News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Has anyone flown since Covid??

Started by OCGuy81, February 22, 2021, 03:14:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

JayhawkCO

Quote from: formulanone on April 18, 2021, 07:48:27 PM
United also gives the option to swap out your itinerary if you're not inclined to fly on a 737 MAX, but I have no idea how they'd rebook you if it's not a common route with available options.

I have a DEN-ANC flight that's currently booked on a MAX.  Unfortunately any switches would add at least three hours of flight time.

Chris


formulanone

#51
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 19, 2021, 03:46:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 18, 2021, 07:48:27 PM
United also gives the option to swap out your itinerary if you're not inclined to fly on a 737 MAX, but I have no idea how they'd rebook you if it's not a common route with available options.

I have a DEN-ANC flight that's currently booked on a MAX.  Unfortunately any switches would add at least three hours of flight time.

Chris

As of this afternoon, I can live to tell about my flight on a 737 MAX 9. There's not much to say; it's just another 737, from the interior look and feel of things.



Flight was nearly-full, from what I could tell. I didn't get a look at the final seat map, since I'd chosen my seat an noted they didn't switch out the aircraft type. They did not seem to make mention of it being a "MAX" at the gate, and didn't mention it when boarding nor during the safety demonstration.

The only oddity was that they asked passengers to refrain from using the included charging ports during takeoff and landing procedures, but they didn't seem to enforce it in any meaningful way. They mentioned it once before we backed away from the gate, and I suppose the flight crew doesn't want one more thing to police.

gonealookin

#52
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 19, 2021, 03:46:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on April 18, 2021, 07:48:27 PM
United also gives the option to swap out your itinerary if you're not inclined to fly on a 737 MAX, but I have no idea how they'd rebook you if it's not a common route with available options.

I have a DEN-ANC flight that's currently booked on a MAX.  Unfortunately any switches would add at least three hours of flight time.

Chris
I thought the 737 MAX 9 (which was United, IAH-FLL) was a really nice airplane.  The overhead bins are enormous; in fact you're directed to put your carryon bag in on its side, and my 20x14x9 went in with room to spare.  I see I have a Southwest 737 MAX 8 on the schedule in May (DEN-SMF) so I'll see if I like Southwest's version as much.  I don't have the least bit of hesitation about flying the MAX; if the pilots' union wasn't satisfied with the safety corrections there wouldn't be anybody making announcements from the flight deck, and hell, I survived plenty of DC-10 flights back in the day (they didn't have the greatest reputation).

kphoger

Man, I really need to schedule a passport appointment, because mine expired in January.  I was thinking of offering to help my friends move their stuff from a storage shed here in Wichita to a storage shed in Del Rio (TX), but then I realized I don't have any ID that could let me board a plane back home again.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

JayhawkCO

Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:19:45 AM
Man, I really need to schedule a passport appointment, because mine expired in January.  I was thinking of offering to help my friends move their stuff from a storage shed here in Wichita to a storage shed in Del Rio (TX), but then I realized I don't have any ID that could let me board a plane back home again.

Kansas licenses still not Real ID?

Chris

kphoger

Quote from: jayhawkco on April 20, 2021, 10:21:04 AM

Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:19:45 AM
Man, I really need to schedule a passport appointment, because mine expired in January.  I was thinking of offering to help my friends move their stuff from a storage shed here in Wichita to a storage shed in Del Rio (TX), but then I realized I don't have any ID that could let me board a plane back home again.

Kansas licenses still not Real ID?

Last time I got mine renewed, I was missing a form, so I couldn't get a Real ID.  I didn't worry about that, because I can always use my passport instead.  Well, now I'm stuck without a valid passport for the first time since–well, gosh, since I first got one in junior high, I guess.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

doorknob60

Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 11:30:31 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 20, 2021, 10:21:04 AM

Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:19:45 AM
Man, I really need to schedule a passport appointment, because mine expired in January.  I was thinking of offering to help my friends move their stuff from a storage shed here in Wichita to a storage shed in Del Rio (TX), but then I realized I don't have any ID that could let me board a plane back home again.

Kansas licenses still not Real ID?

Last time I got mine renewed, I was missing a form, so I couldn't get a Real ID.  I didn't worry about that, because I can always use my passport instead.  Well, now I'm stuck without a valid passport for the first time since–well, gosh, since I first got one in junior high, I guess.

The Real ID deadline was extended to Oct 1st 2021 because of Covid, so you're good for now. My wife had the same problem when she got her ID renewed, and we haven't fixed it yet, haven't had any trouble traveling (we flew in January).

kphoger

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Scott5114

I had a similar problem getting a Real ID. My license expired at the end of February, so beginning of February I went into my safe to try to find my birth certificate...nothing there. So that means my mom has it. I call her up, she puts off going through her safe, finally comes over around Valentine's Day...with the hospital birth certificate, not the official state one. She says she's never had an official state one for me. So by this point I've got like a week left, and no birth certificate. I go to look up how to get a replacement birth certificate...and requesting one requires a copy of a valid driver license, which is what I'm trying to get by getting a birth certificate in the first place!

Real ID has the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety all jacked up. Even though in Oklahoma, you go to a private tag agent rather than standing in line at the state offices, they all still have to interface with the DPS computer system, and that system is slow as hell, to the point that doing a driver license renewal takes 30 minutes (just to complete and submit the paperwork, you get your physical card in the mail). The first tag agent I went to said they open up at 6am sharp, first come first served, get there at 6 and hope you manage to get a slot sometime that day to do your license. The second tag agent I went to had a sign up that just said "WE AREN'T DOING ANY MORE DRIVER LICENSE RENEWALS TODAY." I called the tag agent down in Goldsby, figuring there would be less demand, but they had an appointment system set up and were booked all the way through March.

Fortunately, I found out that you can do non-Real ID renewals through the mail, so I did that. There was an online form you had to fill out, which required attaching a new photo according to the DPS guidelines. I did that on February 26, and my new license didn't arrive until March 22. And, despite having a fancy new DL design introduced at the time they did Real ID, they sent an exact copy of my old license, with the old design and the old photo, just the expiration date changed and "NOT VALID FOR REAL ID PURPOSES" in the corner.

So yeah, if anyone's wondering, the rest of the Oklahoma government is not any better than ODOT.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Roadgeekteen

Do airlines have passengers sit next to each other during covid?
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

webny99

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 09:33:07 PM
Do airlines have passengers sit next to each other during covid?

Yes, at least within the US. And there are more infected people flying than you might think. Some family friends of ours came down with Covid after returning from a trip, and they're 99% sure they got it from the crowded plane. Personally I'm planning to avoid flying until I'm vaccinated.

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: webny99 on April 20, 2021, 09:39:07 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 09:33:07 PM
Do airlines have passengers sit next to each other during covid?

Yes, at least within the US. And there are more infected people flying than you might think. Some family friends of ours came down with Covid after returning from a trip, and they're 99% sure they got it from the crowded plane. Personally I'm planning to avoid flying until I'm vaccinated.
Me too. They should at least block off the middle seat.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

Rothman

When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

tolbs17

Have been going indoors for essential reasons.

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: Rothman on April 20, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
People are stupid and selfish.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

US 89

#65
The Real ID deadline extension made no difference in Utah, because by the time the feds announced that, the state had already paid to make new, Real ID-compliant licenses with the little gold star on them for anyone whose old license was going to expire after the original deadline.

I was one of those. My drivers license at the start of 2020 was issued back in January 2016, and was actually one of the last issued with the old, non-Real ID compliant design (they switched to the new design in June 2016). At the time, a Utah drivers license was valid for five years, so it was set to expire in January 2021. Since that was after the original federal Real ID deadline of October 2020, the state mailed me a compliant license with the new design at some point last summer. Of course, it was only valid for about 6 months, and I had to actually renew by January... so I had three separate licenses over a span of about six months.

Duke87

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 20, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
People are stupid and selfish.

Or, well, people respond to the incentives they are given, even if they are perverse.

Say, for example, you're on vacation and you decide to go to get tested before flying home in order to comply with your home state's travel rules. You feel fine, but surprise! Your test comes back positive. You now have two options:

1) Reschedule your flight, extend your car rental (if you have one), and spend the next two weeks locked in a hotel room, all on your own dime. Oh and if you didn't think to bring your work laptop with you, you may have to either lose two weeks of pay or burn an extra two weeks of vacation time.

2) Go ahead and get on your flight home anyway, just don't say anything to anyone about having tested positive, and then when you get home just stay home for the next two weeks and comply with the travel rules that way.

While option 1 is certainly the preferred one for the sake of public health, the fact of the matter is that option 1 costs the affected individual a significant sum of their own money, while option 2 likely costs the affected individual nothing since no US jurisdiction other than Hawaii has been imposing legal penalties against people for doing this. Thus, a lot of people will chose option 2 in order to save themselves what could easily be a four-figure sum of money. And while it may be tempting to deride this decision as "stupid and selfish", this ignores the fact that the policies we have in place strongly encourage it.

I would therefore blame the folks making public policy for creating and then failing to eliminate this perverse incentive far more than I would blame any individual for making the totally rational decision to respond to it accordingly.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2021, 02:30:19 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 20, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
People are stupid and selfish.

Or, well, people respond to the incentives they are given, even if they are perverse.

Say, for example, you're on vacation and you decide to go to get tested before flying home in order to comply with your home state's travel rules. You feel fine, but surprise! Your test comes back positive. You now have two options:

1) Reschedule your flight, extend your car rental (if you have one), and spend the next two weeks locked in a hotel room, all on your own dime. Oh and if you didn't think to bring your work laptop with you, you may have to either lose two weeks of pay or burn an extra two weeks of vacation time.

2) Go ahead and get on your flight home anyway, just don't say anything to anyone about having tested positive, and then when you get home just stay home for the next two weeks and comply with the travel rules that way.

While option 1 is certainly the preferred one for the sake of public health, the fact of the matter is that option 1 costs the affected individual a significant sum of their own money, while option 2 likely costs the affected individual nothing since no US jurisdiction other than Hawaii has been imposing legal penalties against people for doing this. Thus, a lot of people will chose option 2 in order to save themselves what could easily be a four-figure sum of money. And while it may be tempting to deride this decision as "stupid and selfish", this ignores the fact that the policies we have in place strongly encourage it.

I would therefore blame the folks making public policy for creating and then failing to eliminate this perverse incentive far more than I would blame any individual for making the totally rational decision to respond to it accordingly.
How would you disincentive doing this?
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

Rothman

#68
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2021, 02:30:19 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 20, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
People are stupid and selfish.

Or, well, people respond to the incentives they are given, even if they are perverse.

Say, for example, you're on vacation and you decide to go to get tested before flying home in order to comply with your home state's travel rules. You feel fine, but surprise! Your test comes back positive. You now have two options:

1) Reschedule your flight, extend your car rental (if you have one), and spend the next two weeks locked in a hotel room, all on your own dime. Oh and if you didn't think to bring your work laptop with you, you may have to either lose two weeks of pay or burn an extra two weeks of vacation time.

2) Go ahead and get on your flight home anyway, just don't say anything to anyone about having tested positive, and then when you get home just stay home for the next two weeks and comply with the travel rules that way.

While option 1 is certainly the preferred one for the sake of public health, the fact of the matter is that option 1 costs the affected individual a significant sum of their own money, while option 2 likely costs the affected individual nothing since no US jurisdiction other than Hawaii has been imposing legal penalties against people for doing this. Thus, a lot of people will chose option 2 in order to save themselves what could easily be a four-figure sum of money. And while it may be tempting to deride this decision as "stupid and selfish", this ignores the fact that the policies we have in place strongly encourage it.

I would therefore blame the folks making public policy for creating and then failing to eliminate this perverse incentive far more than I would blame any individual for making the totally rational decision to respond to it accordingly.
I don't see how what you're saying negates the idea that option 2 is selfish.

"I could either follow the law or spread the virus and possibly kill someone."

That said, I suppose the disincentive would have been stricter regulation of the airlines or some harsher controls on recreational travel in particular.

At least in my daughter's experience, the COVID flyers were mostly people visiting Florida from Connecticut.  There was one guy who tried lying and saying he was in CT, but one of his relatives ratted him out -- he was in NC.

There are some terrible people out there.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Duke87

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 21, 2021, 02:38:53 AM
How would you disincentive doing this?

Well, it's about moot at this point since we're rapidly approaching a situation where if anyone is unvaccinated that is purely by their own decision. But, logically, there would have been three potential solutions:
1) Impose fines/other penalties for failure to immediately proceed to quarantine upon receiving positive test results that are greater than the cost of quarantining away from home
2) Have Uncle Sam pick up the tab for all quarantine costs
3) Prohibit flying for non-essential reasons, such that the conundrum never arises in the first place

Of course, these are all politically unpopular ideas, which is why we did not implement any of them.

Quote from: Rothman on April 21, 2021, 07:06:21 AM
I don't see how what you're saying negates the idea that option 2 is selfish.

It doesn't, in the most technical sense. What it does is provide context, emphasizing that the burden on the individual of doing the right thing (option 1) is quite high. Indeed, there are enough people in this country living on the edge of their means that I'm sure some people who decided to fly home anyway legit could not afford to spend an extra two weeks in a hotel.

QuoteAt least in my daughter's experience, the COVID flyers were mostly people visiting Florida from Connecticut.

Yeah, that's not surprising at all. Florida seems to be the place to go for people who want to travel and be reckless about it. Part of why, even though I've willingly flown several times in the last year, flying to Florida specifically was still a big nope.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

kphoger

Quote from: Rothman on April 21, 2021, 07:06:21 AM
I don't see how what you're saying negates the idea that option 2 is selfish.

"If we choose Option 1, then my company will be in a bind because I can't do my job."

"If we choose Option 1, then my children will miss two weeks of their schooling."

et cetera
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

kphoger

Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2021, 11:33:29 AM
3) Prohibit flying for non-essential reasons, such that the conundrum never arises in the first place

It would still arise.  During the height of COVID, my former boss was working for a company that sets up telecom systems in hotels all over the country.  Communications is considered an essential business on all the lists I've seen.  Part of his job was to go out to work sites that had some sort of problem and clean up the mess.  Now imagine that he came down with COVID while he was out in San Francisco or Newark or somewhere far away on the company dime.  The company he worked for could barely stay afloat well enough to pay its employees on time, so do you think they'd want to pay for two extra weeks of hotel stay for him?  I could imagine him flying back home while knowingly infected, in order to save the company–whose owner is a personal friend of his–thousands of dollars.  And I could certainly imagine someone else in a similar situation, but with less ethical integrity, doing the same.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

hbelkins

Quote from: kphoger on April 21, 2021, 11:42:31 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2021, 11:33:29 AM
3) Prohibit flying for non-essential reasons, such that the conundrum never arises in the first place

It would still arise.  During the height of COVID, my former boss was working for a company that sets up telecom systems in hotels all over the country.  Communications is considered an essential business on all the lists I've seen.  Part of his job was to go out to work sites that had some sort of problem and clean up the mess.  Now imagine that he came down with COVID while he was out in San Francisco or Newark or somewhere far away on the company dime.  The company he worked for could barely stay afloat well enough to pay its employees on time, so do you think they'd want to pay for two extra weeks of hotel stay for him?  I could imagine him flying back home while knowingly infected, in order to save the company–whose owner is a personal friend of his–thousands of dollars.  And I could certainly imagine someone else in a similar situation, but with less ethical integrity, doing the same.

How about providing him with a rental car and having him drive home? Any interactions he might have with other individuals on his drive home would fall well within allowable thresholds for safe contact with others.

Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2021, 02:30:19 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 20, 2021, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 20, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
When my daughter was a contact tracer, it was horrifying how many people knowingly flew while infected.
People are stupid and selfish.

Or, well, people respond to the incentives they are given, even if they are perverse.

Say, for example, you're on vacation and you decide to go to get tested before flying home in order to comply with your home state's travel rules. You feel fine, but surprise! Your test comes back positive. You now have two options:

1) Reschedule your flight, extend your car rental (if you have one), and spend the next two weeks locked in a hotel room, all on your own dime. Oh and if you didn't think to bring your work laptop with you, you may have to either lose two weeks of pay or burn an extra two weeks of vacation time.

2) Go ahead and get on your flight home anyway, just don't say anything to anyone about having tested positive, and then when you get home just stay home for the next two weeks and comply with the travel rules that way.

While option 1 is certainly the preferred one for the sake of public health, the fact of the matter is that option 1 costs the affected individual a significant sum of their own money, while option 2 likely costs the affected individual nothing since no US jurisdiction other than Hawaii has been imposing legal penalties against people for doing this. Thus, a lot of people will chose option 2 in order to save themselves what could easily be a four-figure sum of money. And while it may be tempting to deride this decision as "stupid and selfish", this ignores the fact that the policies we have in place strongly encourage it.

I would therefore blame the folks making public policy for creating and then failing to eliminate this perverse incentive far more than I would blame any individual for making the totally rational decision to respond to it accordingly.

I'm guessing those are the rapid tests, which are notorious for false positives. So it's quite likely that those people who "knowingly flew while infected" actually weren't infected.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

kphoger

Quote from: hbelkins on April 21, 2021, 12:05:06 PM
How about providing him with a rental car and having him drive home? Any interactions he might have with other individuals on his drive home would fall well within allowable thresholds for safe contact with others.

So now you're assuming that (1) he would tell his manager, and that (2) his manager would knowingly provide the means to let n COVID-infected employee travel on a multi-state multi-day road trip, violating all sorts of public health travel orders along the way?
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Rothman



Quote from: hbelkins on April 21, 2021, 12:05:06 PM

I'm guessing those are the rapid tests, which are notorious for false positives. So it's quite likely that those people who "knowingly flew while infected" actually weren't infected.

What an irrational way to rationalize -- to guess that they all got rapid tests and that rapid tests are 100% unreliable.  No, they were not rapid tests and, even if they were, the false positive rate isn't that high with them.

Contrary to popular belief, there are terrible people out there that put their desire to travel above the safety of others by knowingly spreading a deadly disease.

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.