What do you think US - Europe flying will be like for the rest of 2020?

If /when the pandemic has truly ended, then I don't see any reason why it would be different. Other than those airlines that end up bankrupt in the mean time. Flights will be just as long (possibly longer if more connecting flights are required). And just as uncomfortable if you aren't in Business/First class.

Edit. I won't delete my reply, but since the OP has chosen to change the question, feel free to ignore it.

Unless the airlines require some kind of face covering to stop infectious diseases from spreading, they will have fewer passengers. You will be allowed to eat and drink, but may be asked to keep a mask in place. As a person who has contracted any number of upper respiratory infections from morons on planes, I hope that they will do this.

No free food at all in economy nor free drinks. It’s for the safety of airline profits.

Masks will be history as well as no middle seat.

No free food at all in economy nor free drinks.

That seems highly unlikely. The food is I believe required by law. I'm less sure about the drinks.

Until there's a vaccine it won't be great. Masks are only partially effective. Imagine seated within several feet of a person hacking and coughing. You know you will be inhaling some of those droplets. No thank you absent a vaccine. I have an 84-year-old dad that doesn't need to catch this virus from me.

Couldn't care less about free food but there has to be liquid available for survival. I don't mind bringing a sandwich, water bottle, and snacks on to tide me over for 8 hours. That's easy. But there has to be a way to get more water.

Free food ha ha

Not sounding like a fun start to a European vacation.

No free food in economy = less farting all around = better air 6 hours into an 8 hour flight. I'm good with that.

The food is I believe required by law.

No, there is no law that says airlines must serve you a meal or even have food for sale on any flight. The only requirement for food and/or drinks is when a plane is stranded on the tarmac for more than 3 hours and there is no way to safely get the passengers off the plane. Only then are airlines required to provide water and something to eat. The something to eat is crackers or cookies, limit one per passenger. This is a US rule and does not apply to planes not within the US, so you may not even get that on some flights in other countries.

Because of the unknown, I have always taken at least a liter of water and a small selection of granola bars or other non perishable snack items with me when flying. Just in case.

The seasonal Norwegian Air flights between Denver and London Gatwick have offered food for sale, but not free with economy tickets. We’ve brought salads with us, and they came with less-than-3-ounce dressing packets, so cleared Security without any concern. Hope Norwegian can still serve Denver in the future. When conditions allow assuredly confident flying, we’ll be ready with our own food. But conditions are going to have to be reasonably safe all around. I’m not likely going to be on one of the first flights, say, just 6 months from now. I wonder if airlines will be offering big price and/or frequent flyer points incentives to entice willing passengers to start flying that soon?

There will be fewer passengers I bet and strict measuring of temperatures and mask. And I also think that they should get the best self cleaning toilet https://bestflushingtoilets.org/best-self-cleaning-toilet/ just to make sure everything's clean and safe.

The thought of being on a plane with it a usually stale air , with 200 - 300 hundred other people ( and there is always the “ cougher” near me - for nine hours , nope .
Vaccine or proper treatment is only thing that will get me back in air .

Which makes a me sad - but at my age and with existing health issues ,‘I won’t take the risk

https://787updates.newairplane.com/getmedia/88faa01a-d578-4e1a-be44-3a177c8ef50f/Air-change-rates-inplanes

Airplane air is not 'stale'

On average, cabin air is completely refreshed 20 times per hour, compared with just 12 times per hour in an office building. On most aircraft, air is also circulated through hospital-grade HEPA filters, which remove 99.97 percent of bacteria, as well as the airborne particles that viruses use for transport (many regional jets lack these filters). Additionally, cabins are divided into separate ventilation sections about every seven rows of seats, which means that you share air only with those in your immediate environment and not with the guy who’s coughing up a lung ten rows back. When the plane is on the ground, however, air circulation in the cabin can be greatly reduced. ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34708785/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/airplane-air-not-bad-you-think/)

We just need to ensure the cougher is more than 7 rows away. Social distancing, too.

Hold your breath when on the tarmac.

Glad Joe32f posted the links. It is a false belief by many that the air in planes is worse, bad, or simply recirculated, it is cleaner than most places you live or work. If the air has a drawback, it is the low humidity, precisely because they do exchange fresh air into the cabin, and that low humidity can dry out nasal membranes, causing issues. Ironically, one defense against this is...a simple cloth mask. It retains some of the humidity in your exhaled breath, and essentially recycles it. Sipping liquids regularly also helps replenish. For limiting person to person exchange, having some airflow from the little nozzle above you (flow coming from the filtration system) provides you with a fresh supply, moving the air down to the air return slots on the floor.

As for the original question, I think most changes will be pre-flight, health screenings or questionnaires prior to arrival at the airport, temp checks once there, more automated steps with biometrics (check-in, bag drop, security checks) to avoid person to person contact, use of masks. I also expect Countries will put in place more checks on arrival, maybe a greater risk of quarantine or denied entry.

In flight, forget about eliminating the middle seat, good idea if we are all individual travelers, but I for one prefer to sit next to my wife, it would be nice if we had the row, so maybe some method to book a space for a family group, but lets be honest, even with alternate seats, you are still close. Same with food and liquids, still there, maybe more packaging for sanitary reasons.

Don't expect much difference. Airlines will keep the middle seat empty unless they can sell it. Masks will be required for awhile but then who knows. Food isn't free in coach on most domestic trips anyway. And just like they flocked to the beaches when they opened, people will once again fly.

American announced that any Advantage reservation made after July 1 and cancelled over 60 days prior to the flight, will incur no fee to cancel, change and get the miles back into your account. The fee for cancellations/changes between 59 and 7 days is also decreasing and the amount depends on your FF tier level. You will probably see more deals for frequent flyers than for the general public.

Delta has stated that they will not be flying to as many European destnation after the virus as they did before. Look for a lot more code sharing and less options. Not good for prices.

Its fun to speculate, but its all just guessing. I think Paul's middle paragraph is a good summary. I don't expect that the airlines (those still alive) are going to assume all responsibility for protecting your health to the max while on their plane. Armed marshals forcing people to mask up? The customer will have to accept the risks of travel. The airlines have to earn enough to stay open, so the no-middle-seat idea ain't gonna fly.

Even if COVID still around, I don't think everyone will be afraid to fly. There's a significant part of the US population right now, who are blowing off all social distancing, masking and hand washing precautions, because they choose to ignore the risk or don't believe it to begin with.

Any vacations we take this year will be driving ones (thus, the closest we'll get to France is Quebec). I do expect to fly next year, but if masks are required I have my doubts we'll fly. I do bring my mask everywhere I go, and wear it anytime I enter a shop. I do find it difficult to breathe wearing it, but I can deal with 15-20 minutes in the store with it. But I can't imagine wearing one for an 8 hour flight.
As to food, I pretty much never eat airplane food, so I don't care. But for a long flight, water is important..

After vaccines/treatments are developed (I'll not be flying until), I'd like to see dedicated no-middle-seating flights for whatever extra ticket cost would cover the expense of the unsold seats for the airline. It would be far more comfortable than sardine class, and still much less expensive than business.

We will continue to fly to east coast, stay overnight and take a relatively short daytime flight to London. Continue flight to destination the next day.

BlockquoteAfter vaccines/treatments are developed (I'll not be flying until), I'd like to see dedicated no-middle-seating flights for whatever extra ticket cost would cover the expense of the unsold seats for the airline. It would be far more comfortable than sardine class, and still much less expensive than business.

You could always do this...

But I doubt you will. People will not want to pay the "extra ticket cost" Americans are great at saying "Sure I will pay more for comfort", but when it's time to pay it's "Well look Spirit is $10 cheaper so let's go the sardine can route".

It's also a myth that the airplane air is so bad for you. It's actually cleaner then the air in your office or shopping center.... But... It's much more fun to believe "the airline air is the source of all evil" :)

Kent,

This is a great question to ponder and at the moment it's difficult to get a clear picture. A few things that may be normal in future.....

• at least here in Canadian airports or on Canadian airlines, masks are mandatory within terminals where sufficient physical distancing can't be maintained and for the duration of all flights. This is a Transport Canada rule and it's not negotiable. That's going to make in-flight dining a unique experience! Perhaps we'll all have to use ONE OF THESE.
• there will be more "touchless" check-in terminals and baggage systems.
• I've seen a few reports about new airport security procedures, where passengers do more of the work which minimizes contact with the agents. I haven't been able to find any details on that yet.
• some airports may be using the computerized thermal cameras that measure everyone passing within their field-of-view.
• Airlines here seem to be offering "different" meals now, so the usual meal during a long flight may not be as it was in the pre-pandemic days. I'm sure they'll still provide bottled water.
• I've seen a few reports of flight crews that are staying "secluded" behind the curtain during flights, except when they're serving meals or whatever. I surmise that could mean that passengers wandering back there to stretch their legs may be "discouraged" from doing so.
• I've seen a few reports that airlines may try to "limit" use of WC's during flights, but I'm not sure that would be possible.
• airlines will probably be using "ion disinfection" (or whatever it's called) between flights, as the spray can apparently reach all the nooks & crannies between seats, etc. Flight crews will likely be doing more cleaning and sanitizing as part of their regular duties.
• airlines might limit the number of passengers on flights so that they can achieve some degree of "distancing" between passengers. That includes leaving the middle seat empty if possible. At least at the beginning, I suspect flights are only going to be partially full anyway, as not as many people will be comfortable with long flights.
• some changes in air travel may be dictated by the ICAO so these will be common to all countries and airlines.
• airlines are going to be acutely focused on recovering at least some of the money they've lost, so I suspect there will be more "nickel & dime" charges for luggage or whatever. With flights only partially full, seat prices will also increase.

I don't have a crystal ball but suspect the rules will be adjusted as the situation improves. More restrictive measures will probably be in place for at least the remainder of this year.

The new WHO mask guidance might make flights more enjoyable

If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking
care of a person with COVID-19.

Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing.

Ken, thanks for the good post!
Kent

Those WHO guidelines were published April 6. So not exactly new. A lot about mask wearing has changed a whole lot since then, and I am going to assume that in any crowded situation someone around is going to be infected even if they are not showing symptoms. .

While it is always nice to keep up on the latest suggestions on how to avoid the virus, I am going to wear a mask if the place I am at requires it, regardless of any other suggestions or my personal comfort. Who knows, I might be the one infected and by wearing the mask can prevent others from catching it from me.

I've seen a few reports about new airport security procedures, where passengers do more of the work which minimizes contact with the agents. I haven't been able to find any details on that yet.

In the US at least, this means you hang on to your boarding pass (paper or electronic) and scan it at the check in counter, security screening, and gate. Printing your pass before getting to the airport is also strongly encouraged. Any food has to be removed from carry ons and placed in a bin for easier inspection. All other things you used to take out at security still has to come out. Everything else possible (jackets, belts, cash, wallets, and so on) are requested to be placed inside your carry on and not in the bins. This is to reduce the possibility of contamination.

I've seen a few reports of flight crews that are staying "secluded" behind the curtain during flights, except when they're serving meals or whatever.

Had to laugh at that one. Depending on which airline you may have flown, this was often reported as standard FA procedures on long haul flights. They would get upset with you if you "bothered" them when the curtain was closed.

The WHO has been saying the mask is no good since April 6th? Amazing!!

A lot about mask wearing has changed since then and WHO hasn't updated its recommendation? More Amazing!! (how much do we pay them for their help?)

I'm with you on following the rules; where ever it is required, you will find me in it. Detest the dang things... I just thought the WHO would set the standard for those worried about doing the right thing.

Thank you for the update. Much appreciated.

" Depending on which airline you may have flown, this was often reported as standard FA procedures on long haul flights. They would get upset with you if you "bothered" them when the curtain was closed."

That's true, I've also noticed that the FA's get a bit "annoyed" if they're disturbed when the curtain is closed. The reports I've seen of the current situation indicate they're behind the curtain and wearing a gown, mask and gloves. I suppose if they want to completely get away for a break, they could go to the "upstairs bedroom" above the rear galley.

An associate who recently took a flight in the Middle East sent me a phone video of his flight crew. They all had paper hazmat suits on. It looked ridiculous. But he wasnt required to wear a mask.

I think for the rest of 2020 flying rules will be more impression than substance. No one wants to get sued so they will all go overboard.

That is what WHO said on April 6th -- wear a mask only if taking care of someone with the virus. This was an update from previous posts stating only medical professionals needed to wear a mask while working. This was also when the CDC and all of the government was saying not to wear a mask as well if you were in the general public. If you read the (boringly) detailed document that went along with this, WHO is speaking specifically about N95 and other type pf MEDICAL masks which were in limited supply at the time. Nothing about any mask being "no good".

Current worldwide government suggestions, if not requirement or law, mostly say to wear a mask anytime you are not at home.

Things have changed. The WHO appears to be unclear in their public postings on the net. Spin it how you want.

And currently we are paying the WHO nothing since the president has cancelled all of our payments to them.

Thank you Mark. I didnt read the boring document. I just read the advice they put on their website https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks
In the video the woman holds up a mask just like the disposable ones I bought and says it wont help you. I guess we should send the WHO more money so they can afford to update the site so that it represents what you have said.

But I do intend to follow the rules of the Worldwide Governments. By the way, where do they get their guidance? My state isn't worldwide and mask wearing requirements are a bit more selective than the Worldwide Government Standard you quoted.

This is something everyone who travels should be aware of. The rules in your location are not necessarily the Worldwide Government Standard and just to be safe, until you figure out the rules in your travel destination, error on the side of caution to stay out of trouble. Safest would be to download a copy of the Worldwide Government Standard and learn it before you travel.

Mark, thank you again for your help.

Okay, now I am really confused.

"Current worldwide government suggestions, if not requirement or law, mostly say to wear a mask anytime you are not at home." Isnt what the CDC website says either (unless there is some long boring document I didn't read). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html They actually say not to wear a mask, and dont mention anything about when you leave your home, but the do recommend a cloth face covering when you cant maintain social distancing, like inside of stores. Shouldn't they be in conformance with the Worldwide Government Standard? I've got a couple boxes of disposable surgical masks and I dont want to get in trouble for using them.

As a rule, I consider it considerate to wear a mask or a cloth face covering in the presence of others. If it makes just one person feel a bit safer (true or not), then its worth the hassle.

The internet is full of contradicting, obsolete, and flat out wrong information. There is no one responsible for making sure only the most accurate and up to date information is out there (not a job that would be easy for sure!). So it is possible to find a statement to support nearly any opinion anyone has. I approach my browsing with that in mind and try to find information that is supported by research from reputable independent and not politically aligned sources and not presented in a manner that makes it sound unbelievable or outrageous. I hope that I succeed most of the time. Perhaps I need to go back to school and take a journalism class so that I learn to write more clearly when I try to express my findings.

There is no one world wide government standard. My apologies if I made it sound like there was. What I meant to say was each government in the countries around the world have set the standards for people in their country as to what they need to do to provide the level of protection from covid they feel is necessary. One of these standards most governments have mandated (or suggested) is the wearing of some type of face mask. Where they get the basis for their mandates, I can't say. I'm sure they all have something equivalent to the CDC providing guidance. Or it could just be "Hey, everyone else is doing this, we should too!" I also thought my statement on wearing a mask, or cloth face covering if you prefer, when you left your home was in agreement with the CDC statement although not using their exact language. Also, while I cannot be positive, I seriously doubt you would get in trouble for wearing whatever type of mask or face covering you have available to you even if those are surgical or medical or N95 rated. The masks I wear most recently were given to me by local government and look like something a doctor would wear to surgery. They are not and are simply some cheap paper face coverings. Most people out there who care would just be happy we are wearing something.

Mark, you are correct the internet is full of garbage. Thats why I went to the WHO and the CDC, but they are apparently garbage too. Who do you recommend as a better source of information for COVID information? Maybe the NYT? I just dont know.

The CDC confused me on masks so I looked up "Surgical Mask" and the photo appeared to be the cheap Chinese made paper masks that I purchased. I will call my son and ask. He is a nurse in a COVID unit in NYC. He might know (unless he's been getting CDC or WHO garbage too).

Here we arent doing what the rest of the world is doing. Masks are pretty much reserved for inside stores or when entering a bar, massage business or restaurant (but obviously not while eating or drinking). Even then, if you can maintain 6 feet no matter where you are its not required. But like i said, if it makes just one person feel safer to be surrounded by masks, I dont mind doing it.

We were given N95 masks from the local PHD and Direct Relief when we had so many fires here in California.

I don’t see myself on a plane until there is a vaccine or the virus decides to go into hiding like SARS. I can’t imagine what flying might be like with people coughing this coming winter.

Diane, I will be on a plane early next week. I'll let you know how it goes.....

I'm enjoying the recent discussions on this thread. I think this was a good topic because it's stimulated a lot of thinking.

I think unless by a miracle a vaccine is made available before the end of 2020 travel from the US to Europe will be limited to all but essential travel

Jane, I suspect you are going to be proven wrong.

Kent, Mark and I had a good dialogue. I think it did serve a purpose. It was good of him to play along.

I heard a discussion on NPR yesterday, with a travel industry analyst from a trade publication, who said that planes for international travel would be full now, if the governmental restrictions on entry were not in place. In other words, there are plenty of people who want to travel and are not fearful of the virus and willing to take reasonable precautions. I think thats true, vaccine or not.

Stan, that makes sense to me. The thing is supply and demand. If there are fewer people wanting to fly there will likely be fewer and thus crowded flights. Assuming sites are opening in Europe it might be the best time to visit since the 1990's due to less crowded attractions. I would go for sure but my wife says "no way" until there's a vaccine. In some ways this summer might be the best time to visit in our lifetimes, considering the aforementioned caveats.

We all agree

Assuming sites are opening in Europe

They are, or will be soon as they are now opening for local tourism.

Supplementing what James E. said: we are planning to travel in September. I am keeping tabs on many of our visit sites in the Baltic countries and in Warsaw. They are almost all open already. The only one I've seen that has no opening date as of yet is the POLIN museum in Warsaw.

Anyone considering travel should be checking their sites-of-interest - I am finding that they opened in late May or June.

If someone is the tiniest bit flexible, the only reason not to travel is closed borders and a lack of available flights.

the only reason not to travel is open borders and available flights.

Really, James? You mean that people who are known to be particularly vulnerable (due to certain health conditions, age, other constraints, etc) should follow this advice and just roll the dice? It's probably better for each person to decide for themselves based on their own individual situation. These deterministic pronouncements are not facts, and they can be easily refuted. To each is own. Just as some people want to travel and will do so, those who don't (or shouldn't) should be respected as well. They have their own reasons, unknown to you.

Agnes, I will rephrase that:

If someone is the tiniest bit flexible, the only reason they will be prevented from traveling, if that's what they want to do, is closed borders and a lack of available flights.

Better?

Better?

Well, there's that quarantine thing....someone posted the below link on another thread, and it's not something I would have immediately considered. I wouldn't wish this on anyone and I'm not risk-averse myself, but I wouldn't write it off as a possibility as each country (with perhaps the exception of Brazil and Belarus) is going to do its best to protect its population. I don't think anyone would expect to be quarantined simply because someone else on a plane has tested positive, although it's intuitive (and it goes to show that the "middle seat" idea is not at all fool-proof, as are temperature checks - despite sounding like they're sufficient measures). Still not a great way to start a vacation, and your travel/ movement would surely be limited if you are placed even in a 7-day quarantine before being re-tested again and eventually cleared. If you think about the virus and the incubation period (2-14 days) and the latent period (you have virus but still not showing symptoms), then you can easily imagine disruptions like these. I have no way of knowing how common they will be and I would probably expect a patchwork of varied experiences by airport and country, just like airport screening (inconsistent and sometimes unpredictable). I would think it would be much less disruptive to test people before they get on a flight, but I don't know if tests like these are yet widely available, reliable (sensitive enough to weed out true "positives"), and can be read within 1-2 hours of boarding.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-greece-quarantines-all-passengers-from-qatar-flight

Since this is a global virus and travel is truly global, I wish the global community could come up with a set of standards for international flights. This would actually help passengers know what to expect and would help the entire industry by cutting uncertainty, costs and burden of compliance. I think many people who would otherwise travel may not do so just due to the uncertainty and unpredictability of the experience.

Agnes, I will rephrase that:

If someone is the tiniest bit flexible, the only reason they will be prevented from traveling, if that's what they want to do, is unrestricted borders (including things like quarantine) and a lack of available flights.

Better?

If someone has multiple risk factors--such as age, diabetes, existing health conditions esp. involving the lungs--they may understandably view travel in the near future in a different way than someone who is relatively young and healthy.

If someone is the tiniest bit flexible, the only reason they will be prevented from traveling, if that's what they want to do, is unrestricted borders (including things like quarantine) and a lack of available flights.

I have multiple risk factors but I'm siding with James....as soon as countries open up to us Yanks, and hotels, restaurants, and sights are open,,,,,,I'm on a plane.

My life is different than most here. I have been in this hotel room now for just about 5 months. It is the longest I've been in one place since 2015. One room. The same four walls. Day in and day out. I'm going *^&% crazy. I was meant to travel. To move from place to place. I need a change of scenery.

I have face masks. I have face shields. I have gloves. I have hand sanitizer and I have soap. I figure between all of those, I should be good on a plane. And I'll fly business to allow even more separation. After that, I can do my best to social distance. Worst comes to worst, I go to one of my safe havens and settle in for a bit. At least from them, I can do some sightseeing.

And to be honest, for the past couple of years or so, I've been happier outside the U.S. than inside.

Everyone has to do what makes them happy.

FrankII, I got just the thing for us: https://www.amazon.com/DuPont-TY122S-Disposable-Elastic-Coverall/dp/B0711CZ2WH/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=hazmat+suits+disposable&qid=1591321129&sr=8-5

It seems the sweet spot for travel is July-October prior to the virus season resuming in November, give or take a month.

NPR mentioned school systems considering starting a bit early for this reason. Makes sense to me.

Each of us has to make that risk calculation ourselves. There are a lot of places I still want to see while I can. I understand the risks for this current virus, just as I understand the risk for all the other contagious diseases you can encounter on an airplane - the existing ones, and the new ones to come. Many people can't get past that concern of being on a long flight overseas, but it looks to me the risk of traveling in big cities in the US is likely higher than in Europe. I'd be more worried about a trip to Las Vegas or Disney World right now, than Paris or London, and I know people who are planning that.

I think there are likely going to be some technical and procedural measures that airlines will be able to take quickly that will reduce (not eliminate) the coronavirus risk. If the scientists can resolve the immunity question, and we have widely available anti-body testing, that will go a long way to reduce the risk.

James, the only problem with those suits is that they will take up too much room in my carry on bag. Virus or no virus I'm still going to travel light.

Regarding Stan's comment that it is safer overseas than in Las Vegas or Disney World.....I agree. Most people overseas are complying with the new safety requirements. Too many of my fellow countrymen are idiots who can't be bothered to wear a mask or social distance or worst don't think it's real. And then they start screaming about their rights.

I was watching a France 24 report the other day about opening hotels in Greece. The hotel owner says the new requirements are that beach umbrellas be at least 2 meters apart and each rooms' air conditioner must not only be disinfected between guests but the filter must be changed. Here, they'd balk about the cost and wouldn't be made to do anything. Even at my hotel, some of the houskeepers are doing extra disinfecting and others can't be bothered.