And people wonder why I despise flying
.
So Momma's been up in Minnesota the last couple of weeks working disaster relief after the floods. She's flying home tomorrow, albeit by a rather roundabout route.
When they sent her up, she flew from KC to Chicago, then Chicago to Minneapolis. KC to Minneapolis is 435 miles, give or take. KC to Chicago is almost exactly 500 miles. And Chicago to Minneapolis is a little over 400. So they sent her almost 500 miles east so she could get on another plane, fly 400 miles west, and wind up 400-odd miles from where she started.
But it gets better.
Coming home tomorrow, she's going to leave Minneapolis and fly the 435 miles to KC. But she's not going to stop in KC - she's going to continue on south another 550 miles to Dallas, where she will catch a plane to fly back north 550 miles to KC. Look at the map - the most direct route from Minneapolis to Dallas involves flying right over KC.
The explanation for this lunacy is that while there are indeed flights from KC to Minneapolis, (flights I seem to recall being on sale for $39 some years back) these flights are now prohibitively expensive, forcing the would-be passenger to either cough up big bucks for a ticket or waste most of a day shuttling back and forth across the country.
I didn't exactly endear myself to her when I pointed out she could have driven to Minneapolis in the same amount of time (or less) it took her to fly, particularly on the way up where she experienced the traditional O'Hare delays. What exactly is the advantage to flying anymore, since it seems it's no longer faster (or cheaper, despite the price of gas) than driving?
The only way you can get me on a plane these days is to pay me. I'd much rather drive, particularly someplace relatively close like that.
So Momma's been up in Minnesota the last couple of weeks working disaster relief after the floods. She's flying home tomorrow, albeit by a rather roundabout route.
When they sent her up, she flew from KC to Chicago, then Chicago to Minneapolis. KC to Minneapolis is 435 miles, give or take. KC to Chicago is almost exactly 500 miles. And Chicago to Minneapolis is a little over 400. So they sent her almost 500 miles east so she could get on another plane, fly 400 miles west, and wind up 400-odd miles from where she started.
But it gets better.
Coming home tomorrow, she's going to leave Minneapolis and fly the 435 miles to KC. But she's not going to stop in KC - she's going to continue on south another 550 miles to Dallas, where she will catch a plane to fly back north 550 miles to KC. Look at the map - the most direct route from Minneapolis to Dallas involves flying right over KC.
The explanation for this lunacy is that while there are indeed flights from KC to Minneapolis, (flights I seem to recall being on sale for $39 some years back) these flights are now prohibitively expensive, forcing the would-be passenger to either cough up big bucks for a ticket or waste most of a day shuttling back and forth across the country.
I didn't exactly endear myself to her when I pointed out she could have driven to Minneapolis in the same amount of time (or less) it took her to fly, particularly on the way up where she experienced the traditional O'Hare delays. What exactly is the advantage to flying anymore, since it seems it's no longer faster (or cheaper, despite the price of gas) than driving?
The only way you can get me on a plane these days is to pay me. I'd much rather drive, particularly someplace relatively close like that.