You don't say? I'd say for distances of <500 mi its as easy to drive. For distances of <250 mi you'd be silly not to drive. (He's travelling 650 mi i think). I think we've all been stuck at the airport in the past. One major gripe of mine; the airline knows where the aircraft are, and how late they'll really be, but don't bother to tell people on the ground, ticketing agents, passangers, etc. Their information is almost always not useful and not accurate. Nowadays we use third party web sites to track the aircraft, and that gives a good perspective on when it could be expected. Continental now does that for flight status inquires; they show a route map and the position of the aircraft.

Update: Glenn links an article by James Fallow (The Atlantic). He can do math too, apparently.

For trips of 500 miles or less, which include the majority of air journeys, going by commercial airline is effectively no faster than traveling by car. "Think about it," the administrator of NASA, Daniel Goldin, said in a speech in 1998. "You are flying through the air at three hundred to five hundred miles per hour during the part of your trip that is in the commercial airplane. But your average speed from when you left your home to when you arrive at your destination is only fifty or sixty miles per hour."

But the real pitch is the 'mesh network' concept of air travel.

A supply of inexpensive, safe, comfortable small planes, flown by hired pilots and available at rates comparable to today's coach air fares, could bring freedom and convenience to a broader share of the traveling public than the class to whom "flying commercial" is a badge of shame.

Great idea, only, a) small planes are costly; b) pilots are more costly c) b/c of the transit time, how would you find 10 people wanting to leave for LA at the same exact time as you? d) the skyways are already crowded, this wouldn't help e) air traffic control is already overworked (see the most recent plane disaster in KY). So adding thousands of small aircraft every day will clog the skyways, just like our freeways. And, usually, a collision in the air is not survivable. So, my thoughts; A) I hate the inefficiency B) Its much safer to fly commercial. C) It's much cheaper b/c the economics of scale are in play; the cost of travel is alleviated by hundreds of passangers. Also D) the fuel cost/passanger is undoubtedly much lower for jumbo jets (it's a weight issue). So the increased traffic via small aircraft wouldn't help our current fuel crisis at all. But, other than that, yeah great idea. I dream of owning and flying a plane at some point when I'm wealthy.