flyingdelta

What are people's preference assuming you have to connect.
Example: you are at Des Moines and are flying to a place like Zurich that is only served via JFK.
Option A - DSM-MSP-AMS-ZUR
Option B: DSM-MSP-JFK-ZUR

I'm just using that as an example but you could extrapolate to a lot of scenarios (flying to Seoul from LAX; connect in US or connect in Tokyo). Assuming price / schedule isn't a consideration, what do you think most passengers and Delta would prefer?
Option A benefits: getting overseas quicker where schedules are more robust within that part of world. starting to get used to time zone
Option B benefits: not having to connect cities jetlagged or deal with foreign airports. Delta maybe gets more revenue not handing off to KLM / AF / other skyteam carriers.

Even from hubs, this conundrum would come up. Someone based in MSP, DTW, or SLC would often have the same situation unless one of the core overseas markets (AMS, LHR, CDG, HND) is the destination. And I've seen both connecting in US and Europe sold by Delta so it doesn't seem they push one over the other.

cbn42

I don't think there's a universal answer. If the number of stops is the same, and both options are feasible (enough time to clear immigration/customs security whenever needed) I usually look at the total travel time.

Living near LAX, almost all my international travel is nonstop to the foreign country, as this tends to work out cheaper and easier, but for someone in a smaller market it might be different.

Then there is the novelty factor, I like to try new airlines and new airports.

guv1976

Seat pitch on most intra-European flights is paltry -- even in Business Class, on some carriers. I would try to avoid an intra-European flight of any significant length if you can travel to your European destination from a U.S. gateway.

flyingdelta

I wonder how often customs/immigration could be a consideration. Obviously Europe has Schengen but would think outside of that, avoiding country connections would be better right because less painful connections.

flyingdelta

what about from Delta's point of view. Is it advantageous to keep people on their metal instead of codeshare (assuming two options)?

flyerCO

It depends ehich direction and which airport/country. Some countries require you to clear immigration and/or collect bags when transiting. Some airports require reclearing security and some don't.

DL/AF/KL/VS all share revenue on TATL flights between US/EUROPE.

Flying east to Europe, it depends on how long the domestic flight is and what type of aircraft. Also depends if I can fly nonstop to LHR/AMS/CDG to connect instead of double connecting once in both. Ie AUS-AMS-OTP instead of AUS-ATL-AMS-OTP.

Coming back west, prefer connecting in Europe. No need to collect bags and recheck like would if connecting in US. No need to reclear security. (Unless need connect again in US)

Duke787

Where possible I prefer to connect in the US on the outbound so I can have the long flight land directly at my destination without having to further connect.

On the return I prefer to connect in Europe for the same reason.

Unfortunately being based out of RDU, for Asia a connection is always required in the US so I prefer connecting in ATL or DTW if possible to have the shortest possible domestic flight (because the international flight is going to be long no matter what). The only exception is if I can clear any kind of upgrade to D1 in which case connecting through MSP or SEA is worth it

Connecting in Europe and Asia is generally pretty straightforward and certainly more straightforward than connecting in the US (even as a US citizen with GE). It’s only a PITA if you get stuck in a long immigration line.

DL doesn’t care. They have revenue neutral JVs with AF/KLM/VS for TATL and with KE for TPAC. Delta also has equity ownership stakes in all of their JV partners as well.

Same as the setup that AA and UA have with their partners

HDQDD

I agree on the first count, and disagree on the second (but probably because I'm also RDU based, and really don't want to connect in LHR or CDG (or KEF), so there are no other Euro to RDU options. ). Now if we had an AMS flight I might change my mind.

I go to secondary cities in Europe often (ARN, BER, STR, MXP, PRG). I used to do RDU-CDG-onward, but I've decided I prefer RDU-ATL/DTW/BOS/JFK-onward over connecting in CDG. As Duke787 said, it's really nice to get off a long haul and not have to wait a few hours and then take a short flight... I don't sleep on planes, so it's even more important to me.

One caveat here...when flying to Eur, if you do get a non-stop from the US, you will likely arrive in your destination very early in the morning(7-10AMish). Often hotels will not let you check in that early. I've been fortunate in the last few years that they've had a clean room I can check into, but I imagine my luck will eventually run out.

FlyerfromORD

I fly to Asia and Europe quite frequently out of ORD.

Asia - Some destinations are non-stops, others have no non-stop option from ORD. Various airlines - going to Asia, I opt for the Asian carriers even if United or American has a scheduled flight.(I've not flown Delta for years - options aren't great at ORD for me.) I've found the seating better and service level higher on Cathay Pacific, ANA, New Zealand Air than on US carriers. When I've had to make connections, I've always connected in Asia - usually Hong Kong pre-Covid, now Japan. My reasoning is that those Asian carriers fly one plane per day back and forth - they want to get the plane in the air as long as safety is assured. With the domestic carriers, there are too many moving parts to the overall airline schedule. Bad weather in the network can mean I don't get to the West Coast for a departure. If I'm stuck somewhere, I'd rather be stuck in Asia closer to the final destination.

Europe - I tend to fly American or United these days except to Scandinavia where it is SAS for non-stops. I'm not impressed with any European carrier or the US carriers either for that matter. Open to suggestions! With the same reasoning above, I connect in Europe if necessary. Too much "commotion" possible that will disrupt a connection at JFK or elsewhere for the few destinations where I can't get a non-stop from ORD.

BearX220

To me the disruption threat is greater that way, and I am more disruption-sensitive at the start of a trip than returning. For example, I think it is high risk to book a short leg into EWR or JFK with a two- or three-hour connection to a longhaul; every day RJs full of would-be TATL travelers get held on the ground for ATC at SYR, BUF, BTV, etc. and they miss their second, long flights. I would rather fly the long leg first to a Eurohub and if necessary rebook my second, short leg.

Coming home I tend to go for the same model (short, connecting leg in Europe) because I care somewhat less about schedule rigor. If busted flights mean an extra night in London or Paris, fine.

Adam1222

A big factor for me is that if I connect in the US, I can leave out of DCA, versus a single connection in Europe/Asia for me usually requires flying out of IAD on either KL, VS, KE, or AF. I don't mind flying on those airlines, but IAD is schlep.

GagaPilot

Being based in ANC a connection to the lower 48 is always required (usually SEA, but occasionally MSP or ATL). A few recent examples of trips I took and how they turned out:

ANC-SEA-MSP-CDG: We had a mechanical leaving ANC, resulting in a missed connection in SEA to MSP and onward to CDG. We got to SEA so late in the day that we were able to get on an evening direct to CDG, which meant losing a half day in Paris.

ANC-SEA-ATL-FCO: The middle segment, SEA-ATL, was highly delayed, but we managed to barely make it onto the FCO flight. All worked out, but created lots of stress.

ANC-SEA-ICN-BKK: The timing of the SEA-ICN segment doesn't work great for us. It's either leave on a 6 AM flight out of ANC, with a very short (less than 1 hour) connection in SEA or leave on a 12 AM from ANC creating a 5-6 hour connection in SEA. We go with the longer connection for peace of mind and because there's not a multitude of options from SEA to get to ICN. That said, once we get to ICN, I'm more comfortable with a shorter connection there because Asian airports tend to be VERY efficient in getting connecting passengers to where they need to go, and there's many more options to get us to BKK if needed.

VCE-AMS-SEA-ANC: Short intra EU flight to position for the long TATL. If we were to begin our day with a direct out of VCE to ATL, we would arrive so late into the US that options would be very limited to then get all the way back up to ANC. The earlier morning intra EU departure allowed us to get to AMS sooner, thus getting home in one day of travel vs two.

So ultimately it varies. I do feel that the more connections one has the more "risky" the itinerary is. I think connecting in the US carries a slightly greater risk because of overall schedule disruptions and rebooking from an international hub might be easier. But it all depends on the destination and the frequency of where you need to go (not to mention the ease of rebooking once there, language barriers, etc).

Also always great to review codeshare partner mileage earnings when flying on a different marketing carrier than DL on a DL itinerary.

kavok

For me:

Rule 1: Minimize connections (reasonably). Even though I am not a CDG fan, if connecting there means 1 less connection than going through JFK, the choice is easy.

Rule 2: Wherever possible, connect through ATL or DTW over JFK & BOS, all else equal. The experience and reliability of the two core hubs makes those the winner, again unless JFK/BOS offer a nonstop DTW/ATL doesn’t.

18sas

Definitely an "it depends" situation.

Flying US>EUR: As a rule of thumb, to connect stateside, you will need to depart your origin earlier and arrive at your destination earlier. If you connect in AMS/CDG, you will generally depart later and arrive later.

• As an example, MIA>JFK/ATL>MAD, you'll likely need to depart early afternoon and arrive early to mid morning.
• MIA>CDG>MAD, you'll depart around 8PM and arrive in MAD 4ish.

Flying EUR>US: It's the opposite. Connecting in Europe usually means an early morning departure, and an early afternoon arrival. Connecting in the US, means late morning departure, and a late afternoon or early evening arrival.

• MAD>AMS>ORD would depart around 6AM, and arrive back in ORD around 2.
• MAD>JFK>ORD departs around 10AM and arrives in ORD at 6.

sydneyracquelle

I much prefer the longer flight first and getting it over with. I don’t like risking a misconnect from a short hop to overseas.