Private Jet with US tourists rejected at Italy’s borders
wantedinrome.com
wantedinrome.com
Colorado to Sardinia in a private jet? That's a wild flight! How big would it have been?
A typical European summer option for some, and to think it wouldn't have been news if it wasn't rejected at customs.
Going across the ocean will cost you a lot more.
I would expect many multiples over the code of business class. So more like 50k pp.
This is a guess, though I feel 10k in private jet from Colorado to Italy would be a steal.
it was cheaper to fly commercial
I ran up a quote on a private jet site, and it gave an estimate of "From" €113 960 (~=USD$128K).
So your 10/15k/head isn't far off, and likely with other additional fees, transfers, baggage handling, catering, etc it'd probably go over that $15k mark.
e: Also, looking at the quote it generated, that's based on filling every seat and using the cheapest option - for them a Falcon 2000EX EASy (10 seats).
If you go for a different aircraft (more seats, faster) then you won't be getting much change back from half a million for an Airbus 319 Corporate Jet (30 seater) at "from" USD$437k.
Stratosjet quotes ~80k for a flying from New York to Italy. The recommend the Challenger 604 and the Bombardier Global 6000 which seat 10 or 14 people respectively.
Btw, when you fly private, I don’t think it’s courteous to split the tab...normally, one party handles it all.
Joking aside, do you have first hand experience of this? How does it compare to traveling by business class on a national carrier?
In most other walks of life, incremental increases in price come with incremental increases in quality
How about comparing number of new businesses started/companies registered?
I mean the Governor of Sardinia is distraught about it! lol.
It is more interesting that the flight happened at all and the Americans couldn't stay.
Source for this? I know that general aviation travel tend to be much more dangerous than commercial airlines. This is mainly due to them using single engine planes with little redundancy (eg. cessna 172), and inexperienced pilots (you are doing it for fun). However, is the same true for "private jets"? I'm not sure what the exact model plane they used, but the pictured plane has 2 engines and looks about the right size for 10 people. The dual engines alone probably makes it safer than your average cessna. I'd also think that someone rich enough to operate a private jet probably has enough money for a professional pilot.
More likely the actual aircraft involved was a Gulfstream G650 or Global Express.
There have been many private jet flights from the USA to the EU in the past week so it's hard to pin down without further details.
Stop projecting your own angst onto me.
this time it happens to be about a very long flight to a European tourist island for summer that otherwise would not have made news.
you are assuming my opinion on that is negative and it could just as equally be fandom, which is why I greatly question what axe you have to grind and why
And I believe it's news because it shows how American's are being targeted, regardless of their wealth or mode of travel.
whats being exposed is the non-news of a long private flight from colorado to sardinia, thats a really long and really awesome trip and yet it wouldn't have been news if it wasn't turned away. This is now the fourth time I've explained that.
With you, I'm either reiterating what I already said and you not being satisfied, or I'm explaining how what you think I care about isn't what I care about but thats defensive to you and you're still not satisfied.
This is probably not going anywhere bro.
Nobody cares that rich people fly private, the same way a billion people without running water don't care that you have a car and internet. No inequality that's suddenly exposed unless you were clueless about the world. But you're right, this isn't going anywhere.
you were not capable of understanding that or chose not to despite repeated clarifications. hard to tell which is worse
Being on HN to discuss this most likely means you're much better off than billions of people on this planet.
https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percen...
If you are an average CRUD developer in most major cities in the US - Excluding the west coast and NYC, you can easily be making $130K before you’re 30. That puts you right at a household salary that’s at the 80th percentile.
Within two years of working at Big Tech, you could be clearing $200K and that puts you at the 90th percentile.
HN users love to talk about income inequality. But to many people in the US, the salary of your average software developer, let alone a software developer working for $BigTech is just as unattainable as most of us earning $100 million.
Why couldn't the Americans perform a mandatory quarantine for 14 days as well?
It's better that customs turn them back.
Also, reading between the lines, the rest of the passengers didn't leave because of "solidarity" - it's most likely their itinerary is for a weekend trip and they didn't plan to stay for 2 weeks+ - they would have been planning to hit a few other islands maybe move on to Greece within a few days. When told they'd have to stay in one place for 2 weeks, they'd rather move on to their next destination (whether that's back to the US or to some place else with easier customs, we'd have to look at the flight plan to see where the plane actually went).
These kinds of tourist trips are absolutely the worst since they are vectors trying to move fast - with no time allocated for quarantines / incubation at all.
Discriminating against a specific nationality for medical quarantines in a pandemic is not.
The criterias are the daily number of infections (comparable or less than the EU mean), the testing capability to actually estimate the infections, and the rate of change in infections (past the inflection point).
AFAIK, the covid-19 response in the US as a whole fails on each account. Possibly due to the reasons you cited.
Finally, the restrictions are reciprocal. Probably not pertinent in this case.
Americans in particular cannot be trusted to take it seriously or to self-sacrifice for the safety of others
America is a big place, with a lot of people, and a lot of opinions. Some of them are kind and generous and thoughtful. Some of them are mean-spirited and bigoted and hateful. And sometimes (and this is the bit I find most difficult to handle, though I think I'm learning) one person can be a little of any of these at different times in the same day, or different years in the same lifetime.
Put it another way. I think you applied emphasis to one part of the GPs posting without giving equal weight to their other words. Do your future self a favor. Treat the GP with the same generosity that you'd like everyone else to treat you.
If you quarantine someone and it turns out they have COVID-19, then it is your medical facilities that have to care for them.
The new case rate in the UK averaged 5.9 per 1 million per day over the last week, and is rapidly falling.
For New Zealand it was it was 0.3 and has been thereabouts or lower for weeks.
Italy is was 3.
The US was at 137.7 and is rapidly rising.
It's quite possible that they have decided the risk that someone from the US has it is high enough that the expected costs of providing medical care to infected people from the US in quarantine is higher than the benefits they get from those tourists who do not have it and make it through quarantine.
According to the European Commission, tourism is a key industry: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regional-innovat...
It's also worth knowing most countries are still banning by purpose as well as by source. Most countries do not accept tourism as a valid reason to visit.
For example, for Germany; https://www.germany.info/us-en/covid-19/2321562
"Third-country nationals with a long-term right of residence in an EU State and/or in the aforementioned State (residence permit or long-term visa, e.g. for studies or starting a job) " - that could be you, depending in your residence position in Canada. ("aforementioned State" is EU/EEC/EFTA, plus July 1st's "positive list").
However, the page ends with "U.S. citizens may still enter Germany without a visa, if they can show proof of one of the afore-mentioned exceptions to the airline and border authorities. Entry for the sole purpose of a visit or for tourist reasons is therefore still not possible."
Essentially, you need either a) the natural right to enter - EG, you're German. b) a good reason to enter, and be resident in, and travelling from, an acceptable country. or c) be on the VIP list of risks we're willing to take.
(Germany in this case was just the clearest example I found in two searches. Go figure, Germans are good at rules. The "positive list" and recommendations are provided by the EU, the implementation is provided by the state. So the nitty-gritty does vary by country.)