In case ofwar... would your travels really decrease?
 

Personally, I'm not sure it would affect me at all. I'd still travel, just not to sensitive areas in the world where I wouldn't go now anyway.

How about you all? Maybe I'm missing something, but why would a war directly impact YOUR decision to travel?

I know the indirect impacts may be due to a lagging economy, more layoffs, etc. but I can't think of one reason why I'd stop travelling.

------------------
When once you have experienced being a 1K, you will forever fly the friendly skies with your eyes set on 100% mileage bonus and SWUs, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return, every year!

I intend to continue booking itineraries as long as UA stays flying... Hopefully that is through 2004, but we shall see...

If UA goes under, then AS and AA win my business.

Personally I will probably continue to fly. However my employer has already started to discorage us from traveling outside of USA.

So I think it will make an impact.

I'm already booked March - April, transpac. I do have some misgivings, not so much about the war, if it happens...so be it, but more concerned UAL would stop flying and I would end up lord knows where http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif or having to pay middle seat coach instead of C (H fare/ug miles) on another airline.

------------------
UA 2P
Flying UA since
1963

Not the least bit worried here. It has not affected my travels at all.

If prices go down significantly, especially to Europe, I anticipate traveling more.

SFO-KIX on March 27, bombs away in Iraq or not!

I am going to the middle east twice in April, so the answer may be yes for me, but only related to these routes.

If the deals start coming, I will travel even more.

More deals ... more travel....

Leaving for Paris 3/22 -- war or no war

Nope...no planes, no billings, no $$$.

I did recently take a pass on a deal in Egypt for May...not worth the argument with Mrs. CoMooter.

Clearly flying transatlantic or to South America or domestically etc you are nowhere near any war action and I personally would not bother on that score.

I cancelled this week a Thai Airways vacation flight SYD-BKK-ROME-MADRID. The BKK-ROME each way looked like it tracked directly OVER Iraq. Sure they will now divert commercial traffic, but not too far is my guess.

When that Texas cowboy finally lets loose with 800 cruise missiles/tomahawks a day in a blitzkreig and Sadaam starts firing back I do not want a "smart" missile thinking that nice big warm 747 nearby is its "target". http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

In the Gulf War the 'success' rate/accuracy of those missiles was atrocious.

------------------
~ Glen ~

Come visit HERE the most ** FRIENDLY FORUM ** on FlyerTalk. No flame wars, no personal abuse, no substance abuse. Not much of anything really!


[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 03-15-2003).]

To me the issue is not the direct consequences of war in Iraq, but the indirect consequences. If there is just one incident on a plane or at an airport, in "retaliation", then the majority of travellers will, in my opinion, be very wary of flying - period!

FYI I'm heading to the US later this week for a couple of weeks.

I will continue to fly as required. My flying is based on customer need and if there is a need, there is a ticket (for me).

I'm still traveling...war or no war. I think with 9/11, we've come to the realization that such extreme tragedies can occur almost anywhere, anytime--to the most gruesome degree. Thinking about those events, traveling may put some of us in even safer environments--especially those living in larger, cosmopolitan cities which are potential targets.

I will still travel (I'm booked to go to London at the end of the month and will go whether war starts or not), but similarly to CoMooter, I expect some heavy weather from Mrs. Law Lord if I plan a trip anywhere near the Middle East.

I wouldn't worry about it, since such cruise missles will never climb to the altitude that a 747 flies by, nor are they heat-seekers.

Employer and client just banned all new travel, and have urged employees to cancel all non-essential travel.

Looks like my wings just got clipped.

Define atrocious...

Compared to the Vietnam war, Korean war, or WWII, the accuracy was astounding.

I'm flying transpac on UA in about 14 hours from when I type this, and then transtlantic in 2 days (to LHR). While Ozstamps aserts that flying transatlantic is no worries, I actually am more aware than ever that flying specially into the UK from the US, both "allies" in the war ahead, will be likely terrorist targets. Added to that, a US major carrier must look tempting.

Having said THAT, I still think the chances are pretty low, and I'm happy to fly, but also wary. I guess I feel it is down to Fate now. As someone else said.. it could strike anywhere.. and I reckon if my time is up then my time is up.. Plus I also don't want to let fear rule my life and NOT do the things I have planned to do, paid to do and darn it WANT to do.

So I'm flying!

------------------
RichardMEL, UA 1K
A Star Alliance Member.

I'm actually more concerned about trans con travel than those outside the U.S. I currently fly SFO to PHL each week and am slated for a SFO to BOS route in the near future. I admit to feeling more wary now that war appears inevitable. Probably not a terribly rational fear as I figure terrorist acts will be targeted at land concerns and not airplanes.

My husband and I have award tickets to MAD scheduled for late April and have no plans on cancelling them (we're flying AC which makes us feel a tad more secure). We figure that as long as we get there, if air travel becomes hairy there are worst places to be stuck than a villa in the Andalucian mountains.

Not much of a concern on this end, with the exception of Japan if the NKs start feeling their oats...

I'll be following you by 24 hours, same Bat-channel, same Bat-time. I am not anticipating anything out of the ordinary...although I expect things will be a little 'tense'...by Wed. evening.

My greatest fear is UA doing a slash and burn on the schedules over the weekend, forcing me onto another return flight next week.

LHR should be nice and lengthy for both in and out...

Probably stay away from the Middle East, but otherwise travel as usual.

No intention of canceling flights that are planned already (MX glitch trip to CUN this weekend!) but if fares fall.. I'm all over it.
Nothing like helping out the economy.. a shame we can't write that off as a tax deduction (Economic Altruism?).

I am flying to Washington D.C. this weekend (Sun-Tue) to do some museum-hopping. As I expect the war to start this week, the only way I will take UA up on their re-book offer is if we go to Condition Red and they close the Smithsonian (sic) complex.

Just flew PSC-SEA-IAD yesterday. Return is set for Saturday. Mrs. PSC 1K another couple and I are SUPPOSED to head to LHR (SEA-SFO-LHR) on the 26th. Just got an e-mail from Mrs. - "I'm more worried and think we should cancel." The other guy and I have some work to do, because we want to go VERY badly. Now if the question is ...Will Tony and George keep us safe? That is different!

Sorry to hear.

As a former (albeit briefly due to the late 80's draw-down) 'ground pounder' it amazes me as to what is now possible compared to ancient history - say 1991. Through plentiful air-support with long loiter times, US Army tactical commanders can bring down a horrendous amount of firepower almost instantaneously on any enemy.

In WWII we (the U.S.) eventually came around to the British belief in (strategic) bombing due to horrendous inaccuracy of U.S. daylight raids over Germany. RAF SOP was - don't burn the factory down - burn the city down and take the factory with it - it's easier. Also unfortunately somewhat more barbaric, but the Nazi's - or the Japanese for that matter - didn't have nearly as effective PR machine as the Iraqi's do now.

As far as tactical air support went, WWII and Korea were not overtly different - Find target, drop munition of choice in its area, and hopefully hit it. Quite bit was not even close.

By the end of Vietnam, the dawn of laser guided PGM's (radio guided missiles and even drone aircraft had been tried with limited effectiveness) had improved guidance systems by many factors. Even though the laser (and to a much more minor extent active systems like IR and radar guided - as well as HARM systems - which lock on to various active electrical emmissions - like radars) were the wonder weapons of Gulf War that was shown on TV, far and away most weaponry dropped during the first Gulf War were still of the old fashioned 'iron bomb' category.

Although accuracy was again much, much better in Gulf War I (due to very good computerized aiming systems), there was a still a greater revolution coming.

In fact, the first Gulf War allowed U.S. conventional stocks left over from the Vietnam War to be expended. Laser PGM's are very expensive and somewhat difficult to guide since most systems are not of the 'fire and forget' variety, an aircraft has to loiter in the area to 'designate' the target until the bomb hits. This time interval can be very dangerous to the designator aircraft.

What has really changed in the last 12 years (and which is really amazing) is the preponderance of cheap GPS systems that are basically just a bomb with a GPS seeker that guides itself, from usually a very high altitude (longer glide path to target=more range) to a pre-programmed 5'x 5' spot on the earth (military GPS is more accurate - on purpose - than civilian systems, even though it uses the same satelites). Fog, rain, smoke have no effect on the munition. The weapons are cheap, easy to deliver, and extremely accurate.

Errors (baring VERY RARE mechanical failure of some type) are now strctly on the part of bad intelligence/G-2 (aka the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade).

In fact, there have been more than a few complaints coming from pilots grumbling that their job has become little more than 'bomb truck' drivers dropping weapons from very long range (and little threat) and going home. The exciting (and life-threatening) jinking 'ack-ack' days are over.

Also, don't worry about Uncle Sadaam causing any damage to a 744 at FL310. Unless someone schedules a commercial flight across Iraq in the first 6 hours of the campaign (the mid/high altitude SAM systems - and radars - that Iraq has that could reach even a nice easy commercial target at usual cruising level will be the first to go bye-bye) there is nothing to worry about.

Final approach (basically crossing the fence at the airport) is the time to worry - a man-portable SAM system would be quite effective against a commercial airliner. But as the Nairobi failed attack against the El Al flight just showed, even these attacks are not easy to execute.

[This message has been edited by CoMooter (edited 03-17-2003).]

All of my flying this quarter is domestic, so I'm not worrying any more than the low-level concern that's always there post 9/11.

Look at the bright side: If the international schedules are slashed, I just might find myself in a 777 DEN-SEA, or a 744 DEN-MIA! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

------------------
Brian/\/\

My domestic travels will be unaffected by the war, and I'm 99% sure I will still do the 15 April trip to LHR - even if we are at war. I'd avoid the Middle East and many Third World countries if I had plans to visit them in the next month or two.

I feel comfortable in London (I'm there 4-5 times per year), keep a low profile, and avoid standing out as an American (use hotels and restaurants frequented by locals, wear shoes and some clothing purchased in the UK, etc.).

However, terrorism aimed at the airline industry would be an entirely different matter.

No. It does not change my travel plan. In contrary, I just booked a flight to HKG for this November for $590.00 --- H fare and is upgradable with SWUs.

[This message has been edited by Squirrel (edited 03-17-2003).]

Colo:

It's much better to dress like a Brit all the time (One of my Barbour's is usually with me, sometimes even with a suit) to avoid any problems...

You blend in on one end (until you open your mouth) and you are always well dressed on the other.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Recently in Malaysia I saw Texans with the ten gallon hat, cowboy boots and giant belt buckle. My advice would be to leave the cowboy kit at home if you plan to travel in this region. It attracts unwanted attention.

I doubt that Terrorists would even get a view of any of the US-UK flights. The security will be so ****ed tight that they won't get a chance. Remember, they also follow the rule "strike at enemy's weak spot". I think you'll be very safe.

Yes, I am also flying out to BKK-TPE-SIN in 24 hours. Unfortunately my chance of picking up a virus will be higher than your chance of meeting a terrorist.

I'm worried about some award tix that I just gave to my 2 aunts to go to LHR in May. Even though the airlines have promised to reaccomodate paid tix, I'm wondering what their going to do with my F award tix. After the war is over, I don't see them trying to release any award F inventory.

------------------
Tired of the threat of blacklisting and profiling?

Stop the CAPPS II madness.

http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...ML/000064.html.

NOPE.
We have tix (4), for April 10 to go to TLV via FRA, if LH will only gracefully fly there. Didn't have a problem upgrading them with the new SWU... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Still planning to commute to work.
War or not I still have to make a living.

Now that it looks like really coming, I mean war, I am cancelling seven flights booked on 20 and 21 March, two of which were with UA.

I have several domestic and transatlantic flights planned, and have no intention of staying home. I do, however, share to some extent RichardMEL's and jacksf's concerns.

As of today, my employer has just issued a world wide travel restriction. All employees are urged to return home as soon as practicle.

Personally I am not seriously worried, except about possible extra delays at the airports.