Two airlines will fly you from point A to point B.   One charges $100 more than the other.   Baggage and other fees being equal, which one should you take?

A. The Cheaper One

B. The More Expensive One

C. There Is Not Enough Information To Make A Decision

The answer is clearly C, as some airlines will always offer a lower fare, but saddle you with a less than ideal itinerary.   I am frequently asked the question of whether an extra stop is worth the savings.   It comes down to a variety of factors.    First, how much time will the stop add to your itinerary.   There is a big difference between a stop along your route at a relatively quiet airport with no change of planes, and a long connection at a congested, out of the way airport.     In the first instance, you might only expect to arrive about an hour later, and there is no chance of mis-connecting.   In the later arrangement, you could be adding hours to both your travel time and your flight times.    Worse, you are doubling the risk of cancellations and lost luggage.    You also have to take into account the possibility that a weather delay or cancellation will force you to pay out of pocket for overnight accommodations at your transfer city.

If you are a student or you are retired, perhaps your money is far more important than your time.   Compared to other forms of transport, even a delayed trip will be far quicker and the money saved will prove valuable in your travels.

While I am an extremely frugal traveler, one of my most precious commodities is my time.  I have just so many days off a year for vacations, that I have to make the most of each one.    You will find me at the airport departing for vacation after a day at work so that I can wake up the next day at my destination.   You will also see me on the last flight out on my return so I can make the most of my final day off.      Throw in a change of planes, and I end up spending too much time traveling.    Additionally, I would vastly increase my chances of missing a day of vacation if I have a problem on the outbound, or a day of work if I run into trouble on the return.    I have had both experiences, and neither are much fun.

That said, everyone has their price.   I have booked a quick stop to save $100, and even a change of planes to save more than $200.    That is about where my limits lie.   When booking a flight for you or someone else, you have to find out how much your time is worth an how much of a risk you can afford.  Once you set a dollar amount, you can then make the best decisions about which itinerary is going to serve your needs.

I was on the plane today flying to Orange County in the West Coast. I flew with SouthWest. It was quite a hassle for me because of two things. Firstly, I had to change flights. The first flight was 1157 from PHL to MWD (Chicago). Then I had to wait for 2 hours for the flight to John Wayne Airport in Orange County. Secondly, my flight was at 7:10am EST and I had to get up early. And it snowed overnight (4 inches where I lived) and so I had to shovel my driveway in double quick time

But this was the first trip that I paid the extra $10 each way for an automatic check in with SouthWest. That meant that I did not have to check in 24 hours early just to get boarding priority. My boarding number was A31 and A34 respectively.

And the funny thing was that I managed to get front row Aisle seats twice even though I was the 31st and 34th person to board. Each time, there was a person sitting in the window seat. And the person in front of me just looked ahead without considering taking the front row seat. Perhaps it’s instinct to look for an empty row. But I gladly took the front seat. In my opinion, it was the best seat because there was lots of leg room. It certainly felt more like sitting in a US Airways first class!

From now onwards, I will gladly pay the extra $10 so I do not have to manually check in online. And I guess I have a much greater shot a front row seats?

One of the hot button issues in travel these days is what is often referred to as a “Tarmac Delay”.    Of course, Tarmac is a specific type of asphalt, and just about every airport uses a reinforced concrete surface.    Just by pointing out this detail, I am letting you know that I am putting on my pilot’s hat in looking at this problem.

This Pilot’s Perspective

As a pilot we are trained to handle all manner of unlikely contingencies.   In fact, all airlines have an operating handbook that pilots must have on hand during commercial operations.  These handbooks specify in minute detail the proper procedure for eventualities so obscure and unlikely, that any given pilot has only a minute chance of encountering them in their entire career.   What struck me most about all of the notable “tarmac strandings” in the last decade or so was that recounts of the event clearly indicated that no one had any kind of procedure for dealing with it.    Basically, the pilot’s complained to the airport and their company, and both replied to the effect of: there is nothing we can do at this time, we are working on it.  After the event, the airline in question would pretend to have fixed the problem, yet the entire process would repeat on the same or a different carrier the next time there was irregular operations.

Enter The Three Hour Rule

Eventually, things got so bad that the government was forced to intervene.    A three hour rule was created by the Department of Transportation (DOT) that used a blunt instrument, heavy fines, in order to ensure that passengers were never detained on a plane for more than three hours.   The clock starts ticking when the doors close, but exceptions are made when the plane cannot return to the gate for safety reasons.

What Has Happened Since

Strandings have virtually disappeared, especially the terrible ones that went on all day or all night.    On the other hand, foreign carriers, which are exempt from the rule have continued to see strandings during the recent snowstorms in the northeast.   Another effect has been that airlines are staying at the gate as long as possible when they cannot take off due to traffic, weather, or mechanical issues.     This solution is imperfect, as many airports are too short on gate space to permit lengthy stays.   Nevertheless, I have had several recent occasions where I or an acquaintance has been on an airplane that remained at the gate for some time during a delay.    It is always comforting to know that you can leave the plane easily if you need to.   There are all sorts of reasons you might do this.  Perhaps you have already been delayed enough that you will miss your connection.  Maybe you have booked a new ticket to your destination during your delay.  Perhaps you will even miss the event you are to attend, making it a “trip in vain”.

The Rule Is Not Perfect

In my recent web radio interview with Brett Snyder, AKA The Cranky Flier, he made several excellent points about the drawbacks of this rule as implemented.   He contents that flight cancellations have increased.    This may be true, although many dispute whether or not the statistics show this definitively.    Even if it could be proven that has been some uptick in cancellations directly attributable to the three hour rule, I am not ready to call that a bad thing.   I personally, would rather be in the terminal after my flight was canceled, than be stuck in a plane for hours on end.   In the terminal I have access to food, water, and medical care.   I might even find another flight to my destination or one nearby.  I can also leave the terminal and go home, go to a hotel, or find alternate ground transportation to my destination.    I have no options if I am stuck in a plane.    Brett empathizes more with the travelers that are determined to make it to their destination on their original flight, regardless of the delay.   On that subject we agreed to disagree, but we found plenty of common ground in our concerns that the rule is necessary, but could use more tweaking.

Brett points out that the DOT has given very little guidance about this rule and that the potential fines are very steep.  I agree that the rule could have been designed and implemented better.     I also feel that the airports need to be held liable to some degree as well.    Too often, airlines and pilots merely claim that the airport doesn’t have any  open gates, and then they all give up.   In reality, the airport should be able to find an open gate, allocate the next open gate, or at the very least provide an air-stair.     To do otherwise is inexcusable.

Either way, I will always feel that the creation of the rule has been a victory for passengers as well as the realization that the airlines have failed.   Clearly, airlines and airports are finally getting around to creating standard procedures to deal with these types of irregular operations.   They only have themselves to blame for the fact that it took government intervention for them to do so.