Non stop flight or change planes en-route

I would prefer a non stop plane, but only if it costed the same as a cheap flight. It seems that, except for some places, that is not possible. I would not be able to travel much if I didn´t use the cheapest airlines there are.

The issue is if the stop off is too short you don't really have time to explore and do everything in that city(plus recheck in etc). I do agree though if you can afford to spend 2/3 days as a stop in route that is always a great decision(and extra benefit).

I try to do nonstop because I tend to miss connecting flights.

Well, actually, I have never fly to really far away places, but, where I have fly, I prefer to use non-stop flyings, I think that when I do a larger trip, I will prefer this way, of course, it all depends on the money I will have to spend.

Dear maximax8, Truly agreed with you. Flying non stop flights for short distance is good. Then we have more time at destination. However, flying long distance, a break will be great as we need some rest at a proper hotel and need fresh air and a break at places like Hong Kong, London, Bangkok and Singapore will be brilliant :) In 2007, we flew to New York for 3 nights and went sight seeing. Later we flew to Orlando for a great theme parks holidays at Orlando Disney World. It was a fantastic trip and is one of our favourite

Going for international flights with a kid, I'd prefer the direct flight with 1 or no stopover to final destination. This would save me a lot of energy stopping, flight delays, deplane etc, lower the chances of you or your luggage getting lost in airports. It is always cheaper to reserve or purchase your ticket months before your travel as it is cheaper that way and avoid a lot of carry on bags since they are now charging a lot per pound.

Non-stop flights..how long? When I was younger, there were no direct flights to the Middle East. We had to stop at Mumbai or Delhi and then catch a flight from there. So, we ended up catching 2 flights. Then when I was around 10, we had direct flights and it would take 4-5 hours. Now, travelling to Africa (North-west), we need to catch 2 flights atleast....if not 3.Not only are there no direct flights....if there were, it would be a pretty long flight. Travelling with kids, I prefer non-stop flights because my kids would be forced to sit. Changing planes en-route sometimes gets difficult when the kids use to need the toilet or they are sleeping (due to different time zones) and then they are cranky when I have to move them from a plane to an airport to another plane. Having said this, I have travelled alone with my son when he was 4...but he's been pretty easy about being woken up. I'm not sure if it would be the same with my second son and besides 2 kids and luggage to manage is hard.

When I visited my brother in Spain I flew from Denmark to the UK and from the UK to Spain. It was possible to catch a direct plane from Denmark to Spain, but it was much cheaper to fly from the UK. When I went to Italy I changed planes in the Netherlands, because it was cheaper than a non stop flight from Denmark. When we are going to Asia we will catch a non stop plane from Berlin to Bangkok, it takes about 11 hours. There is a cheaper option. If we choose that option we will have to change planes twice, and it will take more than 30 hours to get to our destination. My husband doesn't want to travel for 30 hours, so we are going to catch a non stop plane.