Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
avi8tir
Topic Author
Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:34 pm

Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:59 am

Just completing a Trans atlantic on DL from LAX. Why does DL have the same flight number (ie LAX-JFK and then JFK-XXX) has the same flight number, but a change of equipment (even aircraft type) in JFK. I am on DL75 tomorrow and it is a 764 intl MXP-ATL and then a 764 dom ATL-LAX from a completely different terminal. what is the point of this??
*Long live the Widget*
 
ANother
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:47 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:01 am

Better display in the GDSs. Single flight numbers take precedence over on-line or interline connections. Typical lie to your customers philosophy in play
 
delta fly boy
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2000 7:16 pm

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:17 am

It's basically a marketing ploy. When travel agents or whoever look up flights for LAX-MXP Delta will show up at the top as DL75, or from FLL-LGW, as DL1, or LAS-BCN as DL94. Most of the international flights out of JFK have a flight number that originates elsewhere in the US.
 
sflaflight
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:33 pm

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:51 am

Quoting ANother (Reply 1):
Better display in the GDSs. Single flight numbers take precedence over on-line or interline connections. Typical lie to your customers philosophy in play

I'm not so sure how much precedence it holds. This summer (the day after the tornado touched down in Brooklyn), I was on DL 088 FLL-JFK-KBP and the first leg is on an MD-88 while the JFK-KBP is obviously a B767. Anyhow, 088 FLL-JFK was an hour late leaving FLL (inbound flight was late from WX at JFK) and once airborne, because of bad WX along the Atlantic Coast, we flew inland and added 1/2 hour to the flight. Once landing at JFK, the flight crew informed the passengers that the second leg of the flight had already left. Passengers missed their connection to Kiev and had t be reaccommodated. The Ukranian bound passengers were upset because they were told at FLL that there would be no problem with the delay as it was the same flight. Talk about confusion.

I guess DL couldn't hold the second flight for whatever the reason. You know that if they would have held the flight, It could have made up time in the overnight airspace!

Since this happened, I would say it is trickery having the same flight number, as in this case, it gave the passengers ZERO benefits.
 
vv701
Posts: 5895
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:47 am

UA play this marketing game as well. UA929 starts out as a 772 at LHR and changes to a 320 at ORD before terminating at PDX. Similarly UA935 starts as a 772 at LHR and changes to a 763 at LAX before flying on to HNL.

On these trans-Atlantic routes from LHR, particularly on flights to American cities that the still current Bermuda 2 agreement does not allow to be served direct, it gives the US operator a marketing advantage over the likes of BA and VS. Even under Open Skies this marketing advantage will be maintained as neither BA or VS will be able to down grade a flight to a 320 at ORD on the way to PDX or fill a 777 or 346 up with cabotage passengers at ORD. So until demand for London to Portland, Hawaii or other similar destinations improves a single one-stop UA flight looks on paper or the web more convenient than, for example a BA flight and then an AA/BA code share flight. However in reality they are equally convenient (or inconvenient).
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:52 am

Almost every American airline does this, and it's been done for years and years and years.

The most famous one of course was PA 103.

727-200 FRA-LHR
747 LHR-JFK
727-200 JFK-DTW
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:50 pm

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 5):
Almost every American airline does this, and it's been done for years and years and years.

It's a lovely scam. The airlines pull this on the US gov't; the recent US-China route proposals included the benefits of one flight service to China from cities without single aircraft service. It's amazing that the airlines have the guts to list this as a benefit in that kind of document.

The scam also saves airlines a few FF miles.

One way to quickly eliminate this silly game would be to legally require that the continuation not depart until (min connection time) after the flight lands.

Quoting ANother (Reply 1):
Better display in the GDSs.

Also on airport screens. You get two listings for the "price" of one. People at LGW see flights to MSY on the screens.
 
LASoctoberB6
Posts: 1936
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 4:23 pm

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:59 pm

Quoting Delta Fly Boy (Reply 2):
or LAS-BCN as DL94

i never knew DL had a flight here as DL94... so it goes LAS-JFK-BCN? with a plane change, and maybe even a gate change too?

Quoting ANother (Reply 1):
Better display in the GDSs. Single flight numbers take precedence over on-line or interline connections. Typical lie to your customers philosophy in play

what's GDS?
[NOT IN SERVICE] {WEStJet}
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:30 pm

Quoting Analog (Reply 6):

It's a lovely scam

Is it anymore of a scam then booking on NW and flying on KL? It's no worse then the "interchanges" of years gone by when the same aircraft would be flown by two or three different airlines?

No. Everyone knows how the system works, you are told at the time of booking that there is a plane change or you are flying on a partner airline.

Quoting Analog (Reply 6):
The scam also saves airlines a few FF miles.

I don't know about this. As far as I know you get miles for both segments.
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:35 pm

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 8):

I don't know about this. As far as I know you get miles for both segments.

Nope. Most airlines give you miles for XXX-ZZZ if you fly XXX-YYY-ZZZ on a single flight number.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 8):
Is it anymore of a scam then booking on NW and flying on KL?

Yes, it is more of a scam. Code-shares (in theory) change nothing. One segment is still one segment, a non-stop is still a non-stop. Getting on that flight pretty much guarantees landing on that flight (not so with a "direct" flight).

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 8):
No. Everyone knows how the system works,

Apparently the people at the US DOT are too dense to figure it out.
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:53 pm

Quoting Analog (Reply 9):
Apparently the people at the US DOT are too dense to figure it out.

Ya think?  no 

Quoting Analog (Reply 9):
Yes, it is more of a scam. Code-shares (in theory) change nothing. One segment is still one segment, a non-stop is still a non-stop. Getting on that flight pretty much guarantees landing on that flight (not so with a "direct" flight).

I really think you're over reacting here a bit. I just don't see what the big deal is. Everything is made very clear at the time of booking, be it on the phone or internet. If the pax doesn't listen or read, well that's their own problem, it is stated very clearly.

If these things are clarifeid at the time of booking, why is it a scam? It's a practice that has gone on for decades and I am sure the US DOT is well aware of it. Maybe it's just news to you?!
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
AAtakeMeAway
Posts: 502
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:59 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:33 pm

AA used to do this with AUS-DFW-NRT. Is this still the case?
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5300
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:17 am

Quoting Analog (Reply 9):
Nope. Most airlines give you miles for XXX-ZZZ if you fly XXX-YYY-ZZZ on a single flight number.

Don't know what airline you are flying, but even when i flew the same flight number on NW, I still got them counted on each leg.


Its not a "scam", a scam wouldn't let people know at all, but it clearly says like for instance when i flew to DAB from MSP, it said NW 9877 OPERATED BY DELTA AIRLINES in big capital letters.
 
alphascan
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:04 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:41 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 4):
On these trans-Atlantic routes from LHR, particularly on flights to American cities that the still current Bermuda 2 agreement does not allow to be served direct,

The very definition of a direct flight is one that stops enroute between originaton and destination, keeping the same flight number. It may or may not involve a change of equipment. You confuse the words nonstop and direct.

For example, using the OP's flights:

DL 75 is a direct flight from Milan to Los Angeles. The first segment is also a nonstop flight from Milan to Atlanta.

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 3):
it gave the passengers ZERO benefits.

As stated several times, its about getting a higher listing on a GDS display which has been proven to sell more seats. It has nothing to do with passenger benefits, albeit there is a perception that here is a benefit.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
 
timz
Posts: 6581
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 13):
The very definition of a direct flight is one that stops enroute between originaton and destination, keeping the same flight number. It may or may not involve a change of equipment.

That's been the industry's definition, in the last few decades, but that doesn't mean it's the "very" definition. Until at least 1970 the OAG said specifically that a "direct" flight meant no plane change.
 
Tango-Bravo
Posts: 2941
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:04 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:58 am

Quoting Analog (Reply 6):
It's a lovely scam.

Perhaps not lovely but definitely a scam, one among many the U.S. legacy airlines are allowed to perpetrate with impunity.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 8):
Is it anymore of a scam then booking on NW and flying on KL?

No; change-of-plane single flight numbers being made to appear as same-plane through service (correct definition of direct flight) is a scam of roughly the same magnitude as code-share scams, which in some cases are more accurately described as fraud.

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 13):
As stated several times, its about getting a higher listing on a GDS display which has been proven to sell more seats.

So apparently the end of selling more seats justifies the means, which is deception, even fraud? Or misrepresentation at best?

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 13):
It has nothing to do with passenger benefits, albeit there is a perception that here is a benefit.

 checkmark  In fact, it has everything to do with making an already convoluted product that is bewildering to pax even more confusing, albeit unintentionally.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 10):
I just don't see what the big deal is. Everything is made very clear at the time of booking, be it on the phone or internet. If the pax doesn't listen or read, well that's their own problem, it is stated very clearly.

Here's "the big deal"... It may not be the airlines' fault that the average pax is inattentive, but the consequences of implicit deception and the confusion created do become the airlines' problem, to say nothing of the pax' problems.

Moreover, codeshares have been allowed by government to become anti-competitive legalized collusion. If NW, for example, can pretend to fly someone from MSP to DAB by hiding behind a DL-operated flight (as in Reply 12), in reality there becomes one less airline to choose from in this and innumerable other markets, regardless of full disclosure of the operating carrier. If airlines were required to conduct their business in a fair and honest manner, to serve MSP-DAB NW would be required by law to either 1) serve the market with their own metal or 2) sell the flight as an interline connection with DL (or another carrier) for which a through fare agreement might be allowed; if the service is entirely opb DL, then DL alone would be allowed to market the flight(s).

Quoting Analog (Reply 9):
Apparently the people at the US DOT are too dense to figure it out.

Perhaps not so dense as they are bought off by the U.S. airlines. Which is also why the U.S. legacies have been allowed a free hand in practicing anti-competitive predatory tactics against would-be competitors and the proliferation of codeshare deception which has become legalized anti-competitive collusion. The longstanding deceptive practice of single flight numbers requiring a change of planes enroute represents little more than the proverbial foot-in-the-door that has now become swung wide open to further deceptions and legalized anti-competitive shemes.
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:36 am

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 15):

Perhaps not so dense as they are bought off by the U.S. airlines. Which is also why the U.S. legacies have been allowed a free hand in practicing anti-competitive predatory tactics against would-be competitors and the proliferation of codeshare deception which has become legalized anti-competitive collusion. The longstanding deceptive practice of single flight numbers requiring a change of planes enroute represents little more than the proverbial foot-in-the-door that has now become swung wide open to further deceptions and legalized anti-competitive shemes.

Code shares can actually benefit customers, whereas same-flight-number service with a change of plane has no benefits (except perhaps in RTW tickets: reduced mileage). One of he greatest code share scams is that US gov't considers a flight with a US flag carrier's code to be on a US flag carrier for purposes the "Fly America Act." Neat trick, eh?

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 10):
Quoting Analog (Reply 9):
Apparently the people at the US DOT are too dense to figure it out.
Ya think? no

Obviously the people at the US DOT know what's going on, yet somehow they don't care. Why on earth would NW (I think it was them) trumpet the same flight service in their China route application (direct service to China from some important rep's district... but with a change of planes in DTW/MSP)? Why not just say they have direct service from 100 different US airports (put 100 flight #s on the China non-stop). I think that has been done in the past. Heck, every airport in the world could have direct service to every other airport in the world. You'd just have to have more than 4 digits for the flight numbers.

Seriously, other than deceiving customers & the government, what possible benefit could same-flight-number w/change of aircraft service have? Perhaps for large airlines it reduces the required # of flight #s. But then things get messed up if both are in the air at the same time. (Like if CO5 IAH-MSY takes off before CO5 LGW-IAH arrives).

Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 12):

Don't know what airline you are flying, but even when i flew the same flight number on NW, I still got them counted on each leg.

US gives (at least used to) XXX-ZZZ miles for XXX-YYY-ZZZ on the same flight number.
CO does the same. Their mileage calculator does not show the "direct" routing, so it looks like you earn miles for both segments, but if you buy a ticket it says you earn the direct route miles.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:00 am

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 8):
It's no worse then the "interchanges" of years gone by when the same aircraft would be flown by two or three different airlines?

Actually it is worse than the old "interchange" flights. On those you were on the same aircraft all the way, same seat, consistent inflight service, no need to transfer baggage with increased risk of it going astray. The interchange flights permitted same-plane service on routes where no single carrier had the authority to operate end-to-end.

As already explaned, change-of-gauge flights using a single flight number have existed for many years. Nowadays the main reason is to give them higher GDS display priority as almost all bookings are made from the first screen.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:16 am

Not 100%, but I think JAL did and might still pull off this scam on their GRU-JFK-NRT flights. I think the flight used to, and possibly still does continue to NGO using the same flight number but on a different aircraft.
 
vv701
Posts: 5895
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:17 pm

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 13):
The very definition of a direct flight is one that stops enroute between originaton and destination

If the "very definition of a direct flight is one that stops enroute between origination and destination" that means that if I board a BA flight at LHR and it flies direct to JFK without a stop enroute it cannot be a DIRECT flight. So what is it? Surely if it is not a DIRECT flight then it must be an INDIRECT flight? Am I smoking something or is it you?

To me if I get on a flight and it takes me DIRECTLY to where I want to go without stopping somewhere first I have been on a DIRECT flight. What would you call it?

If, on the other hand a flight does not take me directly to where I want to go but "stops enroute between origination and destination" I would have been on an INDIRECT flight. But you say that this is "the very definition of a direct flight".

So let's see. If it is a direct flight it does not directly take me to my destination. But if it is an indirect flight it does. Or doesn't it?
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:36 am

Get over it and move on folks. This is something that will not change.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15135
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:43 am

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 3):
The Ukranian bound passengers were upset because they were told at FLL that there would be no problem with the delay as it was the same flight. Talk about confusion.

DL should have held the flight.

Quoting Analog (Reply 6):
The scam also saves airlines a few FF miles.

One way to quickly eliminate this silly game would be to legally require that the continuation not depart until (min connection time) after the flight lands.

I'd like to see that. If you offer a "one flight" solution, you must provide that one flight solution. Seems simple enough...  Wink
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
sflaflight
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:33 pm

RE: Why The Same Flight # With A Change Of Equip?

Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:58 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 3):
The Ukranian bound passengers were upset because they were told at FLL that there would be no problem with the delay as it was the same flight. Talk about confusion.

DL should have held the flight.

That's what I thought. Why wouldn't they have held it. Would JFK have put pressure n getting the flight moved out rather than wait for leg 1?

Is this common practice in the industry to let the second leg leave without waiting for the first leg, or are flight generally held and this was an exception?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos