From the article: This article has a list, but apparently it's not final. ... I assume there are legal reasons why the airlines can't pay the salaries of the air traffic controllers. If they...
From the article:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that it was taking the extraordinary step of reducing air traffic by 10% across 40 “high-volume” markets beginning Friday morning to maintain travel safety as air traffic controllers exhibit signs of strain during the ongoing government shutdown.
The cutback stands to impact thousands of flights nationwide because the FAA directs more than 44,000 flights daily, including commercial passenger flights, cargo planes and private aircraft. The agency didn’t immediately identify which airports or cities will be affected but said the restrictions would remain in place as long as necessary.
This article has a list, but apparently it's not final.
In a letter to employees, United CEO Scott Kirby promised to focus the cuts on regional routes and flights that don’t travel between hubs. He said the airline will try to reschedule customers when possible and will also offer refunds to anyone who doesn’t want to fly during this time, even if their flight isn’t canceled.
...
The cuts could represent as many as 1,800 flights and upward of 268,000 seats combined, according to an estimate by aviation analytics firm Cirium. For example, O’Hare International Airport in Chicago could see 121 of its 1,212 flights currently scheduled for Friday cut if the FAA distributes the reductions equally among impacted airports, Cirium said.
I assume there are legal reasons why the airlines can't pay the salaries of the air traffic controllers. If they could, I'm sure they would because this will cost them millions.
As a donation you mean? US Air Traffic Controllers are Federal employees of the US Government. As are, by the way, the airport security employees of TSA. Not to mention airlines (and you, the...
I assume there are legal reasons why the airlines can't pay the salaries of the air traffic controllers. If they could, I'm sure they would because this will cost them millions.
As a donation you mean? US Air Traffic Controllers are Federal employees of the US Government. As are, by the way, the airport security employees of TSA. Not to mention airlines (and you, the traveler) already pay fees to use the National Airspace System which helps fund the FAA and pay for controllers. Really none of us are getting what we've paid and continue to pay for.
They are requesting the ability to use airport revenues to pay ATC. A very interesting legal situation that I feel is not limited just to the legal language regarding how airports spend money.
Maybe I'm too cynical, but I can't help feel that this is part of the reason why Republicans aren't trying harder to resolve the shutdown. If ATCs end up being paid for by the airports, why does...
They are requesting the ability to use airport revenues to pay ATC. A very interesting legal situation that I feel is not limited just to the legal language regarding how airports spend money.
Maybe I'm too cynical, but I can't help feel that this is part of the reason why Republicans aren't trying harder to resolve the shutdown. If ATCs end up being paid for by the airports, why does the government need to resume paying them after it's running again? It's an invisible forced privatisation.
That's my biggest concern. I'm not the one traveling, but I'm very much looking forward to hosting family for the holiday who are all flying in. Hoping for the best.
That's my biggest concern. I'm not the one traveling, but I'm very much looking forward to hosting family for the holiday who are all flying in. Hoping for the best.
We had an announcement from our travel agent at work. Their recommendation was arriving 2-3 hours early for domestic flights and 3-4 hours for international flights to allow for longer wait times....
We had an announcement from our travel agent at work. Their recommendation was arriving 2-3 hours early for domestic flights and 3-4 hours for international flights to allow for longer wait times. Good luck!
isn't 2-3 hours early been the standard since like...forever? Or is that just my family? Growing up it was always 2 hours minimum, but nowadays my parents get there about 4 hours early. I just did...
isn't 2-3 hours early been the standard since like...forever? Or is that just my family? Growing up it was always 2 hours minimum, but nowadays my parents get there about 4 hours early. I just did a trip last week with my kids and we did 3 hours early, and packed a lunch of PB&Js and other snacks from home to tide us over until snacks on the plane.
It depends. If I’m not checking luggage and traveling domestically, usually just an hour or so ahead. Maybe a bit more if it’s international - about 2 hours if I’m checking a bag. I’ll do a bit...
It depends. If I’m not checking luggage and traveling domestically, usually just an hour or so ahead. Maybe a bit more if it’s international - about 2 hours if I’m checking a bag.
I’ll do a bit more if it’s an airport that’s a pain to get around, but I try to spend as little time waiting around in the airport as possible.
I haven't traveled much since the pandemic, but before that, for business, I would usually give myself 30 minutes each for returning a rental car/parking, checking luggage and going through...
I haven't traveled much since the pandemic, but before that, for business, I would usually give myself 30 minutes each for returning a rental car/parking, checking luggage and going through security. At my home airport (PIT), if I could expense the close-in parking and I was not checking a bag, I'd arrive 30 minutes before boarding and pretty much walk from my car onto the plane. But also the downside of me missing a flight was just a business delay. For personal travel I'd be more conservative.
For the airports I use, they do recommend getting there a couple hours before, but this depends a lot on whether it’s busy. I tend not to fly at the busiest times, so getting there a bit over an...
For the airports I use, they do recommend getting there a couple hours before, but this depends a lot on whether it’s busy. I tend not to fly at the busiest times, so getting there a bit over an hour before works out. The main constraint is getting baggage checked on time. Getting through security doesn’t take that long.
Flying around the holidays would be a different story.
Nominally yes, but I’ve lived in smaller cities the last few years where I can show up an hour before if I don’t have checked baggage, 90 minutes if I do. It’s great!
Nominally yes, but I’ve lived in smaller cities the last few years where I can show up an hour before if I don’t have checked baggage, 90 minutes if I do. It’s great!
Without giving it much thought, this is generally a shrug for me. Obviously sucks for people with planned flights, unexpected change always gets people stuck in the rain, but overall….fewer planes...
Without giving it much thought, this is generally a shrug for me. Obviously sucks for people with planned flights, unexpected change always gets people stuck in the rain, but overall….fewer planes in the sky? Maybe net good?
Less to manage for air traffic control.
Less pollution (at all levels of travel— the flight, the travel at the destination, etc).
Cuts across higher economic classes unlike everything else this administration does to the poor. Similarly, hits larger businesses sending their employees on trips.
Maybe encourages people to try staycations over the holidays.
In long term, is an argument for more train travel.
Probably net even workload with ATC. I'm guessing the 10% reduction is to align with a higher rate of ATC calling out "sick". And higher economic classes: the speculation in this thread is that if...
Probably net even workload with ATC. I'm guessing the 10% reduction is to align with a higher rate of ATC calling out "sick". And higher economic classes: the speculation in this thread is that if more flights are cut it'll be for the least revenue flights, so basic economy and economy before premium economy and business class.
I mean that’s not really how flights work. You can’t just cut the economy class. The plane flies or it doesn’t. They’ll cut regional flights with low passenger rates. So JFK to some random town in...
basic economy and economy before premium economy and business class.
I mean that’s not really how flights work. You can’t just cut the economy class. The plane flies or it doesn’t.
They’ll cut regional flights with low passenger rates. So JFK to some random town in Minnesota will go before JFK to LAX before JFK to Heathrow (not Florida).
I’m fine with net even workload for ATC. If they are at a reduced coverage, they should pare down the workload. This isn’t a position on why coverage is low, just that it makes sense that they...
I’m fine with net even workload for ATC. If they are at a reduced coverage, they should pare down the workload. This isn’t a position on why coverage is low, just that it makes sense that they shouldn’t be over worked (more than they traditionally have been).
And as other commenter noted, you can’t just cut economy seats here. Regarding smaller regional flights: my assumption is that regional flyers are likely more rural residents and business which lines up traditionally with conservative voters.
I'm supposed to be going to Japan on November 23rd. Right now, it says international flights won't be affected (aside from regular ground delays, but the plane should be arriving the night before...
I'm supposed to be going to Japan on November 23rd. Right now, it says international flights won't be affected (aside from regular ground delays, but the plane should be arriving the night before so that should be okay, too, even if it gets delayed a bit), but I have an AUS->DFW connection before DFW->HND. I'm starting to get very stressed....
When the shutdown started, I thought "surely it won't be still going in nearly two months". Fuck.
I mean, I have family there so I wouldn't even mind just driving up, but I'm honestly not sure if they'd cancel my whole itinerary if I just didn't show up for the first flight or what.
I mean, I have family there so I wouldn't even mind just driving up, but I'm honestly not sure if they'd cancel my whole itinerary if I just didn't show up for the first flight or what.
Most airlines do. You must show up for all legs of the journey or it'll be cancelled wholesale. My wife had this happen so I had to research the topic. Note that I'm not from the US so it may...
Most airlines do. You must show up for all legs of the journey or it'll be cancelled wholesale. My wife had this happen so I had to research the topic. Note that I'm not from the US so it may differ, but I doubt it.
I’ve driven coast to coast before and I’m wondering if that might be required to see family at Thanksgiving. I’m not working right now so it is possible to pull it off.
I’ve driven coast to coast before and I’m wondering if that might be required to see family at Thanksgiving. I’m not working right now so it is possible to pull it off.
I was sorta thinking the same. I have airline tickets for Thanksgiving. Fully refundable ones, because I knew there was a chance this could last until Thanksgiving. But I was looking at Amtrak and...
I was sorta thinking the same. I have airline tickets for Thanksgiving. Fully refundable ones, because I knew there was a chance this could last until Thanksgiving.
But I was looking at Amtrak and driving last night. Like you, I'd be traveling essentially coast to coast: DC to Las Vegas. It's possible with Amtrak, but it's 57hrs each way for a total of about $1000 (but someone on reddit suggested if I go that route, to get the $499 USA Rail Pass).
Driving is 36hrs each way for around $400. But that's gas only. And realistically, 36hrs is like driving for 3 or 4 days by myself. I've done 2-day road trips alone, but nothing longer. Add on hotels nights and food and it's likely over $1000. I could probably just sleep at truck stops here and there, but at some point I'd want at least one hotel night each direction.
I'm also not working since I'm furloughed. But even that's a gamble. Because I don't know when the shutdown could end. And I don't want to have to use vacation days if the shutdown ends and I'm supposed to be back to work, just because I'm on the road or train. I could probably just take leave without pay, but seems kinda dumb to do after not having income for over a month.
Honestly, if the government is still shutdown and air travel is just pure chaos that week of Thanksgiving, I'll just stay home. Sucks, but I can visit family some other time.
Yup. I've definitely gotten a few excellent, relatively last minute deals on Amtrak before. But most times when I've looked, it just made more sense to fly or drive. Sometimes, Amtrak is even more...
Yup. I've definitely gotten a few excellent, relatively last minute deals on Amtrak before. But most times when I've looked, it just made more sense to fly or drive. Sometimes, Amtrak is even more expensive than flying, while also taking longer to get to the destination!
But there is something to be said about the comfort and convenience of Amtrak over flying. No showing up 2hrs early to the airport. Show up 5min before departure, and you'll still be OK. Don't have to deal with TSA and security. Bags are free if carried-on, and there's basically no size/weight limit (within reason). Plus, you can pretty much bring as many bags as you can carry by yourself, for free. Waaaay comfier seats with faaaar more room; so you're not crammed in like sardines (though on the NER it can sometimes feel that way). You can walk around and eat in the cafe or dining cars. Or can hang out in the observation car, if there is one.
You're definitely paying for that convenience and comfort, plus the experience of the train side itself. Like on long-hauls, it's supposed to be part of your vacation, not just this thing getting you from A-to-B.
Often, air travel is marketed as luxurious and even bougie. When it's anything but, especially domestically, as we know. But to me, Amtrak is far more luxurious, even in Coach.
If you're not in the northeast corridor it pretty much always is, to a hilarious degree. Going from ATL to NYC, for instance, is $700 right now and takes 17 hours, vs $200 and 2 hours on a flight....
Sometimes, Amtrak is even more expensive than flying, while also taking longer to get to the destination!
If you're not in the northeast corridor it pretty much always is, to a hilarious degree. Going from ATL to NYC, for instance, is $700 right now and takes 17 hours, vs $200 and 2 hours on a flight.
Even in the northeast corridor, I find that highway buses are usually way cheaper, and due to the weird routes they take can be as fast. NYC to Boston, for instance, is about the same time on a bus vs amtrak, because amtrak goes the long way and the bus will pretty much drive in a diagonal line. Massive difference in cost, the fancier buses can be had for like $30 one way, whereas amtrak is typically $70 on non-busy days and up to $200 on a busy time.
I still take it sometimes for the northeast routes, but it's really more of a for-fun thing than anything practical.
I've recently learned about those busses like FlixBux and OurBus from some transit YouTubers I watch. I was looking at both recently, since I was thinking about doing a weekend trip soon from DC...
I've recently learned about those busses like FlixBux and OurBus from some transit YouTubers I watch. I was looking at both recently, since I was thinking about doing a weekend trip soon from DC to NYC. How was the experience? I've never taken Greyhound or Megabus or any intercity bus.
One of these days I want to try the Acela. I know it's not that much faster than the NER, but still would like to try the highest speed rail we have in the US. Even if it isn't high speed through a lot of sections. But I always get hung up on the cost.
I've mainly taken OurBus. It's fine. You usually get more young professionals, less crazy people as in Greyhound. Traffic is a thing, so try to pick times where it won't get caught in peak...
I've mainly taken OurBus. It's fine. You usually get more young professionals, less crazy people as in Greyhound. Traffic is a thing, so try to pick times where it won't get caught in peak traffic. There's USB ports and a bathroom that I've never used.
Expect airlines to start by cutting shorter, "regional" routes, first. Then they'll prioritize cutting the least revenue generating flights. I would, however, build in big delays into your...
Expect airlines to start by cutting shorter, "regional" routes, first. Then they'll prioritize cutting the least revenue generating flights.
I would, however, build in big delays into your itinerary. The thing that will be probably affect you most is TSA, not ATC or this reduction in capacity. Houston already saw 3 hour lines last weekend, and you will start seeing that nationwide if this drags on.
I would rather it shutdown— I’m not sure why it’d be good to privatize ATC and gut a unionized federal workforce that has to work in unison across the entire country. If each airport is paying...
I would rather it shutdown— I’m not sure why it’d be good to privatize ATC and gut a unionized federal workforce that has to work in unison across the entire country. If each airport is paying their ATC privately it’ll be a piecemeal thing.
I still wonder why ATCs even come to their workplace. If they ain't getting paid, they should have stayed at home. No ATC = no flights = hell of a pressure to resolve the situation. If there were...
I still wonder why ATCs even come to their workplace. If they ain't getting paid, they should have stayed at home. No ATC = no flights = hell of a pressure to resolve the situation. If there were no flight the next day, it will be resolved that very same day.
They don't even have to be afraid of losing their jobs over this, as I reckon this is very specialized job that needs real experts and there are not hundreds of such people waiting to jump in and run at 100% capacity on day one...
This whole shutdown situation seems absolutely surreal for me (European).
They're legally obligated to continue working, and the more they do work without pay, the more important it is for them to keep working without pay, since stopping would jeopardize the backpay...
They're legally obligated to continue working, and the more they do work without pay, the more important it is for them to keep working without pay, since stopping would jeopardize the backpay they're supposed to get.
They don't even have to be afraid of losing their jobs over this, as I reckon this is very specialized job that needs real experts and there are not hundreds of such people waiting to jump in and run at 100% capacity on day one...
ATCs did do a wildcat strike once (not because of a shutdown), and famously Reagan obliterated them, fired every single one, blacklisted them from any government positions, and temporarily replaced all the ATCs with military ATCs. So yeah, after that, not much resistance since then.
At this point, there's probably a going to be a deal in the next few weeks, so risking the backpay (and career) at this point would seem a poor decision.
That wouldn't be possible today. There's not enough military ATC to cover the amount of flights today. Today we have 44000 flights daily and have 14000 atc. In 1980 we had 20000 flights and...
That wouldn't be possible today. There's not enough military ATC to cover the amount of flights today. Today we have 44000 flights daily and have 14000 atc. In 1980 we had 20000 flights and 13000atc. We have 3000~ military atc roughly right now.
If we're cutting 10% of flights because of this, there would be 75% cuts to flights if we had to go 3000 ATC. That's not even taking into account the fact that the military would need some ATC and the ones who came wouldn't be familiar with routes, systems, etc.
If any president would say damn the consequences and do it anyways, it'd be trump. Hell he probably wouldn't even know or acknowledge the consequences as possible.
If any president would say damn the consequences and do it anyways, it'd be trump. Hell he probably wouldn't even know or acknowledge the consequences as possible.
It seems absurd to us Americans, too. FWIW, it wasn't always like this. I think this whole shutdown business started in 1980, during the Carter Administration. They reinterpreted the...
This whole shutdown situation seems absolutely surreal for me (European).
It seems absurd to us Americans, too. FWIW, it wasn't always like this. I think this whole shutdown business started in 1980, during the Carter Administration. They reinterpreted the Antideficiency Act, which basically says that the government cannot spend money that hasn't been appropriated by Congress, to apply to situations where a budget (or continuing resolution of the previous budget) hasn't been passed on time. Before this, the government would stay open, operating normally, while Congress continued wrangling over a budget.
And, as you can see with ATC continuing to work, the government isn't really shutdown. It's a misnomer. Some parts are. Or parts of parts. But the majority of federal employees continue to work. Some work with pay like normal. My mom, for example, is a nurse at a VA hospital; she continues to get paid as their funding structure is different. My dad, however, also with the VA but who does IT, is required to work but doesn't get paid on-time. People like me, who are furloughed so we're not working nor getting paid, are only around 700k of the over 2million federal employees.
That's why ATC starting to calling-out sick is such a big deal. Because a month later, this "shutdown" is finally starting to affect the public at large. I mean, things like SNAP benefits running out affects the public, too. But that's only for poor people, and we don't care if they starve. I'm only half-joking, sadly.
Looks like it peaked in 2013 but is still much higher compared to before 2008. On the same page further down, there's also a graph by percentage of US population, which makes it look less dramatic...
Looks like it peaked in 2013 but is still much higher compared to before 2008.
On the same page further down, there's also a graph by percentage of US population, which makes it look less dramatic since total population has gone up.
My tinfoil hat, based-in-lala-land, conspiracy theory tiny side of me thinks they're doing this on purpose to eventually get all flights shut down to make it harder for others to leave/come in to...
My tinfoil hat, based-in-lala-land, conspiracy theory tiny side of me thinks they're doing this on purpose to eventually get all flights shut down to make it harder for others to leave/come in to the US, kind of as a way to get travel shut down before shit hits the fan. But again, this is probably not realistic or grounded in reality at all and it's just my imagination running wild. Don't take any of it seriously lol.
I don’t think they’re giving any thought to this at all. If it doesn’t affect their day to day, they do not care. I don’t even really see the conservative news talking about it besides blaming...
I don’t think they’re giving any thought to this at all. If it doesn’t affect their day to day, they do not care.
I don’t even really see the conservative news talking about it besides blaming democrats for ???? whatever
From the article:
This article has a list, but apparently it's not final.
...
I assume there are legal reasons why the airlines can't pay the salaries of the air traffic controllers. If they could, I'm sure they would because this will cost them millions.
As a donation you mean? US Air Traffic Controllers are Federal employees of the US Government. As are, by the way, the airport security employees of TSA. Not to mention airlines (and you, the traveler) already pay fees to use the National Airspace System which helps fund the FAA and pay for controllers. Really none of us are getting what we've paid and continue to pay for.
Edit: So funny enough not long after commenting I ran across a post from the Denver Airport: https://www.flydenver.com/press-release/denver-international-airport-working-to-support-federal-employees-working-without-pay/
They are requesting the ability to use airport revenues to pay ATC. A very interesting legal situation that I feel is not limited just to the legal language regarding how airports spend money.
Maybe I'm too cynical, but I can't help feel that this is part of the reason why Republicans aren't trying harder to resolve the shutdown. If ATCs end up being paid for by the airports, why does the government need to resume paying them after it's running again? It's an invisible forced privatisation.
I bet, even if they were privatized, they still wouldn't be allowed to strike... cough thanks, Reagan cough
especially
Obviously minor in the grand scheme of all this but I’m not looking forward to my flight on Friday, assuming it’s still happening…
Yeah I have to fly next week for work, and am very much not looking forward to the shitshow it’s going to be if the flights are cancelled.
I don’t have a flight that soon but I’m wondering about the possibility that the shutdown extends to Thanksgiving.
As much of a shitshow as it would be, I think it might get some people to finally wake up to everything going on if it starts directly affecting them.
That's my biggest concern. I'm not the one traveling, but I'm very much looking forward to hosting family for the holiday who are all flying in. Hoping for the best.
We had an announcement from our travel agent at work. Their recommendation was arriving 2-3 hours early for domestic flights and 3-4 hours for international flights to allow for longer wait times. Good luck!
isn't 2-3 hours early been the standard since like...forever? Or is that just my family? Growing up it was always 2 hours minimum, but nowadays my parents get there about 4 hours early. I just did a trip last week with my kids and we did 3 hours early, and packed a lunch of PB&Js and other snacks from home to tide us over until snacks on the plane.
It depends. If I’m not checking luggage and traveling domestically, usually just an hour or so ahead. Maybe a bit more if it’s international - about 2 hours if I’m checking a bag.
I’ll do a bit more if it’s an airport that’s a pain to get around, but I try to spend as little time waiting around in the airport as possible.
I try to only ever travel with just a large backpack. Anything else feels like asking for trouble. I’ve done this for trips up to 10 days long.
I haven't traveled much since the pandemic, but before that, for business, I would usually give myself 30 minutes each for returning a rental car/parking, checking luggage and going through security. At my home airport (PIT), if I could expense the close-in parking and I was not checking a bag, I'd arrive 30 minutes before boarding and pretty much walk from my car onto the plane. But also the downside of me missing a flight was just a business delay. For personal travel I'd be more conservative.
For the airports I use, they do recommend getting there a couple hours before, but this depends a lot on whether it’s busy. I tend not to fly at the busiest times, so getting there a bit over an hour before works out. The main constraint is getting baggage checked on time. Getting through security doesn’t take that long.
Flying around the holidays would be a different story.
Nominally yes, but I’ve lived in smaller cities the last few years where I can show up an hour before if I don’t have checked baggage, 90 minutes if I do. It’s great!
Without giving it much thought, this is generally a shrug for me. Obviously sucks for people with planned flights, unexpected change always gets people stuck in the rain, but overall….fewer planes in the sky? Maybe net good?
Less to manage for air traffic control.
Less pollution (at all levels of travel— the flight, the travel at the destination, etc).
Cuts across higher economic classes unlike everything else this administration does to the poor. Similarly, hits larger businesses sending their employees on trips.
Maybe encourages people to try staycations over the holidays.
In long term, is an argument for more train travel.
I say let it ride.
Probably net even workload with ATC. I'm guessing the 10% reduction is to align with a higher rate of ATC calling out "sick". And higher economic classes: the speculation in this thread is that if more flights are cut it'll be for the least revenue flights, so basic economy and economy before premium economy and business class.
I mean that’s not really how flights work. You can’t just cut the economy class. The plane flies or it doesn’t.
They’ll cut regional flights with low passenger rates. So JFK to some random town in Minnesota will go before JFK to LAX before JFK to Heathrow (not Florida).
Massive brain fart :')
I’m fine with net even workload for ATC. If they are at a reduced coverage, they should pare down the workload. This isn’t a position on why coverage is low, just that it makes sense that they shouldn’t be over worked (more than they traditionally have been).
And as other commenter noted, you can’t just cut economy seats here. Regarding smaller regional flights: my assumption is that regional flyers are likely more rural residents and business which lines up traditionally with conservative voters.
I'm supposed to be going to Japan on November 23rd. Right now, it says international flights won't be affected (aside from regular ground delays, but the plane should be arriving the night before so that should be okay, too, even if it gets delayed a bit), but I have an AUS->DFW connection before DFW->HND. I'm starting to get very stressed....
When the shutdown started, I thought "surely it won't be still going in nearly two months". Fuck.
I'd start planning on just getting a rental car and driving to DFW.
I mean, I have family there so I wouldn't even mind just driving up, but I'm honestly not sure if they'd cancel my whole itinerary if I just didn't show up for the first flight or what.
Most airlines do. You must show up for all legs of the journey or it'll be cancelled wholesale. My wife had this happen so I had to research the topic. Note that I'm not from the US so it may differ, but I doubt it.
I’ve driven coast to coast before and I’m wondering if that might be required to see family at Thanksgiving. I’m not working right now so it is possible to pull it off.
I was sorta thinking the same. I have airline tickets for Thanksgiving. Fully refundable ones, because I knew there was a chance this could last until Thanksgiving.
But I was looking at Amtrak and driving last night. Like you, I'd be traveling essentially coast to coast: DC to Las Vegas. It's possible with Amtrak, but it's 57hrs each way for a total of about $1000 (but someone on reddit suggested if I go that route, to get the $499 USA Rail Pass).
Driving is 36hrs each way for around $400. But that's gas only. And realistically, 36hrs is like driving for 3 or 4 days by myself. I've done 2-day road trips alone, but nothing longer. Add on hotels nights and food and it's likely over $1000. I could probably just sleep at truck stops here and there, but at some point I'd want at least one hotel night each direction.
I'm also not working since I'm furloughed. But even that's a gamble. Because I don't know when the shutdown could end. And I don't want to have to use vacation days if the shutdown ends and I'm supposed to be back to work, just because I'm on the road or train. I could probably just take leave without pay, but seems kinda dumb to do after not having income for over a month.
Honestly, if the government is still shutdown and air travel is just pure chaos that week of Thanksgiving, I'll just stay home. Sucks, but I can visit family some other time.
I've looked into Amtrak before and it's disappointing how expensive it is in the US. No wonder people fly so much.
Yup. I've definitely gotten a few excellent, relatively last minute deals on Amtrak before. But most times when I've looked, it just made more sense to fly or drive. Sometimes, Amtrak is even more expensive than flying, while also taking longer to get to the destination!
But there is something to be said about the comfort and convenience of Amtrak over flying. No showing up 2hrs early to the airport. Show up 5min before departure, and you'll still be OK. Don't have to deal with TSA and security. Bags are free if carried-on, and there's basically no size/weight limit (within reason). Plus, you can pretty much bring as many bags as you can carry by yourself, for free. Waaaay comfier seats with faaaar more room; so you're not crammed in like sardines (though on the NER it can sometimes feel that way). You can walk around and eat in the cafe or dining cars. Or can hang out in the observation car, if there is one.
You're definitely paying for that convenience and comfort, plus the experience of the train side itself. Like on long-hauls, it's supposed to be part of your vacation, not just this thing getting you from A-to-B.
Often, air travel is marketed as luxurious and even bougie. When it's anything but, especially domestically, as we know. But to me, Amtrak is far more luxurious, even in Coach.
If you're not in the northeast corridor it pretty much always is, to a hilarious degree. Going from ATL to NYC, for instance, is $700 right now and takes 17 hours, vs $200 and 2 hours on a flight.
Even in the northeast corridor, I find that highway buses are usually way cheaper, and due to the weird routes they take can be as fast. NYC to Boston, for instance, is about the same time on a bus vs amtrak, because amtrak goes the long way and the bus will pretty much drive in a diagonal line. Massive difference in cost, the fancier buses can be had for like $30 one way, whereas amtrak is typically $70 on non-busy days and up to $200 on a busy time.
I still take it sometimes for the northeast routes, but it's really more of a for-fun thing than anything practical.
I've recently learned about those busses like FlixBux and OurBus from some transit YouTubers I watch. I was looking at both recently, since I was thinking about doing a weekend trip soon from DC to NYC. How was the experience? I've never taken Greyhound or Megabus or any intercity bus.
One of these days I want to try the Acela. I know it's not that much faster than the NER, but still would like to try the highest speed rail we have in the US. Even if it isn't high speed through a lot of sections. But I always get hung up on the cost.
I've mainly taken OurBus. It's fine. You usually get more young professionals, less crazy people as in Greyhound. Traffic is a thing, so try to pick times where it won't get caught in peak traffic. There's USB ports and a bathroom that I've never used.
Are they near an Amtrak station? I recently took Amtrak from Chicago to the Bay Area to avoid airport problems.
That’s an interesting idea
I'm supposed to be going to Hawaii on the 25th. I'm so screwed.
Expect airlines to start by cutting shorter, "regional" routes, first. Then they'll prioritize cutting the least revenue generating flights.
I would, however, build in big delays into your itinerary. The thing that will be probably affect you most is TSA, not ATC or this reduction in capacity. Houston already saw 3 hour lines last weekend, and you will start seeing that nationwide if this drags on.
Could airports start paying the salaries of the FAA employees? I think they’d much rather do that than shut down.
I would rather it shutdown— I’m not sure why it’d be good to privatize ATC and gut a unionized federal workforce that has to work in unison across the entire country. If each airport is paying their ATC privately it’ll be a piecemeal thing.
I still wonder why ATCs even come to their workplace. If they ain't getting paid, they should have stayed at home. No ATC = no flights = hell of a pressure to resolve the situation. If there were no flight the next day, it will be resolved that very same day.
They don't even have to be afraid of losing their jobs over this, as I reckon this is very specialized job that needs real experts and there are not hundreds of such people waiting to jump in and run at 100% capacity on day one...
This whole shutdown situation seems absolutely surreal for me (European).
They're legally obligated to continue working, and the more they do work without pay, the more important it is for them to keep working without pay, since stopping would jeopardize the backpay they're supposed to get.
ATCs did do a wildcat strike once (not because of a shutdown), and famously Reagan obliterated them, fired every single one, blacklisted them from any government positions, and temporarily replaced all the ATCs with military ATCs. So yeah, after that, not much resistance since then.
At this point, there's probably a going to be a deal in the next few weeks, so risking the backpay (and career) at this point would seem a poor decision.
That wouldn't be possible today. There's not enough military ATC to cover the amount of flights today. Today we have 44000 flights daily and have 14000 atc. In 1980 we had 20000 flights and 13000atc. We have 3000~ military atc roughly right now.
If we're cutting 10% of flights because of this, there would be 75% cuts to flights if we had to go 3000 ATC. That's not even taking into account the fact that the military would need some ATC and the ones who came wouldn't be familiar with routes, systems, etc.
If any president would say damn the consequences and do it anyways, it'd be trump. Hell he probably wouldn't even know or acknowledge the consequences as possible.
That would be collosal move from him. He already showed how he thinks (or rather don't), this would just add up to that.
It seems absurd to us Americans, too. FWIW, it wasn't always like this. I think this whole shutdown business started in 1980, during the Carter Administration. They reinterpreted the Antideficiency Act, which basically says that the government cannot spend money that hasn't been appropriated by Congress, to apply to situations where a budget (or continuing resolution of the previous budget) hasn't been passed on time. Before this, the government would stay open, operating normally, while Congress continued wrangling over a budget.
And, as you can see with ATC continuing to work, the government isn't really shutdown. It's a misnomer. Some parts are. Or parts of parts. But the majority of federal employees continue to work. Some work with pay like normal. My mom, for example, is a nurse at a VA hospital; she continues to get paid as their funding structure is different. My dad, however, also with the VA but who does IT, is required to work but doesn't get paid on-time. People like me, who are furloughed so we're not working nor getting paid, are only around 700k of the over 2million federal employees.
That's why ATC starting to calling-out sick is such a big deal. Because a month later, this "shutdown" is finally starting to affect the public at large. I mean, things like SNAP benefits running out affects the public, too. But that's only for poor people, and we don't care if they starve. I'm only half-joking, sadly.
There are 40+ million people on SNAP. "The poor" seems more and more like just "the average American" instead.
Looks like it peaked in 2013 but is still much higher compared to before 2008.
On the same page further down, there's also a graph by percentage of US population, which makes it look less dramatic since total population has gone up.
My tinfoil hat, based-in-lala-land, conspiracy theory tiny side of me thinks they're doing this on purpose to eventually get all flights shut down to make it harder for others to leave/come in to the US, kind of as a way to get travel shut down before shit hits the fan. But again, this is probably not realistic or grounded in reality at all and it's just my imagination running wild. Don't take any of it seriously lol.
I don’t think they’re giving any thought to this at all. If it doesn’t affect their day to day, they do not care.
I don’t even really see the conservative news talking about it besides blaming democrats for ???? whatever