Why Continental can blow me... Options

[impala454]

I have never sat in BOS for 10 hours, even for international connections.

well i meant continental (as in your OP talking about bad service).

2-3 connections? You are looking at a good day in the airport with 2-3 connections with SW depending where you fly.

well what i mean is, it seems like the other airlines tend to make connections that are downright stupid. on continental, I flew down to Houston (from Lubbock) before flying to Philly. On AA, they had us connect through DFW to go to vegas. That's 2 hours in the air added to the flight, not to mention downtime in DFW. I didn't have a choice on that trip, as someone else had booked our trip.

just doin a quick lookup on aa.com for lubbock to vegas:
AA has a few options (all go through DFW)- $276 for a 9hr flight, $287 for a 5hr flight, $461 for a 4hr flight, and even a $900 flight (not sure how the hell that one came up).
SW has a flight for $274, 2 hrs non stop
CO has a flight for $464 ~5.5 hrs with 1 stop (in houston!?)

here's another one, lubbock to chicago:
SW = $438, 1 stop, ~5 hrs
CO = $638, 2 stops, ~8 hrs
AA = couldnt even find a flight...

now I totally understand if they don't fly to a specific city you need to go to, but I can see where you'd need to eventually eat on the plane if your trip took three hours longer than it should, simply because the airline is limited in its connections.

Also, I hate the free seating policy on SW. I always get an aisle seat, usually on an exit row.

yeah i guess that's just personal preference... I personally hate assigned seating. I usually get there a tad earlier and snag the emergency exit row.

[Hartmann]

Impala, you are pointing out the distinct difference in how legacy carriers and low cost carriers do business. Legacy carriers rely on their hubs so that they can destinations that SW can't, such as Cattletsburg, KY, somewhere I have to go next week.

Lubbock is a poor choice to do your comparison shopping because it's basically a regional airport with only a few flights to anywhere but Texas destinations (ATA flies to HON out of LBB, btw).

I flew SW out of there simply because I didn't want to fly in the puddle jumper regional jets that CO and AA operate. You notice Delta and United both dropped out of Lubbock... It wasn't a profitable market. People weren't trying to go from Lubbock to Chicago or Lubbock to Atlanta. They were trying to go from Lubbock to Vegas and Lubbock to Albuquerque or Houston. SW is perfect for that situation.

A friend and I flew from Lubbock to Seattle on SW and it sucked. We connected in Las Vegas (after a 3 hour wait), then we lost two hours because of the time change. We could have just flown AA to DFW and got a quick connection to Seattle.

It's 6" one way, half a foot the other.

I think Austin is a better choice for doing price comparisons. You can do United, JetBlue, Frontier, AA, Delta, SW, and Continental out of there and some of them don't have connections.

Also, I'd like to point out that while most of my SW experiences have been good ones, there have been some pretty bad ones as well.

In other news, this is huge for people traveling to Europe: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/200...-approved_N.htm

[impala454]

Impala, you are pointing out the distinct difference in how legacy carriers and low cost carriers do business. Legacy carriers rely on their hubs so that they can destinations that SW can't, such as Cattletsburg, KY, somewhere I have to go next week.

Lubbock is a poor choice to do your comparison shopping because it's basically a regional airport with only a few flights to anywhere but Texas destinations (ATA flies to HON out of LBB, btw).

ok so lubbock is a bad choice, but Cattletsburg, KY is?

You notice Delta and United both dropped out of Lubbock... It wasn't a profitable market.

it wasn't profitable for them, because everybody flies SW

A friend and I flew from Lubbock to Seattle on SW and it sucked. We connected in Las Vegas (after a 3 hour wait), then we lost two hours because of the time change. We could have just flown AA to DFW and got a quick connection to Seattle.

so AA has some kind of magic device that eliminates the time change between lubbock and seattle? and you'd rather add two hours to your flight right up front by going to DFW on the way?

Also, I'd like to point out that while most of my SW experiences have been good ones, there have been some pretty bad ones as well.

well that's understandable, but your thread started with you bitching about CO

I personally have never had any bad experiences with SW. has there been delayed flights? of course, but any airline will have problems with weather and such. if there is a connection, the gates are usually very close together, the seats are bigger, and I can sit where I want. I've sat on the tarmac for an hour waiting for CO to fix the damn plane. with SW only using one plane, it seems to eliminate or shorten these problems. i think it's very smart business (which is pretty obvious by how well they're doing).

[False Dude]

i always fly continental out of lubbock. SW sucks and doesnt even fly to IAH in houston which is the big airport

[Hartmann]

ok so lubbock is a bad choice, but Cattletsburg, KY is?

No, but SW doesn't fly anywhere close except Columbus, USair, Delta, and Continental have directs to airports a lot closer.

it wasn't profitable for them, because everybody flies SW

No, Lubbock isn't a profitable air market, period. SW has a limited presence in Lubbock, it's only appears bigger because they fly one aircraft. I guarantee that if they had a smaller plane in their fleet, it'd be deployed to Lubbock. I've been on SW out of there that were completely empty. Fly out during off-peak times, you'll see what I mean.

so AA has some kind of magic device that eliminates the time change between lubbock and seattle? and you'd rather add two hours to your flight right up front by going to DFW on the way?

It's a 50 minute flight to DFW and the connection is 30 minutes later. So in an hour and 20 minutes, I am in the air on the way to Seattle instead of sitting in Albuquerque for 3 hours waiting. Though, going through Vegas allows you to gamble during your stop.

well that's understandable, but your thread started with you bitching about CO

I will continue to bitch about CO, though I did get an apology this afternoon, written and from a rep over the phone. CO is up and down for me. SW is just a bad choice for cross-country and most business traveling (in my view). If you like being herded for long haul flights, which by the way, usually have to stop in St. Louis or something, then SW is your airline.

I personally have never had any bad experiences with SW. has there been delayed flights? of course, but any airline will have problems with weather and such. if there is a connection, the gates are usually very close together, the seats are bigger, and I can sit where I want. I've sat on the tarmac for an hour waiting for CO to fix the damn plane. with SW only using one plane, it seems to eliminate or shorten these problems. i think it's very smart business (which is pretty obvious by how well they're doing).

SW has its own problems with being late. Oddly enough, CO's main plane is the same as SW, the 737-500. I have sat waiting for a part at Lubbock before too... We waited so long the next flight leaving took off before ours. No company is without problems or mechanical failures and when you fly a wide variety of airlines you realize that.

I disagree about SW's connections, but that's just me.

[Seeker]

let's quit arguing and just agree that all airlines suck because they're run by incompetent boobs

[impala454]

No, Lubbock isn't a profitable air market, period. SW has a limited presence in Lubbock, it's only appears bigger because they fly one aircraft. I guarantee that if they had a smaller plane in their fleet, it'd be deployed to Lubbock. I've been on SW out of there that were completely empty. Fly out during off-peak times, you'll see what I mean.

well no shit lubbock isn't a profitable air market, but the other carriers did pull out because they were less profitable than SW out of lubbock.

It's a 50 minute flight to DFW and the connection is 30 minutes later. So in an hour and 20 minutes, I am in the air on the way to Seattle instead of sitting in Albuquerque for 3 hours waiting.

ok so an hour and 20 minutes later, you're still 50 minutes further to the east . you forgot to include that. and i seriously doubt every single SW flight that direction sits in alb for 3 hours.

you like being herded for long haul flights, which by the way, usually have to stop in St. Louis or something,

wrong again my friend... there's plenty of flights all the way across the country non-stop on SW. from both large and small cities.
check em out here: http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/rou...tml?ref=wwf_fgn
honestly I was surprised by it.. i think SW really is expanding their service nationwide.

SW has its own problems with being late. Oddly enough, CO's main plane is the same as SW, the 737-500. I have sat waiting for a part at Lubbock before too... We waited so long the next flight leaving took off before ours. No company is without problems or mechanical failures and when you fly a wide variety of airlines you realize that.

well flights being late due to mechanical problems vs weather are two different things. i have never sat on the tarmac on a SW flight for more than 10 minutes. i've only flown continental about 8 times, and sat on the tarmac for over 30 minutes at least on half of those flights. maybe it's simply a side effect of SW flying to the smaller airports i dunno.

and as far as flying out of houston, i'd rather fly out of hobby any day. it's much closer to me, and not nearly as crowded.

let's quit arguing and just agree that all airlines suck because they're run by incompetent boobs

ya want more drama ya want less drama... shit man make up your mind

[Mommy]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I think the only reason Chuck (Impala) is arguing with Stephan is because Stephan uses a Mac. Problem solved.

[Seeker]

cue the mac vs. windows debate

MORE DRAMA!!

[Hartmann]

well no shit lubbock isn't a profitable air market, but the other carriers did pull out because they were less profitable than SW out of lubbock.

I would put money on SW not being very profitable out of Lubbock. The catch is that the other airlines weren't profitable to their destinations. If Delta flew to Vegas from Lubbock they'd probably do alright.

ok so an hour and 20 minutes later, you're still 50 minutes further to the east . you forgot to include that. and i seriously doubt every single SW flight that direction sits in alb for 3 hours.

Well when you're finally boarding your plane, I'll be an hour away from Seattle

wrong again my friend... there's plenty of flights all the way across the country non-stop on SW. from both large and small cities.
check em out here: http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/rou...tml?ref=wwf_fgn
honestly I was surprised by it.. i think SW really is expanding their service nationwide.

There are very few non-stop cross country flights from that map... LAX-BWI only two flights are nonstop. Those are 5 hour flights that cross mealtime. Better bring your food on board.

well flights being late due to mechanical problems vs weather are two different things. i have never sat on the tarmac on a SW flight for more than 10 minutes. i've only flown continental about 8 times, and sat on the tarmac for over 30 minutes at least on half of those flights. maybe it's simply a side effect of SW flying to the smaller airports i dunno.

I have been on a lot of airlines and sat on the tarmac with all of them at one time or another. Like I said, I was on a SW flight that left after the next flight out did because of mechanical issues. My girlfriend left HOU late because the flight was late getting in (on SW) just last week.

and as far as flying out of houston, i'd rather fly out of hobby any day. it's much closer to me, and not nearly as crowded.

Hobby is convenient, but if you are anywhere but in the Southwest area, it's dirty and smells awful.

To me this isn't drama, it's the question of flying preference. I can argue timing all day simply because I've tried to book on SW at convenient times and can't get the right connections or the connections take too long. If SW let me choose my connections, I may be happier.

Their (SW) rewards program kind of sucks too... The free liquor coupons are a nice touch.

[Mommy]

cue the mac vs. windows debate

MORE DRAMA!!

[FORSAKENR320]

cue the mac vs. windows debate

MORE DRAMA!!

jessica is a genius


mac users are coffee drinking self-rightious-self-absorbed-ass-hippy-trendy-fucks... with their 1 mouse button bullshit

[impala454]

I would put money on SW not being very profitable out of Lubbock.

i still don't think you caught what i said. i never said any airline in lubbock is profitable. i said the other ones probably dropped lubbock because they were LESS profitable than SW.

Well when you're finally boarding your plane, I'll be an hour away from Seattle

i don't know where the hell you're getting this...

lubbock -> seattle:
best flight time (straight off their websites)
SW: 5:55 (1 stop LAS)
CO: 7:28 (1 stop IAH) (so I can see why you say you need a meal on CO)

There are very few non-stop cross country flights from that map...

LA->philly
LA->baltimore
LA->chicago
LA->nashville
houston->oakland
houston->philly
houston->baltimore
oakland->philly
oakland->baltimore
vegas->pretty much everywhere
phoenix->pretty much everywhere
need i keep listing? maybe you didnt understand the map.

Those are 5 hour flights that cross mealtime. Better bring your food on board.

so let me get this straight.. you can't go 5 hours without eating a full meal? so you eat lunch at noon, you're starving of malnutrition by 5:15 or so? or the 4 or so bags of peanuts they'll give you can't hold you over? geez i'd hate to be on a road trip with you.

I have been on a lot of airlines and sat on the tarmac with all of them at one time or another. Like I said, I was on a SW flight that left after the next flight out did because of mechanical issues. My girlfriend left HOU late because the flight was late getting in (on SW) just last week.

well great then it's a moot point for you, as far as your concerned, all airlines are the same as far as maintinence problems.

Hobby is convenient, but if you are anywhere but in the Southwest area, it's dirty and smells awful.

the airport smells??? not sure what you're talkin about here

To me this isn't drama, it's the question of flying preference. I can argue timing all day simply because I've tried to book on SW at convenient times and can't get the right connections or the connections take too long. If SW let me choose my connections, I may be happier.

or have no connections at all?

Their (SW) rewards program kind of sucks too... The free liquor coupons are a nice touch.

perhaps paying less for every flight is nicer?

[Mommy]

********SNORE*********

For those who travel OFTEN for business, anyone will agree that Southwest is not going to be their first choice.

I like Southwest because I can get somewhere for cheap. I feel like cattle being herded on and off their flights, but its cheap. For now, Ill stick with that because 1) I have a limited income...2) I dont travel often.

[impala454]

For those who travel OFTEN for business, anyone will agree that Southwest is not going to be their first choice.

well that's exactly the notion I'm debating here... i don't get it. would you not want a shorter flight and cheaper ticket if you were on business? obviously you can't go everywhere on SW but if it's available I don't understand why not.