So, in case you didn't catch it on Facebook, Delta Airlines has seen fit to cancel our direct flight from Sacraghetto to Atlanta, on the way to Jamaica in December. Now they want us to go from Sac to Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City to Atlanta, and Atlanta to Montego Bay.
Yes, with a 9 month old.
Initially, my reaction was the same as yours probably is - is she nucking futs????
But then, I looked at the schedule. Originally the flight into Atlanta from Sac left us with a 3-4 hour layover before getting on the last leg to Jamaica. Now, with the new schedule, we're leaving about 1/2 an hour earlier from Sac but they're having us take that same final flight from Atlanta to Jamaica, arriving at the same time. So, instead of a 3-4 hour layover, we only have like 90-120 minutes. The two flights (Sac to SLC and SLC to Atlanta) take-up that extra time inbetween and we're actually only adding 30 minutes of travel time to the day.
Therefore, the question remains: Is is better to take a 9 month old on 3 flights with shorter gaps between them or 2 flights with a bunch more downtime between?I'm torn. Right now, I would say the first but who knows what Daisy is going to be like 3 months from now? Plus, I also have to take into consideration the increased likelihood of delays and missed connections or lost luggage, the more flights we take. ACK!
The Expedia.com representative says she can contact Delta and see if they can come up with a better route but the reality is that they then cannot guarantee the dates or the price (which is already pretty hefty.)
Since I am the travel planner extraordinaire, the final decision sort of lands with me, says my family. Of course, what this means in reality is that they then get to bitch-and-whine about whatever decision I make when it goes wrong.