Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA Dropping Domestic-International Tag Ons  
User currently onlineNorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1832 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 14728 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

For years UA has tagged domestic legs onto their International flights, such as UA 938 going Den-Ord-Lhr or UA 900 going San-Sfo-Fra. Imagine my surprise checking the schedules for my RTW trip this fall to see that my Den-Ord flight has been de-tagged from the onward Ord-Lhr international leg. Not that it made much difference, it wasn't like I was going to magically get an equipment upgrade from the scheduled 752 for the Den-Ord leg, but after so many years of doing the tag ons, I find it interesting that UA is ceasing the practice.

I wonder if this is some kind of preparation for much bigger changes in the fall schedules that may happen later in the summer.

Or is UA just getting in line with the other major carriers who no longer do Domestic-International tag ons.

The schedules i checked for were for the first week in October and it seems that the de-tagging is pretty universal, all of the international flights i looked at no longer had domestic tag ons.

Any ideas on why this is happening?


Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21634 posts, RR: 55
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 14622 times:

About damn time. Now if the other airlines doing this could just follow suit, and we could end this deceptive practice once and for all.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinetpaewr From United States of America, joined May 2001, 452 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 14306 times:

It is a temp fix to a SHARESPlus issue. This was driven in part by upgrade and seat issues. They will be back.


It is strange to me how many things worked just fine in CO's old SHARES that malfunction in the new SHARESPlus


User currently offlinejporterfi From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 14297 times:

I think this may be happening in order to lessen confusion about different legs of a flight with the same flight numbers. Do you know if they are doing this with domestic flights as well? This may help clarify to people when they have a connection on an international flight: before they might have seen United 900 from SAN to FRA, unaware of the stop in SFO. Enough passengers may have gotten upset to make United change its policy. I believe DL changed this a while ago: any idea which airlines still engage in this practice? I think this needed to happen when airlines started using the same flights numbers for multiple flights, but different aircraft operate the flights. I think that flight numbers imply the same aircraft for both legs, which is simply not true. For example, United 618 has its first leg from CMH to DEN, on an A319. But the second leg, which is from DEN to LIH, is on a 752. The same flight number implies that it is either a nonstop or direct flight, instead of a connecting flight.

User currently onlineNorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1832 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14066 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 3):
Do you know if they are doing this with domestic flights as well?

I've only seen it on the international flights. I think with the domestic flights the issue might be that when they added in the PMCO flights there were more flights than available flight numbers. I think everything above 1900 is reserved for codeshares, express, and probably special purpose flights like ferries and charters. The result of that is that they have to combine two or three or four different flights on the same flight number. DL solved the same problem by doing alot of "out and back" type flight numbers, i.e. having an Atl-Dtw-Atl use the same flight number both ways.

I do also believe that for non-frequent flyers, having one flight number for multiple destinations may be confusing. When I book such a flight, as a travel agent, I always make it clear that there will be a change of planes and possibly even customs clearance enroute. For instance, if I have someone traveling from say Ams-Lax on UA 947, I'll let them know that they're going to need to deplane, clear customs and change aircraft at IAD. Unlike those of us here on a.net, your average traveler probably doesnt pay much attention to details like gauge changes enroute. They just know they get on the plane at point A and get off at point b, so, if there is a point c where they'll need to get off and change planes, they need to be told this.

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 2):
It is a temp fix to a SHARESPlus issue. This was driven in part by upgrade and seat issues. They will be back.

Thanks for that information.



Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14010 times:

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 3):
I believe DL changed this a while ago: any idea which airlines still engage in this practice?

I think the other day when I flew into CVG and saw some of the baggage claim stuff, I saw an AA flight from Dallas that actually originated somewhere in Latin America with a bunch of random codeshares on it. Confused the heck outta me and I wasn't even on that flight. Just a lot of clutter on the screen, to me.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinepanova98 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 13401 times:

Airlines have always known why this do this change-of-gauge business. To make you, whether a saavy traveler or not, think, believe, or otherwise fall for the lie that you're getting a through flight, one where you are avoiding all the messiness of a connetion, when you're getting no such thing.

It's a deceptive practice, having flights listed as something other than connections and getting higher up on the booking screen. "Don't look any further. We have a more convenient schedule than our competitors." All legal. Disclosure notice. Of course, it's still connecting service.

Complaining as I have about this with companies like UA for years, I hope UA is finally seeing the light, maybe now just for the domestic-international tag-ons, but eventually for all its service, international and domestic.


User currently offlinePI4EVER From United States of America, joined May 2009, 680 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13058 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It is driven by the display in booking systems. "Direct" flights with a stop/aircraft change will display first in most distribution systems that give that carrier a booking advantage. All the revelent disclosures occur when the segment is sold so the customer is made aware of the different equipment, required change of plane etc. DL uses the domestic-international tag/change of gauge for many of their city-pairs......the best example being DL17 ATL-LAX-SYD or DL10 TPA-ATL-LHR or DL130 LAS-ATL-MUC. Even on the days of week that DL17 ops with the 77L between ATL-LAX, if you are on DL17 to SYD you still have to deplane in LAX and re-board, so no difference in principle if you fly a 763 ATL-LAX. DL's advantage however is that from their largest hub GDS systems show they offer "direct" service to SYD, and from TPA a display advantage showing DL10 to LHR when BA flies TPA-LGW nonstop.
I suspect UA will reintroduce this practice once their system issues or upgrades are completed. The largest "global" airline in the world will want their code and identity to display at first glance, and then further down in the process the actual itineraries, equipment, times etc will display at point of sale.
Deceptive? It could be debated; however, its all about marketing and getting that first glance from a customer, and is a fully-approved process by the FAA and DOT if proper disclosures are made by point of sale. Same principle as marketing a regional jet/prop or commuter type service as a UA, DL, AA or whomever "big" airline/airplane service.



watch what you want. you may get it.
User currently offlinehamad From United Arab Emirates, joined Apr 2000, 1160 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 12597 times:

When i used to fly United All the time (2005, 2006 & 2007), i used to connect in DEN, then take flight 902, it was a 777 and many times they will say it will be continuing to MUC. Now MUC was a 767 at times, so there was always an announcement made on board by the flight attendants that if they are continuing to munich that you will have to deplane as this is not the aircraft continuing to MUC.

Another time i took delta out of PHX and the flight number was continuing to some where in florida from Atlanta, the same announcement was made. I was surprised this time as it was a domestic flight number all the way. It was a 767 out of PHX, but the continuing flight number was a 757. Not sure, as I checked online when i got home just out of curiosity.

As many of you pointed: For us, whether we are a.netters or airline employees, we do read and research multiple times before the flight.



PHX - i miss spotting
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21634 posts, RR: 55
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 12181 times:

Quoting PI4EVER (Reply 7):
Deceptive? It could be debated;

Not really - it's deceptive. You're marketing a customer experience identical to a connecting flight as something other than a connecting flight.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5438 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 11474 times:

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 2):
It is a temp fix to a SHARESPlus issue. This was driven in part by upgrade and seat issues. They will be back.

Are you sure? PMCO avoided tags mostly because of the increased risk of delaying the more important segment of the flight. Even the old SFO-HNL-GUM route used to mean an unadvertised plane-change in HNL. A through flight number was usually the best they would offer.

That logic still seems to hold.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlinemalaysia From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 3352 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 11134 times:

Even it is deceptive, it has helped me a bit as a Non-Rev, saved me by using just a single coupon all the way through even having to change planes 2 times on the same flight number, but my origin to final was the beginning and end of the flight number overseas. They made sure they could clear me all the way first even on the domestic leg, then gave me all my seat assignments. but for a revenue traveler its a pain if you actually need to be on several of those legs, no convenience in staying on the plane


There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
User currently offlineDTWLAX From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 10222 times:

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Thread starter):
Or is UA just getting in line with the other major carriers who no longer do Domestic-International tag ons.
Quoting jporterfi (Reply 3):
I believe DL changed this a while ago: any idea which airlines still engage in this practice?

DL still does the domestic tag-ons. As pointed before, DL 17/16 is a very good example.


User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 9689 times:

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 2):
It is a temp fix to a SHARESPlus issue. This was driven in part by upgrade and seat issues. They will be back.

Can you explain the SHARESPlus system - and the issue with it - for those of us, such as me, whose only connection to the industry is as a passenger?


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 9501 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):

About damn time. Now if the other airlines doing this could just follow suit, and we could end this deceptive practice once and for all.

-Mir

How are you being deceived by this practice? What is it that you gain by them discontinuing this?



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 9276 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 14):
What is it that you gain by them discontinuing this?

My direct issue with this is: Timetable format
Some of these timetables (nowadays just in PDF format, unfortunately) are endless in listing city after city including the direct and connecting flights, not just the non stops.

I've always liked the Northwest Timetable. It was simple, thin and you could figure out connections easily.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineb52murph From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 241 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 9130 times:

It appears as though this isn't limited to domestic. UA 803 has been IAD-NRT-BKK for quite some time; however, still a change of plane and requirement to clear security in NRT. For the fall, it changes to UA881 on the NRT-BKK leg and by October is up-gauged to a 744 from 772.

User currently offlineUA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1730 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8903 times:

Quoting b52murph (Reply 16):

It appears as though this isn't limited to domestic. UA 803 has been IAD-NRT-BKK for quite some time; however, still a change of plane and requirement to clear security in NRT. For the fall, it changes to UA881 on the NRT-BKK leg and by October is up-gauged to a 744 from 772.

Actually, UA803/804 has traditionally been IAD-NRT-SIN (since 200X when UA started the route). UA used to re-number IAD-NRT when they dropped the IAD-PEK non-stop during the winter months. To satisfy the slot agreement, UA operated IAD-NRT-PEK as UA897 (the IAD-PEK flight number), and UA898 PEK-NRT-IAD with a 777.

UA881/882 has traditionally been ORD-NRT-ICN with NRT-ICN operated with a 777-200ER, while the ORD-NRT leg operates with a 747-400.

NRT-BKK has traditionally been UA837/838 utilizing the inbound 744 from SFO (no plane change).

More info than you probably wanted to know!!!!


User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2092 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8866 times:

I do not think it means anything for informed travelers. Kettles might be fooled by the single flight number when booking but anyone that has flown more than a couple of times on UA knows that the international tag-ons are just another connecting flight. Does it really make any difference taking UA888 from PEK to SFO on a 744 then switching to UA888 on a A320 SFO-LAX if the second segment had a different flight number? There might be some mileage or segment issue for MilagePlus but it makes no difference for much else.

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21634 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7997 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 14):
How are you being deceived by this practice? What is it that you gain by them discontinuing this?

As I said, it's a connecting flight marketed as something other than a connecting flight. I personally don't gain anything, because I know the practice exists, but for the traveler who doesn't fly that often, they'll benefit by knowing that they're booking the regular connecting flight that they're actually booking.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7607 times:

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 3):
I believe DL changed this a while ago

No. DL still has many domestic-international tags that share the same flight number; in both directions.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7496 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 20):
Quoting jporterfi (Reply 3):
I believe DL changed this a while ago

No. DL still has many domestic-international tags that share the same flight number; in both directions.

Same applies for DL international-international tag-ons at NRT where they use 757s based in Asia for sectors beyond NRT to various points in Asia. They're forced to use the same flight number as a U.S.-NRT flight on those tag-ons as they're restricted to 5th freedom rights, meaning a flight that's a continuation of a flight to/from the U.S. They can change aircraft but can't operate them with stand-alone flight numbers which would imply 7th freedom rights which are very rare.


User currently offlinedlphoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 419 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 6303 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 9):
Not really - it's deceptive. You're marketing a customer experience identical to a connecting flight as something other than a connecting flight.

-Mir

I couldn't have said it any better.
I would love to see the airline industry recognize this practice for what it is and discontinue it.
I have yet to see how a customer gains from this practice, but there is a lot to lose.

DLP


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6764 posts, RR: 31
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5866 times:

Quoting dlphoenix (Reply 22):
I have yet to see how a customer gains from this practice, but there is a lot to lose.

There is a very small benefit to the customer in that the TSA security fee and connecting airport PFC (if any) would not be charged on a connecting itinerary ticketed as a single flight number -- so a connection over ATL sold as a "direct" flight would actually save the customer $7.00.


User currently offlineCapEd388 From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5735 times:

Im sorry, but if travelers are having trouble or are suddenly surprised by a stop, then thats their fault. If you carefully read the itinerary, it will see that a flight makes a stop or changes planes. Same thing goes for codesharing, they always disclose the "operating carrier".

I personally do not purchase anything until i have carefully read and researched whatever Im about to buy. Travelers need to be a little more careful and take a few seconds to go over their itinerary before purchasing it.



388 346 77W 787
25 Post contains images CapEd388 : Heres an example of an AA flight: Heres a "direct" flight from MFE to ABQ on AA's timtable It clearly states that there is a stop. Heres a look at the
26 Mir : A direct flight always has a stop - that's not the issue. There's nothing wrong with marketing a flight as having one stop when it's the same plane f
27 Post contains images hiflyer : Personally I like eliminating the codeshares and the COG thrus as well as the true thrus. (COG change of gauge). I had read in 'another forum' that CO
28 B747forever : You mean put another $7 in the airlines pocket.
29 CapEd388 : I have been tracking a specific AA aircraft since January and I have noticed is that whenever there is a direct flight, that aircraft serves all the
30 blueflyer : Let's turn the question around and ask why UA bothers to do this. No, it certainly isn't because they'd run out of flight numbers otherwise. They don
31 gigneil : So does United. They both have practically no restrictions to operating flights from NRT. NS
32 Mir : And that's the definition of a direct flight, so that's fine. What is thread is about is airlines scheduling two different airplanes (and often two d
33 Viscount724 : No, DL and UA don't have 7th freedom rights. They have 5th freedom rights which means they can carry local traffic between NRT and points in Asia but
34 Stratacruiser : Good Riddance! Most Frequent Flyer programs credit non-stop distance only, even when the passenger uses a one or multi-stop flight. If you flew BOS -
35 Coairman : A couple years ago there was a lot of hoopla in CLE about a "direct" flight to PVG. It was big news. It was actually a CO737 on the CLEEWR flight segm
36 GolfBravoRomeo : Let's say the airlines were required to hold the second flight, would that make acceptable? It would provide a benefit over a straight connection it.
37 blueflyer : I am pretty sure I came across an ICAO document purporting to be a list of 7th freedom rights, that included both DL and UA. I'll have to see if I ca
38 Viscount724 : You may be referring to the following paragraph in the Record of Discussions of a 2009 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. and Japan, relate
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UA 787 Domestic Routes? posted Wed Feb 22 2012 14:21:44 by 747400sp
Merged UA-CO: What International Network Changes? posted Sat Apr 24 2010 12:12:03 by rjpieces
Continental 752 Domestic/International posted Sun Mar 1 2009 20:52:22 by JLDWC
UA Q2 Domestic Route Performance posted Wed Oct 22 2008 16:14:32 by MOBflyer
Is UA Dropping ORD-MEX? posted Mon Aug 4 2008 10:05:06 by Olli
UA 744s Domestic This Summer posted Sat May 3 2008 20:00:16 by ExpressJet_ERJ
UA's And DL's International 763s--Question posted Fri Apr 11 2008 14:34:19 by Soxfan
Any UA 744s Domestic Aug Or Sept? posted Tue Aug 21 2007 22:14:13 by Expressjet_erj
Route Map Returns With UA/DL Domestic Map posted Mon Jul 16 2007 03:56:37 by Jimyvr
UA 744 Domestic Routes '07 posted Sun Mar 18 2007 20:48:19 by Mav75