aj411

fly.
Interesting report from IATA this week. It does indicate data is limited but includes comment on community transmission on planes. Not so good for crew but for passengers it seems fairly low risk - especially with current loads.https://www.iata.org/contentassets/f...ies-200508.pdf

"Little is available in the way of published research on in-flight transmission of COVID-19. One paper from Canada reports careful follow up of a long-haul flight on which someone later confirmed to have been unwell at the time, but no secondary cases resulted. A recent public report shows that a flight on 31 March from USA to China Taipei with 12 people subsequently confirmed to be symptomatic at the time of flight, generated no secondary confirmed cases from the 328 other passengers and crew members, who all tested negative. An informal survey of 18 major airlines in correspondence with IATA has identified, during Jan-Mar 2020, just three episodes of suspected in-flight transmission, all from passenger to crew, and a further four episodes of apparent transmission from pilot to pilot, which could have been in-flight or before/after (including layover); there were no instances of suspected passenger-to-passenger transmission reported by the group of airlines. The group of airlines represents 14% of global traffic for that period. A request to a much larger group of 70 airlines (representing half of global passenger traffic) also failed to identify any cases of suspected passengerto-passenger transmission. And finally, closer analysis with IATA was able to be carried out by four airlines which had close contact with local public health authorities during the outbreak. The four airlines (with a combined annual traffic of 329 billion RPK) together followed up around 1100 passengers who were identified as confirmed cases having recently flown. The flights in question represent about 125000 passengers. There was one possible secondary passenger cases identified in the total, and just two crew cases. By comparison, a recent article from Shenzhen China on transmission quotes an overall transmission rate of 6.6% across modes of contacts (household, travel, or meals), which would equate to a predicted 72 cases from those 1100 passengers, compared with the 3 that we have observed."

MSYtoJFKagain

Have you considered renting an RV? My parents are wanting to join my brother and his wife for a 2 month vacation in Vermont and that's the route they're likely taking. Alleviates the bathroom and food concerns and gives you much more freedom in your route choice.

RooseveltL

I would fly. Hope seat away from people and use PPE. My concern with driving is each state is doing their own thing with exposure and risk. I'd rather be 5-6 hr on plane, know the airline requires passengers PPE (and you clean plane, seat around you, etc.), get off and shower immediately, vs. stopping in backwood places/road stops whereas folks are coughing, sneezing, unclean surfaces and cheap off-the-road hotels, etc. Additionally, if the flight is direct you leave a state that cares to a state that cares about its residence. The middle states are more about freedoms/economy and don't care about residents so I'd rather avoid the risk of car break down or other weather forcing me to stay someplace I'd rather not be enroute.

AsiaTravel2019

I'd fly, fly, fly. Less interaction with people and places on a 6 hour flight than a multi-stop, multi-day road trip.

I would grab CLT to LAX direct in First/Biz all the way. He would get there so much faster. I was in LAX a few weeks ago. Ghost town.

dlaue

I would fly, but be ready for stricter anti-viral measures than you may be used to.

The deaths in CA peaked a few weeks ago and are on the decline, whereas the deaths are still increasing in North Carolina.

In my lay opinion the flight will no be the risky part of your trip. The risks will come at the airport, rental car buses, rental cars, and Ubers.

Of course, your risk of injury or death is many times higher when driving across the country than in the air.

Ford Fairlane

If knew I could get tested once I arrived, I'd fly. Then I'd immediately get tested. If negative, I'd quarantine for three days, then get tested again. If still negative, I'd quarantine for two more days, then get tested again. If still negative, then I'd visit Mom. By that point I'd have taken up that time to drive across the country anyway.

If I couldn't get tested at destination, I'd keep doing whatever I could remotely to support Mom.

Dr_wanderlust

any update on his choice?

zitsky

This is close to what we will probably do. He may want assurance that they block the middle seat. We are in Raleigh but easy to connect in Charlotte.

bandbconsulting

I would fly. Wear a mask, wash hands, use hand sanitizer. That is a LONG drive.

MSYtoJFKagain

Good to hear, 1 month later.

zitsky

It's ok. We haven't traveled yet. Better than replying to a 10 year old thread.

Dr_wanderlust

I'm curious what the choice was... I'm facing a similar decision.

zitsky

Husband will fly maybe mid July. He is still nervous but he wants to check on his mom.

Alex1122

If the reason is in a bad health condition, I would go. I think, flying is better. It takes less time and seems to be a safer trip.