Airliners.net

Have you ever been on a milk run flight going from point a to point B with say 5 stops on the way. I wonder why airlines these days don't do these milk runs like they did in the 1960s and 1970s.Kind of faded out in the 1980s.
Here is one out of a National Airlines timetable from 1970. MIA-PBI-MCO-JAX-SAV-CHS-ORF-PHL-JFK, Seven stops between MIA and JFK, operated with a Boeing 727.

Lots of info in the somewhat recent thread listed below with over 160 replies:

Milk Run Nostalgia (by flylku Aug 11 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Some current multi-stop journeys available domestically in Australia:

Skippers Aviation (JW) BME-DRB-FIZ-HCQ Cessna 441 Conquest

Skytrans (Q6) flights DHC-8 100
CNS-KWM-EDR-CNS
CNS-CUQ-IRG-AUU-CNS
CNS-NTN-ONG-BUC-DMD-ISA
BNE-TWB-SGO-CMA-XTG
BNE-TWB-CTL-ULP-WNR-BVI-BEU-BQL-ISA


REX (ZL) TVS-HGD-RCM-JCK-ISA Saab 340

Qantas Link (QF) CNS-TSV-MKY-ROK-GLT-BNE DHC-8 300

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter): I wonder why airlines these days don't do these milk runs like they did in the 1960s and 1970s.Kind of faded out in the 1980s.

The hub-and-spoke concept became almost universal for the major network carriers and eliminated most of those types of flights.

Some LCCs like Southwest that are less hub-and-spoke oriented still do that. WestJet also has quite a few flights with 2 or 3 stops.

AS also still has some multi-stop flights serving various points in Alaska. Examples:
AS62, 737-400, FAI-ANC-JNU-SIT-KTN-SEA..
AS64, 737-400, ANC-JNU-PSG-WRG-KTN-SEA
On AS64, PSG-WRG may be the shortest scheduled jet sector in the U.S. at 27 nm.

Several Canadian regional carriers serving remote points have multi-stop flights. For example, Air Inuit that opeates from YUL to many points in northern Quebec has some Dash 8 flights with as many as 7 stops and a block time end-to-end of over 8 hours.

[Edited 2013-03-03 18:39:19]

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter): I wonder why airlines these days don't do these milk runs like they did in the 1960s and 1970s.Kind of faded out in the 1980s.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 3): The hub-and-spoke concept became almost universal for the major network carriers and eliminated most of those types of flights.

And the reason the hub-and-spoke concept became almost universal is because most people hate milk runs. Yes, airline geeks like us may love them, but most people understandably just want to get to their destination with as few stops and diversions as possible.

I'm willing to wager that WN has the lions share of these: WN# 1929 FLL-TPA-BHM-SDF-BWI-MHT or WN# 1659 MCO-PIT-MDW-STL-LIT-DAL. While not the uber short segments of old ex: MIA-FLL-MCO-JAX-ATL etc... they still exist and even AA does them on a *few* intrercontinental occasions : AA992 MIA-LPV-VVI-MIA (round robin: one direction one flight number).

[Edited 2013-03-03 18:48:58]

I used to do PIA-CMI-IAD all the time on Ozark. Continued on to LGA, flew the IAD-LGA leg once to meet my mom in NYC then on to YUL-YQB on AC. Flew PIA-SPI-STL a few times and PIA-IND-BNA which continued on to TPA, caught the same flight back to PIA via IND. Gotta chance to fly Aloha HNL-OGG-KOA and return nonstop from KOA to HNL. Once tried to fly PIA-SUX-DEN on OZ, got bumped in SUX, flew back SUX-ORD then back ORD-ALO-DEN, gosh I miss the Local Service carriers!

Back in 1994 I flew one of Varig's milk runs. If my memory serves me right the flight originated in Sao Paulo, I picked it up in Rio and it continued to Belo Horzonte, Brasilia and on to Manaus where I deplaned and it then continued to one of the border towns, which looking at the route map for 1993 must have been either Boa Vista or Tabatinga.

I then did the reverse all the way to Sao Paulo where becasue of delays en route I missed my connection and took a side trip to Curatiba to pick up an alternate flight to Foz do Iguacu where my journey ended.

Back in the early 60s when I was born, the CP Air flight we took to EZE was MEX-ACA-LIM-SCL-EZE. Mother must have been a saint doing that with a three month old, me.

Thing is, we would be going to MDZ and we still had to make a connection in BUE, going from EZE to AEP.

Quoting Polot (Reply 4): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 3): The hub-and-spoke concept became almost universal for the major network carriers and eliminated most of those types of flights. And the reason the hub-and-spoke concept became almost universal is because most people hate milk runs. Yes, airline geeks like us may love them, but most people understandably just want to get to their destination with as few stops and diversions as possible.

Some of the old milk runs with 2 or 3 stops could be faster than many of today's one-stop connections via a hub. The milk runs usually headed in roughly the correct direction, while it's common when making hub-and-spoke connections to have to fly a few hundred miles in the wrong direction to/from the hub, and the intermediate stops on the milk runs were usually shorter than today's typical hub connection. And since you were on the same aircraft all the way you didn't have to worry about missing the connection and a possible several hour (or overnight) delay waiting for the next flight. Baggage was also less likely to go astray when it remained on the same aircraft all the way.

Quoting GEN2STEW (Reply 5): I'm willing to wager that WN has the lions share of these: WN# 1929 FLL-TPA-BHM-SDF-BWI-MHT or WN# 1659 MCO-PIT-MDW-STL-LIT-DAL. While not the uber short segments of old ex: MIA-FLL-MCO-JAX-ATL etc... they still exist and even AA does them on a *few* intrercontinental occasions : AA992 MIA-LPV-VVI-MIA (round robin: one direction one flight number).

I wonder if anyone actually flies all 5 segments of one those WN flights. Usually there is a shorter way to do it. On the other hand, if the shorter way involved a long layover the multi-stop way could actually be less total time, and you don't have to worry about making your connection.

It certainly makes sense for WN to keep the flight number unchanged for as long as possible so as many people as possible can be taking a direct flight for whatever intermediate segments as possible. Just imagine if the flight number changed at every stop. People would think they are changing planes when they don't have to. Unless the aircraft repeats a segment sometime during the day (like LAS-RNO-LAS-RNO-LAS, which I think used to happen, may still) I don't see the point in changing the flight number any time during the day.

Quoting aklrno (Reply 10): I wonder if anyone actually flies all 5 segments of one those WN flights. Usually there is a shorter way to do it. On the other hand, if the shorter way involved a long layover the multi-stop way could actually be less total time, and you don't have to worry about making your connection.

WN does not sell these itineraries. Any passengers flying these flights from start to finish ended up on them as a result of a delay, missing their original flight(s), and so on.

Quoting aklrno (Reply 10): It certainly makes sense for WN to keep the flight number unchanged for as long as possible so as many people as possible can be taking a direct flight for whatever intermediate segments as possible. Just imagine if the flight number changed at every stop. People would think they are changing planes when they don't have to. Unless the aircraft repeats a segment sometime during the day (like LAS-RNO-LAS-RNO-LAS, which I think used to happen, may still) I don't see the point in changing the flight number any time during the day.

That's exactly why they do it. If I remember correctly, they allow a maximum of 2 stops on regular bookings, anything higher would be the result of irregular operations, missed flights, and so on.