I have been reading recently on this board that airlines use the same flight number but require a change of planes on "direct" flights. To me this is deceptive and annoying. If I have to change planes its a connection.
When most people think of direct or 1 stop flights they think of just a stop where you can stay on the plane
Opinions?
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
I know CO does this. CO 6 NRT-IAH-SAT. The NRT-IAH is on a 777 and the IAH-SAT is on a 737.
[Edited 2006-05-27 04:54:24]
[Edited 2006-05-27 04:54:24]
A318 A319 A320 A321 717 722 732 733 735 737 738 739 752 762 763 772 DC9 DC10 DHC8 E120 E145 E170 MD80 MD90 F100 CRJ CR7 CR9
-
- AlexPorter
- Posts: 1655
- Joined:
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
UA has a TUS-PHX-IAD-FRA route, where an A320 operates TUS-PHX-IAD, and I think a B767 operates IAD-FRA. IMO these are annoying for me, mainly because airlines don't give extra miles for connecting on direct flights.
Last Flight: SCX701 MSP-PHX B738 8Jan2008
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
AA used to have one of its roundtrips between ORD and LHR continue to/originate from SEA, using an MD-80 each way between ORD and SEA.
The idea was that it would show up as a direct flight, whereas UA would show a connection at ORD for service bewteen LHR and SEA.
In theory, going from LHR to SEA would require leaving the aircraft at ORD, even if the 777 continued to SEA. Passengers would have to go through immigration and customs, and AA would have to move the aircraft from Terminal 5 (international arrivals) to Terminal 3 (domestic arrivals and all departures).
The idea was that it would show up as a direct flight, whereas UA would show a connection at ORD for service bewteen LHR and SEA.
In theory, going from LHR to SEA would require leaving the aircraft at ORD, even if the 777 continued to SEA. Passengers would have to go through immigration and customs, and AA would have to move the aircraft from Terminal 5 (international arrivals) to Terminal 3 (domestic arrivals and all departures).
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
Dunno if they still do it, but in the past UA had one flight number continuing over two plane changes-- i.e. three different aircraft.
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
DL (ComAir) runs STL - PBI (5127?) on a CRJ with a one stop at CVG. You must change planes at CVG to another CRJ. A tad bit confusing since the boarding pass reads STL - PBI with no mention of changing planes or at what time the flight leaves CVG.
Fools and thieves are well disguised in the temple and the marketplace.....
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
A lot of airlines do this with their transatlantic crossings. When looking at UA arrivals in to LHR it shows some of their flights coming from places such as LAS, HNL, PDX and SAN. Also, with US their flight PHL-MAN is shown as coming from LAX at the mo, although they have used flight #196 for LAS-PHL and more recently MCO-PHL. Kind of confusing to people who think they are going directly to a place, but they have to change aircraft somewhere. Are pax re-issued boarding passes when say arriving from MAN on US and connecting on to LAX, because both aircraft wouldn't have the same seat numbers on? Unless US send the 333 to LAX as well?
Matt
Matt
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
The situation is referred to as "Change of Gauge" and is probably more common than it should be.
In my experience, it's most likely to happen with international flights where the airline wishes to advertise direct service. As an example from about 3 years ago with United:
I was flying a 747-400 ORD-LAX (UA0125 or UA0100, IIRC); that particular aircraft was to continue on to Sydney as UA0825 (for example, I don't think that's the right flight number). UA0825 originated out of JFK as a 757, so it would be 757-200 JFK-LAX, 747-400 LAX-SYD.
I don't know why they didn't just run the 744 JFK-LAX-SYD, maybe it was equipment positioning, maybe maintenance needs to check out the 744 before sending it to SYD, but for whatever reason the aircraft goes (went) ORD-LAX-SYD, but the flight went JFK-LAX-SYD.
As an even more annoying example that I couldn't figure out from the same time period:
Northwest has two DC9-30 flights:
NW0001 is ORD-DTW-YYZ (IIRC)
NW0002 is YYZ-DTW-ORD...
Same aircraft types, both flights arrive and depart DTW at about the same time. Aircraft A operates NW0001's ORD-DTW leg and NW0002's DTW-ORD leg; Aircraft B operates NW0002's YYZ-DTW leg and NW0001's DTW-YYZ leg.
This makes even less sense to me because it was the same equipment type, and on the days I flew it (DTW-ORD-DTW), the two aircraft were departing from opposite ends of the gargantuan concourse. I'll never know why DTW would want to unload all of the through pax and bags drive them across the airport and then load them back on the same model aircraft.
Lincoln
In my experience, it's most likely to happen with international flights where the airline wishes to advertise direct service. As an example from about 3 years ago with United:
I was flying a 747-400 ORD-LAX (UA0125 or UA0100, IIRC); that particular aircraft was to continue on to Sydney as UA0825 (for example, I don't think that's the right flight number). UA0825 originated out of JFK as a 757, so it would be 757-200 JFK-LAX, 747-400 LAX-SYD.
I don't know why they didn't just run the 744 JFK-LAX-SYD, maybe it was equipment positioning, maybe maintenance needs to check out the 744 before sending it to SYD, but for whatever reason the aircraft goes (went) ORD-LAX-SYD, but the flight went JFK-LAX-SYD.
As an even more annoying example that I couldn't figure out from the same time period:
Northwest has two DC9-30 flights:
NW0001 is ORD-DTW-YYZ (IIRC)
NW0002 is YYZ-DTW-ORD...
Same aircraft types, both flights arrive and depart DTW at about the same time. Aircraft A operates NW0001's ORD-DTW leg and NW0002's DTW-ORD leg; Aircraft B operates NW0002's YYZ-DTW leg and NW0001's DTW-YYZ leg.
This makes even less sense to me because it was the same equipment type, and on the days I flew it (DTW-ORD-DTW), the two aircraft were departing from opposite ends of the gargantuan concourse. I'll never know why DTW would want to unload all of the through pax and bags drive them across the airport and then load them back on the same model aircraft.
Lincoln
CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting JerseyGuy (Thread starter): I have been reading recently on this board that airlines use the same flight number but require a change of planes on "direct" flights. To me this is deceptive and annoying. If I have to change planes its a connection. When most people think of direct or 1 stop flights they think of just a stop where you can stay on the plane Opinions? |
I agree, it simply causes confusion among pax......its especially difficult for unexperienced travellers or pax travelling where language is an issue. The same flight number/change of aircraft thing happened more in the past, pre mega hubs, and Pan AM and TWA were big offenders.......flying a narrowbody into JFK and then larger aircraft overseas, and then sometimes back to smaller aircraft for tag on flights to other destinations......and the flight would have one flight number.
In my opinion, if you have to get off the aircraft, go to another gate, and then continue on a different airplane, its two seperate flights and the service should not be marketed as direct or one-stop, it is a connection and the flight numbers should change.
-
- EWRCabincrew
- Posts: 4323
- Joined:
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting JerseyGuy (Thread starter): I have been reading recently on this board that airlines use the same flight number but require a change of planes on "direct" flights. To me this is deceptive and annoying. If I have to change planes its a connection. When most people think of direct or 1 stop flights they think of just a stop where you can stay on the plane |
...among other things.
Non-stop means just that...non stop, no stopping until you reach your destination.
Direct can imply making a connection or changing planes, as long as the flight number doesn't change. A change in flight number automatically assumes a connection. You are correct in stating that a change of planes is a connection, but it is still a "direct" means of getting you to your destination.
It can be annoying and, yes, confusing, but still another meaning to the word "direct".
For example, if you have a non-stop to London from Los Angeles, it would mean just that...non stop. LAX-LHR without stopping. A direct flight has many meanings. It may mean stopping in CVG - no plane change or stopping in ORD - plane change. As long as the flight number doesn't change, it can be marketed as direct. If it is a non stop it usually marketed as such, but a change in planes or making a stop with the flight number staying the same is marketed as direct.
It is similar to how people use the word layover, instead of stopover, when describing their time between flights at an airport. It should be best said stopover or connection. A layover is when you actually spend time at your destination. As cabin crew we layover in Tulsa, but may have a stopover in Houston in getting there, for example.
Yet another "to-may-to", "to-mah-to" way of saying things in the airline business to keep you on your toes.
When all else fails...enquire, find out what the flight does. Does it stop? Does it make a connection? Do we get a crew change? Do we change aircraft?
While the airline industry is far from perfect, it just helps to be proactive in your travels.
You can't cure stupid
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
Does a direct flight always follow the most direct route. Like if you had a flight EWR-LAX. The most direct route would allow for a stop over in lets say DEN but I would think that ATL is out of the way. Its almost like the new defination of "direct flight" is a marketing ploy primarily.
BTW Dictionary.com defines a direct flight as "a flight with one or more intermediate stops but no change of aircraft"
It defines connection as "A scheduled run providing continuing service between means of transportation: missed my connection in Atlanta. "
BTW Dictionary.com defines a direct flight as "a flight with one or more intermediate stops but no change of aircraft"
It defines connection as "A scheduled run providing continuing service between means of transportation: missed my connection in Atlanta. "
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
As a travel agent, I refuse to sell "disguised" Connecting flights for many reasons. First, I will spend too much time trying to explain this to a customer, they always come back to complain about it anyway. Plus, they get less miles from their frequent flyers programs and it diminishes my segment count in my GDS. I need those extra segments in order to get my bonus from them. The combined flights will always be displayed as a connection in addition to the pseudo direct flight anyway. I wish there would be rules against this as this is misleading advertising.
Ben YVR
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 9):
It can be annoying and, yes, confusing, but still another meaning to the word "direct". |
In the airline industry, direct means same aircraft with or without stops.
[Edited 2006-05-28 04:23:10]
Ben YVR
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
yeah...Qantas (QF 3 or 4) used a B744 from MEL-SYD and then changed to a B743 from SYD to HNL. But now, not anymore.
UAL is also doing the same things as well. UA 869/UA 870 use a B763 to fly from ORD to SFO and then change to B744 for SFO-SYD vice versa.
UAL is also doing the same things as well. UA 869/UA 870 use a B763 to fly from ORD to SFO and then change to B744 for SFO-SYD vice versa.
The Spirit of AustraliAN - Longreach
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting QB737 (Reply 12): In the airline industry, direct means same aircraft with or without stops. |
To be semantic, I beleive that direct means same flight number with or without stops; therefore "Change of Gauge" flights can be described as "direct".
Lincoln
CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
Apparently they "can" be described as direct, if "can" means "no one will throw you in jail for doing it". But does the airline treat a same-flight-number connection any different than any other connection? Is it possible to miss the connection? Or if the first leg is a couple hours late, will they hold the second leg?
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
The doomed Pan Am flight that exploded over Lockerbie had started in Frankfurt. The first leg to LHR was with a 727-200.
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
Although annoying, this practice does make sense. I remember UA ran I think SEA-IAD-some place in Europe, and from Europe to IAD was on either a 744 or a 772, and then the same flight continued to SEA on a 752. From an airline's perspective, why waste a 744/772 sized plane on a route that can be done using a smaller, more profitable plane?
"don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining!" - Judge Judy
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting Timz (Reply 15): Is it possible to miss the connection? Or if the first leg is a couple hours late, will they hold the second leg? |
If it means holding the second segment more then a few minutes, most likely not. With only a few exceptions (at least with CO at IAH) there are rarely more then 5-6 "thru" pax (if that many) continuing onward. Why delay the other 130 pax on the second segment for 5... Plus causing down-line delays for the aircraft at final destination.
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting IAHcsr (Reply 18): If it means holding the second segment more then a few minutes, most likely not. With only a few exceptions (at least with CO at IAH) there are rarely more then 5-6 "thru" pax (if that many) continuing onward. Why delay the other 130 pax on the second segment for 5... Plus causing down-line delays for the aircraft at final destination. |
So assuming that the pax knows that the "direct" flight is "a change of gauge" and requires a change of planes, what benifit is it to the pax?
The plane still leaves without them if the first segment is late. It appears that this is only benefical to the airline. More chance that a pax will use their airline to travel between point A to point B because they think they don't have to change planes. Airline awards less mileage and less segments.
Seems like a plan to sucker unknowing pax to me.
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
Pan Am use to do it on flights from US to Argentina with stop in RIO.Same flight number with different airplane from Rio to EZE
Alex!!!
Alex!!!
Tengo una pasion por la aviacion /لدي شغف للطيران / I have a passion for aviation /Jeg har en lidenskap for luftfart/ J'ai une passion pour l'aviation.
-
- dtwclipper
- Posts: 6668
- Joined:
RE: Same Flight #..Different Planes
| Quoting Levent (Reply 16): The doomed Pan Am flight that exploded over Lockerbie had started in Frankfurt. The first leg to LHR was with a 727-200. |
And then there was also a change of "gauge" at JFK to a 727 again with a final destination of Detroit.
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 11C, afterburner33, alia380, anymaninfc, ArcticSEA, aristoenigma, ASMD11, astuteman, Baidu [Spider], berty320, bevan7, Bing [Bot], bombayduck, BrazilExPat, Caymanair, CLEguy, CLT704, d8s, Dutchy, eeightning, EricBTV, ERJ170, graham697, hbernal1, InnsbruckFlyer, jetmatt777, Jshank83, KliptWings, LASVegan, Luke1994, LXM83, maverick4002, MD80MKE, midexjet, nascar1, njeinaz, nyd686, SEU, SRQLOT, SteinarN, SWALUV, tphuang, unusualattitude, vandoc, winstonavgeek, YYZORD and 390 guests