PSA - Don't Fly In The Day of the Cruise

[SpeedNoodles]

@Matt - can we pin this thread?

[twangster]

9 hours ago, RockerDom31 said:

Reading through this thread has made me do some alternative travel research.

Living in Jersey, we can easily drive to NYC, Philly, and even some places more south like Baltimore and DC.

Has anyone from the northeast traveled to Florida via train? An Amtrak from Philly or NYC to Orlando is considerably much less expensive than an airplane ticket though it's a 20-24ish hour travel time. I suppose delays can happen with any mode of travel. But not having to check in (and pay for) luggage, having the extra legroom (especially nice that the seats are only 2 per row), and the views along the way are all appealing.

I have nothing against flying - we'd do it if have to. Flights are plentiful from here. It just seems more and more annoying to do so nowadays!

Amtrak is notorious for delays.  If you do sleeper cabins it isn't cheap either and that doesn't typically come with good restful sleep.  Regular service is okay if you don't value or need good sleep, which is already iffy on many rail routes in America.  No kids and no issues recovering from a night of poor (no) sleep? No problem.  Amtrak may be your answer.  By that token, driving and Motel 6 provides a similar experience and they leave the light on for you.

[MaryCS62]

On 8/5/2024 at 2:34 AM, ScottD said:

We're an hour and a half away from Cape Liberty and Brooklyn and STILL go up the night before. It gives us the "we're on vacation" feel a night early, plus nothing better than waking up and having a 15 minute ride to get to the ship 

we are less than an hour from cape liberty, and are giving serious consideration to staying over the night before our Jan 2025 cruise, just to avoid the possibility of driving there in bad weather.  We did it last summer, but we were on a 16 day B2B, and it was actually cheaper to use the park and stay than to park at the port for the 16 nights.  Had a cruise out of Baltimore in March, and never considered not going down the day before - it's a 3.5-4 hr drive, and going down that morning would have meant spending most of the drive in rush hour traffic.  Staying over the night before was worth the extra money.

[Matt]

15 hours ago, SpeedNoodles said:

@Matt - can we pin this thread?

Yup

[JimnKathy]

I think one thing this thread emphasizes is that good travel insurance is becoming more critical as opposed to a optional "nice to have" thing. Commercial air travel is just so unreliable these days.

[Andy & Sheryl Unwin]

Sheryl and I live in Florida. It's a 2-3 hour drive from Miami or Port Everglades and a tad longer for Port Canaveral. It's under an hour to Tampa.

We always drive to the other coast a day ahead of time. Simply because you can never tell what may happen on the way.

For example, we drove to Port Everglades in February this year for a trip on Odyssey the following day. About 10 minutes from leaving the house, "Newsflash". An aircraft had crash-landed on I-75 south of us. (RiP to the souls onboard) and I-75 was blocked entirely.

Rerouting cross-country to avoid the blockage and the tailbacks added 4 hours to our journey. After all, we weren't the only ones who had heard the news.

Had we been driving on the day of departure, I have no doubt we would have missed the trip.

 

 

[Jolly Ogre]

19 hours ago, Andy & Sheryl Unwin said:

Sheryl and I live in Florida. It's a 2-3 hour drive from Miami or Port Everglades and a tad longer for Port Canaveral. It's under an hour to Tampa.

We always drive to the other coast a day ahead of time. Simply because you can never tell what may happen on the way.

For example, we drove to Port Everglades in February this year for a trip on Odyssey the following day. About 10 minutes from leaving the house, "Newsflash". An aircraft had crash-landed on I-75 south of us. (RiP to the souls onboard) and I-75 was blocked entirely.

Rerouting cross-country to avoid the blockage and the tailbacks added 4 hours to our journey. After all, we weren't the only ones who had heard the news.

Had we been driving on the day of departure, I have no doubt we would have missed the trip.

 

 

Same here but I am further south on I-75... We have to deal with Alligator Alley and the problems it can throw at you. In addition it is currently under construction so yeah there's that too.

[WAAAYTOOO]

13 minutes ago, Jolly Ogre said:

 We have to deal with Alligator Alley

[Jolly Ogre]

26 minutes ago, WAAAYTOOO said:

yeah LOL and sad at the same time.

[GaryAA]

We always fly down 2 days before the cruise. Last June, we were stranded in Miami for 2 days after our trip due to flight cancellations. Severe storms went through the day before we arrived in Miami and lasted for a few more days. Our flight canceled just before boarding, we had no luggage for 2 days. While we always carry essential clothing on the way down to a cruise, we will do the same for the return trip.

[packercruising]

We always fly in a few days early. Flights get delayed. A lot.

 

[Hunny68]

I live in Ohio. It's an under 3 hour flight to get to Florida from Cleveland.  With the exception of 1 cruise, we have always flown in the morning of the cruise.  We make sure it's a direct flight and that it's very early morning.  The one time we flew to Tampa the evening before, it was a complete nightmare.  We were delayed, then bad weather caused us to have to take a longer route to get around the storm, then there was a medical emergency.  By the time we got to Tampa at midnight, I was very irritated and stressed.  LOL 

We are cruising in February and we are flying in the day before because you never know how February will be in Cleveland.  I also buy trip insurance and I'm well aware one day we are probably going to get dinged flying in the morning of.

I've seen on the news that Delta is being sued over the delays and cancellations because of the crowd strike mess.  One person in particular is complaining about missing his cruise and losing 10 grand.  Should have bought insurance.  

[Zacharius]

On 8/8/2024 at 10:06 AM, JimnKathy said:

Commercial air travel is just so unreliable these days.

On 8/12/2024 at 2:05 PM, packercruising said:

We always fly in a few days early. Flights get delayed. A lot.

This is a common sentiment, but it's actually not accurate. In the US, in 2023, about 78.4% of flights were on time. Looking back historically, the 2010s as a decade averaged about 79% on time, the 2000s about 75% on time, the 1990s about 77% on time. So, almost 80% of flights are on-time these days, and that's the same as, if not slightly above, what it has been for the last few decades. It's still very reliable considering there are tens of thousands of flights with millions of passengers each and every day.  

I guess that "a lot" of flights still do get delayed, because 20% out of 13,000 flights is still a decent number, but your odds of being on an on-time flight are several times higher than being on a delayed flight. 

Still, fly in a day in advance or more. I agree with that 100%. 

[WAYNO]

And I will repeat, "commercial air travel is so unreliable" ...

 

Spin the numbers however we must, I have been severely impacted by cancelled/late/changed flights.  And I will continue to be proactive, accordingly.

[WAAAYTOOO]

19 minutes ago, Zacharius said:

This is a common sentiment, but it's actually not accurate. In the US, in 2023, about 78.4% of flights were on time. Looking back historically, the 2010s as a decade averaged about 79% on time, the 2000s about 75% on time, the 1990s about 77% on time. So, almost 80% of flights are on-time these days, and that's the same as, if not slightly above, what it has been for the last few decades. It's still very reliable considering there are tens of thousands of flights with millions of passengers each and every day.  

I guess that "a lot" of flights still do get delayed, because 20% out of 13,000 flights is still a decent number, but your odds of being on an on-time flight are several times higher than being on a delayed flight. 

Still, fly in a day in advance or more. I agree with that 100%. 

I am no expert....and I know that you are "in the field" but isn't it true that the on-time statistics are very easily manipulated by the airlines to make it appear that their flights are "on time".  I seem to recall something about airlines' changing the flight number to skew on-time statistics.  Maybe I am misremembering.  

I am no expert on the logistics of airline process but I am a fairly seasoned consumer and I can tell you that there is NO WAY that flying is as comfortable, dependable or reliable these days as it has been in the past...no matter what the statistics say.

[Zacharius]

51 minutes ago, WAAAYTOOO said:

I am no expert....and I know that you are "in the field" but isn't it true that the on-time statistics are very easily manipulated by the airlines to make it appear that their flights are "on time".  I seem to recall something about airlines' changing the flight number to skew on-time statistics.  Maybe I am misremembering.  

I am no expert on the logistics of airline process but I am a fairly seasoned consumer and I can tell you that there is NO WAY that flying is as comfortable, dependable or reliable these days as it has been in the past...no matter what the statistics say.

I'm not really in the field, per se...I am an aero engineer and I travel a ton, but I am not in the airline business. Airlines do change flight numbers often, though my (possibly incorrect) understanding of the federal government data I was quoting is that, since it's based on airlines as a whole, the changing of flight numbers doesn't impact that data. On the other hand, the statistics within an airline can be skewed (i.e. if you look on United for on-time statistics for flight 1234, the data may be a bit skewed because flight 1234 may not exist all year round, year after year, etc. etc.). However, that's not the data I was pulling/quoting. 

For the 26ish years I have been traveling seemingly nonstop, I do anecdotally find travel more-or-less the same on time, if not slightly better. Part of that comes down to aircraft being newer and better maintained, so for example an airline like Delta or American doesn't have hundreds of MD-80s with seemingly constant mechanical breakdowns that delay their operations. 

Comfort is an interesting one. In economy, I agree, it's not as comfortable as it used to be (though that's a separate convo from our original one). In business/first, it's better than ever. 

[JimnKathy]

3 hours ago, Zacharius said:

This is a common sentiment, but it's actually not accurate. In the US, in 2023, about 78.4% of flights were on time. Looking back historically, the 2010s as a decade averaged about 79% on time, the 2000s about 75% on time, the 1990s about 77% on time. So, almost 80% of flights are on-time these days, and that's the same as, if not slightly above, what it has been for the last few decades. It's still very reliable considering there are tens of thousands of flights with millions of passengers each and every day.  

I guess that "a lot" of flights still do get delayed, because 20% out of 13,000 flights is still a decent number, but your odds of being on an on-time flight are several times higher than being on a delayed flight. 

Still, fly in a day in advance or more. I agree with that 100%. 

I wonder if this data includes canceled flights and not rescheduled flights? We've had this happen several times on our cruise travels without one bit of assistance from the airlines, which is one reason we drove 10 hours from Memphis to Galveston on our last cruise vs. flying. 

[Fuzzywuzzy]

We only did this once, everything turned out well, but it was absolutely nerve wracking and on a scale of 1-10 the anxiety was an 11. Never again.

[packercruising]

On 8/21/2024 at 11:26 AM, Zacharius said:

This is a common sentiment, but it's actually not accurate. In the US, in 2023, about 78.4% of flights were on time. Looking back historically, the 2010s as a decade averaged about 79% on time, the 2000s about 75% on time, the 1990s about 77% on time. So, almost 80% of flights are on-time these days, and that's the same as, if not slightly above, what it has been for the last few decades. It's still very reliable considering there are tens of thousands of flights with millions of passengers each and every day.  

I guess that "a lot" of flights still do get delayed, because 20% out of 13,000 flights is still a decent number, but your odds of being on an on-time flight are several times higher than being on a delayed flight. 

Still, fly in a day in advance or more. I agree with that 100%. 

Depends on perspective. We live in Wisconsin and generally cruise in Jan/Feb. Our chances of delays are undoubtedly higher. Two years ago the three days we were planning to spend in Miami was spent in our motel room in Green Bay. Even if they re always on time, there is stress related to flying and who wants to be stressed out embarking a cruise? Still, I understand that there are a variety of reasons people can't fly in early. 

[twangster]

On 8/21/2024 at 1:49 PM, Zacharius said:

Comfort is an interesting one. In economy, I agree, it's not as comfortable as it used to be (though that's a separate convo from our original one). In business/first, it's better than ever. 

Domestically it's somewhat embarrassing they call it first class, it isn't.  

Coach used to be bearable until they compressed it to squeeze in "comfort" seats at a premium.  Fake first class didn't suffer from this new class, it came at the expense of the economy cabin.  

As someone who has also flown for decades basically US airlines make the experience so terrible they invented a premium product so it sucks less.  If you fly as much as you say you do, which I was there, so I get it, you probably aren't spending much time back there.  In my heyday I missed an upgrade on only one 1 of 300 flights one year.  That was due to IROPS and I wanted to get home on a 55 minute flight so yeah, downgrade me.  Other than that I was upgraded to fake first 299 times.  No complaints, I'd much rather take fake first over the ghetto in coach any day.  

Mad Dogs were a favorite of mine.  So quiet in fake first.

[smokeybandit]

55 minutes ago, twangster said:

Mad Dogs were a favorite of mine.  So quiet in fake first.

Yet so loud to the surrounding 5 miles of airspace.

[twangster]

23 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Yet so loud to the surrounding 5 miles of airspace.

Who needs TCAS?  Open a cockpit window and you’re good! 

[Zacharius]

On 9/1/2024 at 2:57 PM, twangster said:

Mad Dogs were a favorite of mine.  So quiet in fake first.

As an AA frequent flier, I spent so much damn time on Mad Dogs...love hate relationship. Their maintenance issues were ridiculous and I felt like there was a 50/50 shot they would have to sub out the plane or have some delay for maintenance (not literally 50/50, but like 51/49!). But yeah...when you hear the wind passing by your window because you can't hear the jets, you realize how special that engine config is. 

I remember one time flying in to DFW in first class of a Mad Dog and we could hear the cockpit warnings go off because of wind shear on final. Myself and the guy next to me, having been drinking whiskey together all the way from Hartford, looked at each other and nervously smiled as the pilot laid on the throttle to get us the hell out of there and back around for a safer approach. 

[twangster]

1 hour ago, Zacharius said:

As an AA frequent flier, I spent so much damn time on Mad Dogs...love hate relationship. Their maintenance issues were ridiculous and I felt like there was a 50/50 shot they would have to sub out the plane or have some delay for maintenance (not literally 50/50, but like 51/49!). But yeah...when you hear the wind passing by your window because you can't hear the jets, you realize how special that engine config is. 

I remember one time flying in to DFW in first class of a Mad Dog and we could hear the cockpit warnings go off because of wind shear on final. Myself and the guy next to me, having been drinking whiskey together all the way from Hartford, looked at each other and nervously smiled as the pilot laid on the throttle to get us the hell out of there and back around for a safer approach. 

I could always hear the ground callouts on approach...  30... 25... 20... 10...  

I used to fall asleep in first on them before take off and wake up somewhere in the air.  

[JasonOasis]

On 9/1/2024 at 3:57 PM, twangster said:

Domestically it's somewhat embarrassing they call it first class, it isn't.  

Coach used to be bearable until they compressed it to squeeze in "comfort" seats at a premium.  Fake first class didn't suffer from this new class, it came at the expense of the economy cabin.  

As someone who has also flown for decades basically US airlines make the experience so terrible they invented a premium product so it sucks less.  If you fly as much as you say you do, which I was there, so I get it, you probably aren't spending much time back there.  In my heyday I missed an upgrade on only one 1 of 300 flights one year.  That was due to IROPS and I wanted to get home on a 55 minute flight so yeah, downgrade me.  Other than that I was upgraded to fake first 299 times.  No complaints, I'd much rather take fake first over the ghetto in coach any day.  

Mad Dogs were a favorite of mine.  So quiet in fake first.

I get your frustration about the invented premium product at the expense of regular coach but perhaps you need to take a look at what the Europeans call first class.  It's truly a coach seat with the middle seat blocked and that is first class.  The leg room the seat pitch and actual seat itself is all the same as the seat in coach only difference is the middle seat has a blocker installed that maintenance can remove depending on where the aircraft is flying as not all routes have first class in Europe.

And while you are correct US airlines have invented this fake premium product that offers additionally room for those in the first few rows of coach the reason they've done it is to cover all their bases.  The major carriers like American, Delta, and United have learned how to compete against airlines like Southwest, Frontier, Spirit, and JetBlue.  Looking at the industry today its the ULCC and LCCs (ultra low cost carrier, and low cost carriers) that are experiencing some headwinds financially while the legacy carriers are flying high.  Just a little bit over a decade ago the exact opposite was true the ULCCs and LCCs were cleaning out the legacy carriers.   Just this quarter Frontier, Spirit and JetBlue have all announced they are deferring orders that combine total over 100 brand new Airbus aircraft until 2030 or later.  Meanwhile the legacy carrier continue to grow and are now clamoring to get those coveted delivery slots that have now be abandoned by those carriers.  Southwest which is in better financial shape than the other carriers mentioned and is not deferring delivery of new aircraft still has its own problems and really they are being forced to make some major changes by Elliot Financial Group.  Starting next year Southwest will finally, finally launch redeye flights something they should have done decades ago to be honest but they've resisted until now. Assigned seating is also coming to Southwest which is the first step in them monetizing seating selection on aircraft.  Southwest also recently sent out a poll asking some of their most frequent fliers how they feel about paying for checked luggage so its quite possibly free checked bags will come to an in on Southwest but most don't expect that to happen in 2025 what I've heard from insiders is they would most likely introduce that change in 2026.  Southwest is making all these changes because they are under extreme pressure to increase revenue and profits, the same pressure the legacy carriers faced more than a decade ago. Over 14 years ago United Airlines then CEO stated there was no money to be made in the US domestic market a sentiment all the legacy echoed but only United was dumb enough to say out loud.  Fast forward to today and some of the legacies most profitable routes aren't international long haul routes they are domestic short haul routes right here in the the lower 48.  What changed is they've learned to to adapt and compete in every segment of the market including the ULCC and LCC markets.

I wish we could go back in time to the days when the airline industry was regulated no deregulation, go back in time to PanAm's hey day, but that's not reality.  By the time I was born in 1980 PanAm was already on its way out they just didn't know it yet. But as someone who has spent a large portion of my life working in the aviation industry I do wonder from time to time would PanAm had survive as the Legacy PanAm we all know and cherish if they were still around today?  Or would PanAm if they had survived look a lot like the American Airlines, Delta Airlines and United Airlines of today? 

[Stella]

Can’t do it on the February 8 2025 cruise.  It is Super Bowl in New Orleans the next day and all rooms are for the Super Bowl.   Looked all around New Orleans   No hotels or they start at $600 a night because of the Super Bowl.  So flying into Houston for the night and taking the 1 hour hopper to New Orleans.   Always a first for everything.  I would not have booked the cruise if I would have known about Super Bowl 

[TimeRacer]

When I was looking into doing our first cruise, this was the one piece of advice that I took extremely seriously, even though it was a direct 2 hour flight that I'd made plenty of times before. It was worth the extra hotel cost to have my anxiety-ridden oldest child be chill the day the cruise started. 

[Zacharius]

19 hours ago, Stella said:

Can’t do it on the February 8 2025 cruise.  It is Super Bowl in New Orleans the next day and all rooms are for the Super Bowl.   Looked all around New Orleans   No hotels or they start at $600 a night because of the Super Bowl.  So flying into Houston for the night and taking the 1 hour hopper to New Orleans.   Always a first for everything.  I would not have booked the cruise if I would have known about Super Bowl 

Ha, this happened to me once on a work trip...client asked me to come to Dallas and I failed to realize, despite being a big football fan, that my day of arrival was Super Bowl Sunday, in Dallas. Client must have forgot this too and didn't love my hotel bill for that night! 

[Pattycruise]

On 9/16/2024 at 9:36 PM, TimeRacer said:

When I was looking into doing our first cruise, this was the one piece of advice that I took extremely seriously, even though it was a direct 2 hour flight that I'd made plenty of times before. It was worth the extra hotel cost to have my anxiety-ridden oldest child be chill the day the cruise started. 

Wow, I dodged a bullet with that date.  I was booked on that cruise but realized it didn’t give me a cushion to fly home for a cruise I had booked the following week so I cancelled it.  (Casino comp-no loss of $)  

[Riley]

Enjoying this thread as it moves into airline gossip

Two things: I believe on-time statistics are based upon pullback from the gate, and as someone who has been stuck on the tarmac many times that's flat-out cheating!  Second, our home airport is O'Hare in Chicago. We ALWAYS fly out a day ahead for domestic flights since Chicago can get shut-down weather any time of year... for our cruise out of Miami in February I'm planning two days ahead (might even do three and suck up the extra hotel costs) as that's prime "blizzard" time up here. We will just drive to the Everglades or the Keys for a day or two. 

[Zacharius]

1 hour ago, Riley said:

Enjoying this thread as it moves into airline gossip

Two things: I believe on-time statistics are based upon pullback from the gate, and as someone who has been stuck on the tarmac many times that's flat-out cheating!  Second, our home airport is O'Hare in Chicago. We ALWAYS fly out a day ahead for domestic flights since Chicago can get shut-down weather any time of year... for our cruise out of Miami in February I'm planning two days ahead (might even do three and suck up the extra hotel costs) as that's prime "blizzard" time up here. We will just drive to the Everglades or the Keys for a day or two. 

Pros and cons of Chicago airports. In winter, I often choose to actually fly through Chicago instead of somewhere like Dallas (I'm an AA frequent flier) because I know that Chicago can handle most of the weather. Give me 6" of snow in Chicago over a single flake of snow in Dallas. I've had 1" get me stuck in Dallas for 36 hours (giggity), whereas I've made barely-delayed connections at O'Hare with 6x that snow.