5 ms·

It also potentially eliminates the need for 1-2 nights of hotel rooms. Depending on your travel situation, that might be more convenient.

by cvsh 9y ago

sologoub 9y ago
The main advantage seems to be no travel the morning of and no need for a hotel for previous night. However, I usually do 6-7am flights and get there before 9am, 10am to office after BART from SFO. Flights back go as late as 9pm. In the end, southwest will set you back less than $120 if you book in advance. I also much prefer my own bed, as opposed to hotels or buses, but that's a personal preference.
et-al 9y ago
Except in this case we're talking about SF/LA, which is only an hour-long flight. I do this flight every other month or so and it's a breeze. You leave work a bit early on Friday, get to the airport in about an hour, board the plane, they serve you a drink, and the captain tells you to fasten your seatbelt because we're descending. It's 1 hour to the airport, 45 minutes through security, 1 hour in the air, and another 45 min to my friend's house. So 3.5 hours, but round it up to 4 hours door to door. Sure, summer months have weather delays like low ceilings at SFO, but otherwise it's one of the smoother journeys one can have. I guess if you party in SF on Friday, and sleep and sober up on a midnight bus, and go HAM all weekend in LA, then recharge on the return leg for Monday. However, I'm too old for that and would much rather sleep in a proper bed.
- matthewowen 9y ago
  Imagine that you aren't staying at a friend's house, but rather at a hotel or AirBnB. Avoiding paying for one extra night instantly saves you money. And if you don't expect to do much the night you arrive anyway, there's no real cost (plus you don't have to leave work early, which may be advantageous).
  - et-al 9y ago
    I think in that case, I'd rather take an early morning flight like sologoub mentioned. And like dopeboy pointed out, if this was $100 RT, it would appeal to price sensitive people. And regardless of how comfortable they make it, for many of us in the States, it's still an 8-hour bus ride.
    - matthewowen 9y ago
      An SF flight that gets you to LA by 9am realistically requires you to leave the house around 6am: wheels down at 8:30am, wheels up at 7:30am, boarding at 7am (if you want space for yr hand luggage), arrive at the airport by 6:30am, leave the house at 6am. And those are fairly aggressive timings IMO. I want to try this service, because if the sleep is really bad then I agree that it's no use. But if it's even close to comparable to taking a sleeper train, I'd much prefer it: I've always slept well on those, and I'd much sooner not have the 5am start.
      - et-al 9y ago
        Few days late, sorry. Just wanted to say those are all good points. If it's comparable to a sleeper train, like you mentioned, I agree that it could be a feasible option.

It also potentially eliminates the need for 1-2 nights of hotel rooms. Depending on your travel situation, that might be more convenient.

by cvsh 9y ago

It also potentially eliminates the need for 1-2 nights of hotel rooms. Depending on your travel situation, that might be more convenient.

sologoub 9y ago

The main advantage seems to be no travel the morning of and no need for a hotel for previous night. However, I usually do 6-7am flights and get there before 9am, 10am to office after BART from SFO. Flights back go as late as 9pm. In the end, southwest will set you back less than $120 if you book in advance. I also much prefer my own bed, as opposed to hotels or buses, but that's a personal preference.

et-al 9y ago

Except in this case we're talking about SF/LA, which is only an hour-long flight. I do this flight every other month or so and it's a breeze. You leave work a bit early on Friday, get to the airport in about an hour, board the plane, they serve you a drink, and the captain tells you to fasten your seatbelt because we're descending. It's 1 hour to the airport, 45 minutes through security, 1 hour in the air, and another 45 min to my friend's house. So 3.5 hours, but round it up to 4 hours door to door. Sure, summer months have weather delays like low ceilings at SFO, but otherwise it's one of the smoother journeys one can have. I guess if you party in SF on Friday, and sleep and sober up on a midnight bus, and go HAM all weekend in LA, then recharge on the return leg for Monday. However, I'm too old for that and would much rather sleep in a proper bed.

matthewowen 9y ago
Imagine that you aren't staying at a friend's house, but rather at a hotel or AirBnB. Avoiding paying for one extra night instantly saves you money. And if you don't expect to do much the night you arrive anyway, there's no real cost (plus you don't have to leave work early, which may be advantageous).
- et-al 9y ago
  I think in that case, I'd rather take an early morning flight like sologoub mentioned. And like dopeboy pointed out, if this was $100 RT, it would appeal to price sensitive people. And regardless of how comfortable they make it, for many of us in the States, it's still an 8-hour bus ride.
  - matthewowen 9y ago
    An SF flight that gets you to LA by 9am realistically requires you to leave the house around 6am: wheels down at 8:30am, wheels up at 7:30am, boarding at 7am (if you want space for yr hand luggage), arrive at the airport by 6:30am, leave the house at 6am. And those are fairly aggressive timings IMO. I want to try this service, because if the sleep is really bad then I agree that it's no use. But if it's even close to comparable to taking a sleeper train, I'd much prefer it: I've always slept well on those, and I'd much sooner not have the 5am start.
    - et-al 9y ago
      Few days late, sorry. Just wanted to say those are all good points. If it's comparable to a sleeper train, like you mentioned, I agree that it could be a feasible option.