45 mins to change planes at raleigh is it doable

[Zach1213]

As the OP is a UK passenger, most UK passengers are REQUIRED to book everything as a package-cruise, air, insurance.

 

So changing airlines or even changing flights may not even be an option. This is one time where cruise air WILL protect the passengers if this was booked out of the UK as a package. Their consumer protection laws are much more stringent than those in the USA and insurance is REQUIRED. They are also more expensive booked out of the UK because of the insurance requirement and stringent consumer protections.

 

 

OP needs to MAKE SURE the luggage is checked all the way through to LHR from MIA. 45 minutes is more than enough at RDU. I really like flying through that little airport BUT I bet it will be "de hubbed" as soon as this merger is complete. Just too much US Air traffic through Charlotte. So things could change quite a bit before the OP cruises.

 

Curious to see if they keep that route for the subsidies, or just route it all RDU-CLT-LHR. I assume the latter, but the former would be pretty great for area residents.

[Globaliser]

As the OP is a UK passenger, most UK passengers are REQUIRED to book everything as a package-cruise, air, insurance.

This is actually overstating the position. There's no reason why UK passenger must book it as a package. It's perfectly possible to book cruise only, and do one's own air travel separately - I often do this. And insurance is often required by the terms of the cruise line's contract, but there is no enforcement.

 

In any case, having all the EU protections in place (as the OP does) does very little for someone who's missed a connection at RDU because the inbound flight is late. Whether or not it's an EU package, the airline still has to get them to their destination. The practical help needed is rapid rebooking onto an alternative flight(s). Fortunately, there are other options from RDU to LHR if the OP misses their non-stop RDU-LHR. A quick and dirty search suggests that there's a UA to IAD departing at 1920, from where there are multiple options to LHR the same night. At a guess, if faced with a choice between FIMing someone to UA or paying for an enforced overnight stay, AA would keep the passenger moving that evening.

Curious to see if they keep that route for the subsidies, or just route it all RDU-CLT-LHR. I assume the latter, but the former would be pretty great for area residents.

My guess is that RDU-LHR won't be going anywhere fast, so long as RDU can continue to handle an international flight. RDU-LON has long been in place despite the fact that it's non-hub to non-hub for AA, and RDU isn't exactly a major travel destination. And it moved to LHR pretty quickly after that became permissible.

 

Why?

 

Because it's basically the GSK corporate shuttle, on which members of the public can also buy tickets; and GSK's headquarters are in Brentford, less than 15 minutes drive from LHR (as anyone who travels from central London to LHR by road will know).

[greatam]

This is actually overstating the position. There's no reason why UK passenger must book it as a package. It's perfectly possible to book cruise only, and do one's own air travel separately - I often do this. And insurance is often required by the terms of the cruise line's contract, but there is no enforcement.

 

That's very interesting. I had no idea you really could book stuff separately. Why all the hub bub then from Brits about the astronomical price of the cruise, can't book with a USA agent and must have all this "package stuff", especially the insurance?

 

In any case, having all the EU protections in place (as the OP does) does very little for someone who's missed a connection at RDU because the inbound flight is late. Whether or not it's an EU package, the airline still has to get them to their destination. The practical help needed is rapid rebooking onto an alternative flight(s). Fortunately, there are other options from RDU to LHR if the OP misses their non-stop RDU-LHR. A quick and dirty search suggests that there's a UA to IAD departing at 1920, from where there are multiple options to LHR the same night. At a guess, if faced with a choice between FIMing someone to UA or paying for an enforced overnight stay, AA would keep the passenger moving that evening.

 

And THERE's the UK protection, correct??? US passengers would be on the next available flight which may be two days hence or paying for their own hotel.

 

My guess is that RDU-LHR won't be going anywhere fast, so long as RDU can continue to handle an international flight. RDU-LON has long been in place despite the fact that it's non-hub to non-hub for AA, and RDU isn't exactly a major travel destination. And it moved to LHR pretty quickly after that became permissible.

 

Why?

 

Because it's basically the GSK corporate shuttle, on which members of the public can also buy tickets; and GSK's headquarters are in Brentford, less than 15 minutes drive from LHR (as anyone who travels from central London to LHR by road will know).

 

Thanks for the info. Interesting.

[Globaliser]

That's very interesting. I had no idea you really could book stuff separately. Why all the hub bub then from Brits about the astronomical price of the cruise, can't book with a USA agent and must have all this "package stuff", especially the insurance?

Because even if you book cruise only, it's often still at a much higher price than the same cruise bought from a US agent - which, in the case of many cruise lines, UK customers are not allowed to do.

And THERE's the UK protection, correct??? US passengers would be on the next available flight which may be two days hence or paying for their own hotel.

I thought that if you were on an international itinerary while flying on a US airline, you'd get hotel accommodation if you misconnect? This could be a real incentive to the airline to re-route you onto another airline. I remember having an AA economy ticket in a situation where I was going to misconnect in MIA, so AA re-routed me onto DL, which (tragically) only had business class available all the way to London.

 

Anyway, there are two different sets of EU protection potentially in play here.

 

The first is the EU protection you get if you book a package holiday, via the Package Travel Directive (and its UK implementation, the Package Travel Regulations). As the Association of British Travel Agents says:-

The PTD and PTR introduced requirements on the organisers and sellers of package holidays to provide greater protection to purchasers of package holidays in three main areas:

 

• The provision of information
  
• Financial protection and repatriation in the event of company failure
  
• A specific regime for contractual liability in respect of package holidays.
  

I'm not on top of all of the details of this, and it's quite possible that you have the right to hotel accommodation and meals if you're delayed while travelling. However, your rights are against the holiday provider (ie the cruise line, in the OP's situation). Any PTD rights that you have may simply get you your money back from the cruise line after the event. The airline will only see the ticket in your (virtual) hand, and won't know that it's part of an EU package holiday to which the PTD applies. So any PTD protection isn't really much practical use at the point at which you misconnect and you're trying to persuade the airline to do something for you immediately (just as having travel insurance that covers this isn't of any immediate practical help - it just gets you your money back later).

 

The second is the EU protection that you get in relation to air travel, which comes from a Regulation commonly known by its number, 261/2004. This applies to all air travel, whether or not it's part of a package holiday. However, it only applies to flights from an EU airport, and also to flights to an EU airport operated by an EU airline. The OP is flying AA, so would not benefit from 261/2004 if they were to misconnect.

 

This is why I think that for practical purposes, the OP would be likely to be in a position that's little different from that of someone holding a normal non-package ticket for the same flight who'd misconnected at RDU in the same way.

[greatam]

Interesting info. Thanks

 

US airlines sometimes will and sometimes won't give you a hotel voucher on a mis-connect whether domestic or international. JUST DEPENDS on who's guarding the store that day and what kind of status or ticket you have. And additionally, what caused the mis-connect. Weather, you can generally forget it. But if I understand you correctly, this is part of the EU protections that you pay dearly for which would get you a hotel room. Am I correct???

 

They ALWAYS pass out those food vouchers which get you a cup of coffee and MAYBE a roll. I've seen Eagle pass out $10 vouchers which will just about pay for Pringles and a cheese/cracker tray on the plane. Yahoo!!!!

[Globaliser]

US airlines sometimes will and sometimes won't give you a hotel voucher on a mis-connect whether domestic or international. JUST DEPENDS on who's guarding the store that day and what kind of status or ticket you have. And additionally, what caused the mis-connect. Weather, you can generally forget it. But if I understand you correctly, this is part of the EU protections that you pay dearly for which would get you a hotel room. Am I correct???

Yes, it's clearly part of the 261/2004 protection, whatever the reason for the misconnect (including Icelandic volcanoes). But 261/2004 does not apply to someone flying on AA from the US to the UK. It's one (small) reason to book BA rather than AA in that direction!

[greatam]

Yes, it's clearly part of the 261/2004 protection, whatever the reason for the misconnect (including Icelandic volcanoes). But 261/2004 does not apply to someone flying on AA from the US to the UK. It's one (small) reason to book BA rather than AA in that direction!

 

That nonstop PHX/LHR is very, very nice. BUT the additional taxes/fees on BA can get me a pretty darn decent hotel room in most cities in the world. So the EU protections are basically a wash money wise. But oh, the experience is sometimes worth the money. Thanks again for all the info about the EU protections.

[Globaliser]

BUT the additional taxes/fees on BA can get me a pretty darn decent hotel room in most cities in the world. So the EU protections are basically a wash money wise.

Oh, yes - I hear you! I did say it was only a small reason for preferring an EU carrier in this direction!

 

And you're welcome - glad to have been able to help.