I don't usually delve into the TSA and airline policies, since I'm not that well educated on the matter. But, every now and then a story jumps out at me...
Before 9/11 and the TSA airlines were responsible for carry-on screening - the time before airlines charged for checking your suitcase. Also, before everyone started trying to carry-on as much as possible.
The Washington Post had an article about how it's costing the TSA to screen these bags at check points and how the TSA wants more money from a security fee (travelers) to pay for this.
I've finally gotten over the whole pay for your suitcase thing, though I often fly with Jetblue anyway, and now you want me to pay more money for security because I have to pay for my suitcase to go on the plane. If I didn't distrust the TSA then I might not be so annoyed.
but an even more intersting question is... If the airlines were still conducting the security would they be so excited about the money they make off the luggage fees, since they would be the ones forking over the extra money for the extra screening. Well I'm sure they would find a way to make the flyer pay anyway.
A blog about my past and future travels, come and enjoy the ride. I typically post about Domestic and European locations. Also cruises, solo travel, female travel and whatever else comes up.
About Me
- Christine Maier
- I'm a 30 something who loves to travel. I have a full time job and enjoy writing (or blogging) about my travels. I've traveled through several countries in Europe as well as Russia and Egypt. I also enjoy domestic travel in the United States, including Disney. My long term travel goal is to do a round the world trip.
Friday, March 11, 2011
The cost of charging for luggage
| Reactions: |
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Illuminations and the evening shows
My last trip to Disney World was the first time I got to see Illuminations and I really really liked it. Maybe it's the whole world and Earth and World thing, but I think it's my favorite evening show at Walt Disney World. Don't get me wrong, I really do enjoy Wishes and Fantasmic, but I connected with Illuminations.
Wishes is primarily a fireworks show, it's a really good one. But I've also had a front row seat to the Macy's 4th of July Fireworks show, it takes a lot to impress me. I'm impressed, but I also know that at least once a year I can go see a fantastic fireworks show in my own backyard.
Fantasmic is fantastic! After I saw it the first time I had to drag my friend to see it on our trip - it rained and none of the characters came out. I love the characters and the story at the show, as well as the special affects. What I don't like? How early you need to get there (though seating is a plus), if it rains they cancel it, and it's not shown every night - making it a pain for scheduling.

But Illuminations. I love the globe, the fireworks and how World Showcase is integrated into the show by lighting up each of the pavilions.
I originally wrote this before I went to Disneyland, I thought the best way to deal with my update was to just add to the post my thoughts about the Disneyland shows. Wishes is still fireworks, the music is great the coordination with the fireworks is great, but it's still just fireworks. I wasn't in love with fantasmic here, I hear the show itself is better, but I found it was too crowded and hard to see since the show is done pretty much in the middle of the park instead of in a dedicated area. The experience of watching Fantasmic here took away from the actual show.
World of Color on the other hand was really good. I'm still sticking by my love of Illuminations, but this show was special too. And they have much better organization for seeing the show (with the use of fast pass) that it wasn't as overwhelming as seeing Fantasmic. Though it is a bit disturbing that I got there over an hour before and couldn't get that good of a spot. This is one event where the dining package could be worth the cost, just to get the good seats.
Wishes is primarily a fireworks show, it's a really good one. But I've also had a front row seat to the Macy's 4th of July Fireworks show, it takes a lot to impress me. I'm impressed, but I also know that at least once a year I can go see a fantastic fireworks show in my own backyard.
Fantasmic is fantastic! After I saw it the first time I had to drag my friend to see it on our trip - it rained and none of the characters came out. I love the characters and the story at the show, as well as the special affects. What I don't like? How early you need to get there (though seating is a plus), if it rains they cancel it, and it's not shown every night - making it a pain for scheduling.
But Illuminations. I love the globe, the fireworks and how World Showcase is integrated into the show by lighting up each of the pavilions.
I originally wrote this before I went to Disneyland, I thought the best way to deal with my update was to just add to the post my thoughts about the Disneyland shows. Wishes is still fireworks, the music is great the coordination with the fireworks is great, but it's still just fireworks. I wasn't in love with fantasmic here, I hear the show itself is better, but I found it was too crowded and hard to see since the show is done pretty much in the middle of the park instead of in a dedicated area. The experience of watching Fantasmic here took away from the actual show.
World of Color on the other hand was really good. I'm still sticking by my love of Illuminations, but this show was special too. And they have much better organization for seeing the show (with the use of fast pass) that it wasn't as overwhelming as seeing Fantasmic. Though it is a bit disturbing that I got there over an hour before and couldn't get that good of a spot. This is one event where the dining package could be worth the cost, just to get the good seats.
Labels:
disneyland,
Fantasmic,
Illuminations,
Walt Disney World,
Wishes
| Reactions: |
Monday, March 7, 2011
Photo of the Week: London
Labels:
England,
London,
photography,
Piccadilly Circus
| Reactions: |
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
New York Times Travel Show
This weekend I went to the New York Times Travel Show, it's the first time I ever went to a travel show and it was just ok.
If you want to enter contests, and collect brochures, this is the place to be! Bring address labels so it's easier to give out your information.
If you want to learn about destinations, travel, tour companies - it's ok. Obviously there are lots of vendors there - Greece had a giant set up with lots of tour companies there. There were all sorts of tour companies there, there were locations. There are seminars on travel and tons on contests. But after about an hour or two of being open it started to get very crowded and if you wanted to talk to someone, it was hit or miss. I can also say that I didn't meet anyone at any table who tried to suck me into anything, a few spoke to me, but no one pushed me. Which left me wondering why are they there?
But my biggest disappointment was there there wasn't anything there for the locations I'm considering for this year. I found one person who dealt with Ireland and it wasn't what I was looking for. There wasn't anything in a few hours drive of my that jumped out at me for a weekend trip. If you want the caribbean though, the place was flooded!
What I would do differently, I would only go again if I had something in mind - say an African Safari. I would find out what vendors would be there, if I was interested in any of them and then I would get there early so I could talk to the vendors and see if I could get a discount by booking through any of them. Also, I would budget a little more time so I could do the rock climbing wall.
My apologies if this post is a little random - I have a headache, it's late and my mind is racing a bit as I write this.
If you want to enter contests, and collect brochures, this is the place to be! Bring address labels so it's easier to give out your information.
If you want to learn about destinations, travel, tour companies - it's ok. Obviously there are lots of vendors there - Greece had a giant set up with lots of tour companies there. There were all sorts of tour companies there, there were locations. There are seminars on travel and tons on contests. But after about an hour or two of being open it started to get very crowded and if you wanted to talk to someone, it was hit or miss. I can also say that I didn't meet anyone at any table who tried to suck me into anything, a few spoke to me, but no one pushed me. Which left me wondering why are they there?
But my biggest disappointment was there there wasn't anything there for the locations I'm considering for this year. I found one person who dealt with Ireland and it wasn't what I was looking for. There wasn't anything in a few hours drive of my that jumped out at me for a weekend trip. If you want the caribbean though, the place was flooded!
What I would do differently, I would only go again if I had something in mind - say an African Safari. I would find out what vendors would be there, if I was interested in any of them and then I would get there early so I could talk to the vendors and see if I could get a discount by booking through any of them. Also, I would budget a little more time so I could do the rock climbing wall.
My apologies if this post is a little random - I have a headache, it's late and my mind is racing a bit as I write this.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Photo of the Week: Scotland
Labels:
cow,
photography,
Scotland
| Reactions: |
Friday, February 25, 2011
Churchill's War Room
While in London I visited the Churchill War Rooms - a museum dedicated to the underground bunker that Churchill and the British government used during WWII. This museum was recommended to me by family friends and I have to say it was a good fit.
Before and after going here I heard wonderful things about the museum and it was wall set up. I will caution thought that I was by far the youngest person going through the museum, I think everyone else had lived through WWII.
The set up of the museum gave an idea of what it would have been like to be down in the bunker for long periods of time (I work in an office without windows so I undertood that part of it already). there was an authentic feel to the museum with the use of actually and period pieces. The only thing I didn't like was that some of the maniquines made the museum feel a little cheesy.
I would recommend this musuem to others visiting London, particularly if you are interested in history. I'm not sure I would put it on a 1 day itinerary, but probably a 2 or 3 day + itinerary. There was another part to the museum, about Churchill himself. I opted to skip that part as I was getting hungry and he wasn't my primary interest in visiting.
Labels:
Churchill War Rooms,
History,
London,
WW 2
| Reactions: |
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Anaheim Fairfield Inn

There are some other hotels in this area too, I walked past at least 3 on my way to the park. I know they are all also moderately priced hotels and although some of them had cheesy exterior decorations, none of them screamed, "bad hotel." After booking my hotel I found out the Best Western there is good, it is the closest to the park entrance too. But other then considering that Best Western I would stay at the Fairfield Inn on a return trip in a heartbeat.
Labels:
booking hotels,
disneyland,
Marriot
| Reactions: |
Monday, February 21, 2011
Photo of the Week: Newport
Labels:
Newport,
photography,
Rhode Island
| Reactions: |
Friday, February 18, 2011
A rainy day at St. Andrews
On my Contiki tour we had a few hours to visit St. Andrews - the town, the school, the golf course. You've probably heard of St. Andrews from one of two places - it's the birth place of golf and it's where Prince William and his future Princess Kate meet and went to school. It's a great little town, even on a rainy day.

We visited St. Andrews in the morning. It's a coastal town and it's the type of town that you envision when you think of old English and Scottish towns - small, quaint, old architecture. There is a "Cathedral" there. I use the quotes because at one time there was a Cathedral there, today there are just ruins of a Cathedral, but it must have been magnificent in its day.
The golf course looks great too, and it's surrounded by lovely buildings, though they were still cleaning up after a tournament.
I'll admit I don't know if there is all that much to do there for the average tourist. I would however recommend that anyone who is visiting Scotland stop at least for a day. If you like golf, I believe you need to book early to get a t-time. If you don't like golf, but want to honor the history of golf while you're there then you can visit the golf museum or better yet, play a round of miniature golf. And don't forget to take a walk along the water, it's quite lovely there, but don't be like some girl on a previous tour and try to walk on the rocks during low tide - my Tour Manager had to swim out and save her.
The golf course looks great too, and it's surrounded by lovely buildings, though they were still cleaning up after a tournament.
I'll admit I don't know if there is all that much to do there for the average tourist. I would however recommend that anyone who is visiting Scotland stop at least for a day. If you like golf, I believe you need to book early to get a t-time. If you don't like golf, but want to honor the history of golf while you're there then you can visit the golf museum or better yet, play a round of miniature golf. And don't forget to take a walk along the water, it's quite lovely there, but don't be like some girl on a previous tour and try to walk on the rocks during low tide - my Tour Manager had to swim out and save her.
Labels:
Scotland,
St. Andrews
| Reactions: |
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Disneyland in review
I've just gotten back from my trip to Disneyland, that's the one in California. It was my first time there, but I had heard it wasn't as good as Disney World, for many reasons. It's smaller, it doesn't have that Disney bubble effect that you get in Florida, and it's just not as cool. Of course I know there are people who disagree. I think that for as similar as the two places are, they both offer something a little different.
My first impression when I walked into Disneyland was, "that's the castle? That's not a castle!" There was a smaller feeling to everything, from the view of the train station when you first arrive, Main Street and the castle. It was particularly weird since things also felt so familiar too, but was still different. Overall the whole park felt a little smaller. I'm not sure how much smaller the park is compared to the Magic Kingdom, but the walkways all felt smaller, and some of the lands felt smaller too. I did like New Orleans Square. As the day went on though the smaller feel of the park started to grow on me, the park felt more intimate then the Magic Kingdom.
Overall I had a great time on this trip, I will talk more about it in future posts. I felt like Disneyland was a bit underwhelming, though I could certainly see areas where Walt made noticeable improvements for the Magic Kingdom. DCA provided great rides, but not so great of an experience, hopefully that will change once the expansion and upgrades are completed. I do feel like the Disneyland vs Disney World is a worthy discussion, though no on will win it. But I do think it makes a valid excuse to visit both.
| Reactions: |
Monday, February 14, 2011
Photo of the Week: Las Vegas
Labels:
Las Vegas,
photography
| Reactions: |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
