get the train down and book an overnight hotel, I would rather just get an extra plane as going to Gatwick seems like it would be more hassle

 

[Bonnie151]

I'd rather fly direct, but if I have to fly indirect to anywhere in the US, would prefer to fly (in order) via: Iceland, Amsterdam or London. I don't have the immigration worries in the US as the family just comes through the US citizen line with me, but I don't like the hassle of collecting my bags/rechecking them in the US.

 

[joolz1910]

We have two children and we actually prefer to fly indirect, even if there is no saving as it means we can fly from a more local airport rather than the 3-4 hour journey to LGW which I can't stand.

I've done direct 4 and indirect 5 times and can honestly say that I don't find it a hassle at all. Yes, it does take longer, but if I factor in saved travel times to the UK airport, actually it comes in at roughly the same travel time.

If I could fly scheduled direct from closer to home I would more than likely be happy to pay a little more for that - say £50 per head. As there are four of us any more than that starts to look pricey

ETA I won't do charter as the dates never suit our needs, though I am aware I could fly "direct" (sort of) from our local airport, I would never choose this option.

I hadn't factored this in. As a family of 5, we would have to pay to leave the car at Gatwick plus pay for an overnight stay before travelling. Then there's the drive home...
The train might be an option.

But then again, if we could fly indirect from Birmingham, all of that hassle is avoided. This is why I plan several years in advance.

 

[Miffy2003]

I hadn't factored this in. As a family of 5, we would have to pay to leave the car at Gatwick plus pay for an overnight stay before travelling. Then there's the drive home...
The train might be an option.

But then again, if we could fly indirect from Birmingham, all of that hassle is avoided. This is why I plan several years in advance.

Planning's half the fun anyway

There are definitely charters from Birmingham and Continental fly daily into Newark (just outside New York) with connections to Orlando. I don't find Newark that bad to negotiate and it's only a small flight of two and a half hours or so down to Orlando then.

The drive home is the thing I (personally) will go out of my way to avoid if possible. I did it once and staying awake was very difficult!

 

[joolz1910]

Planning's half the fun anyway

There are definitely charters from Birmingham and Continental fly daily into Newark (just outside New York) with connections to Orlando. I don't find Newark that bad to negotiate and it's only a small flight of two and a half hours or so down to Orlando then.

The drive home is the thing I (personally) will go out of my way to avoid if possible. I did it once and staying awake was very difficult!

Thanks! I know that I wouldn't sleep on the flight home, so the drive back from Gatwick would be a no-no. I am warming to the idea of indirect from Brum.