In domestic flights we've flown from our nearby Sacramento airport quite often (25 minute drive) but a few times have flown from San Francisco or Oakland (2 or more hours away) when the price was much different and when it involved up to 4 tickets. For our Europe trip in 2019 we flew from Oakland with Norwegian and I was hopeful that Norwegian would be an option for further trips.
Alas, it looks like that won't be the case for the future, so now I'm a free agent, checking out all kinds of different airline and flight options, and one thing I notice is that the price difference between my local airport Sacramento isn't that much different than the big bay area airports. Of course its often one extra stop till the final destination but the overall travel time isn't that much more than flying out of San Francisco, without the hassle of having to drive much further away.
So I'm wondering what people's feelings are about the tradeoffs involved. Biggest downsize to the regionals I can think of off hand is what if the first connecting domestic flight, such as Sacramento to Denver and then the flight to Europe from there, if that flight out of Sacramento is delayed, then missing the connection and basically getting to Europe one whole day later. Biggest advantage of course is being only 25 minutes away If I know before hand whats happening we don't even have to go to the airport only to find our trip is postponed a day. Anyway, with ticket price being about the same, and travel time about the same would you do the regional airport vs the big hub, if it meant an extra stop and a somewhat greater chance of getting to your final destination on time.