petey2428

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to book a flight from Bangkok to Ohare. Ideally, I would like to fly either EVA or ANA, but United isn't pairing the logical flights that would work. The wiki says that Singapore Airlines segments are priced separately. Can someone clarify this? Can I, let's just say, fly Bangkok-> Singapore (on Thai/Singapore), Singapore->Taipei (on Singapore), and then Taipei -> ORD somehow? Does a United rep have more control when choosing a singapore flight?

Thanks!

Kacee

No one can really answer that definitively. You'll have to call and find out.

jsloan

A UA rep definitely has more control when choosing an SQ flight -- between what I've seen on this board and what I've experienced, it appears that SQ flights do not appear at all in the main booking tool that they're using. You basically have to tell them to look for them, and then they have to construct the award manually.

What varies is the pricing. I've seen one report that said that if you flew BKK-SIN-TPE-ORD, with SIN-TPE on SQ, you'd have to pay for three awards (S. Asia - S. Asia, then S. Asia to N. Asia, then N. Asia to N. America). I've also seen one report that they were able to price it all the way through as a single award (S.Asia - N.America).

I suggest looking for the SQ flights that you want on the ANA website. If you see availability there, call United and ask them to price out the specific flights for you, and be prepared to HUCA. It may simply not be possible, however. The new system is much less flexible than the old one was.

nwflyboy

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the new system is not just "much less flexible than the old one." It is clearly broken. Not hyperbole, that's an objective, demonstrable fact. Broken is broken, and I think it's appropriate to call it that.

I'm also wrestling with their broken search results. I search A to B. Yep, that's available. I search B to C, it says yep, that's available too. I search A to C via B, and it says sorry, not available. Both can not be true. A to B to C are in fact all available, and the computer says so - it just fails to put them together. That's not "less flexible", that's nonsense.

To make it even more nonsensical, it behaves differently according to which day you search on. EG, on a given day, is shows A to B to C all available, and A to C (same exact routing) NOT available. But the next day, it shows A to B and B to C and A to C via B all available.

The search results are random. They can worship it as God's One Source Of Truth if they want, but that won't change the fact that it's broken. Why not just let MileagePlus members roll dice to see if they can book award flights?

If they are going to just wave their hands and say "we must follow the what the computer spits out" then the computer needs to actually work.

747FC

nwflyboy: Well said, and spot on! ^

jsloan

So, I think you're actually right that it's broken, but it's not broken for the reasons that you say. It's entirely possible for A-B-C to be unavailable even if A-B and B-C are both available. It happens all the time for non-award tickets due to married segment availability. (Example: AUS-IAH and IAH-DTW might both be G9 but AUS-DTW via IAH might be G0).

Furthermore, AUS-SFO and SFO-EWR might be available, but that doesn't mean that one can purchase an AUS-SFO-EWR ticket using an AUS-EWR fare. If you want that flight, you can book it, but you'll be charged individually for the two legs. That's essentially the way that that award engine is working now.

The inability to piece flights together the way that you're describing is a deliberate feature. UA apparently felt that some of its award rules were open to abuse, so instead of tightening them, it took a sledgehammer to the whole system.

Where I do believe that the system is broken is that it's limited to 200 possible results, and that the number of input modifiers you can use is extremely limited. Most of the advanced search options just filter the output, which means they apply after the 200 limit has been reached and are therefore useless. 200 results wouldn't be bad if you could request, e.g., 200 business saver results, but it's not that useful when you want saver business, but the first 195 results that come back happen to be standard economy instead.

The second problem the site definitely has is that it will not return the same results when you're searching for part of a round-trip or circle trip as it will when you're searching one-way. So, you can find the perfect outbound flight, but then find it disappears when you're trying to book a round-trip or trying to create an Excursionist Perk. It's frustrating, but at least the phone agents' software doesn't seem to have the same limitation.

Anyway, we can debate all day whether or not the system is broken or if it's merely a properly-implemented, anti-consumer design, but the long and short of it is, as customers, we're stuck with it, so I just look to document the current best practices to try to make it work as well as possible. :-)

nwflyboy

Understood, and no offense/hostility intended (at least not towards you... ).

My point was, and remains, that UA has done something incredibly bad to MileagePlus members here. Calling it "less flexible" is a euphemism that they do not deserve. Call it what it is: screwing members of their frequent flyer program. Anti-consumer if you prefer.

With the changes to their system now in place, they have taken what was arguably the best loyalty program of the major US airlines and turned it into what might be the worst (although the competition from AA for that title is tough).

Closing off exploits and preventing abuse is one thing - and I can't blame them for wanting to do that. But that's not what this is (sheesh, they still left exploits open that allow crazy free one-way legs that defy any logic or common sense). The changes they pushed out did not protect them from the exploits that scammers and bloggers used, it just ruined their program for honest MileagePlus members.

The metaphor of rolling dice as a more rational predictor of award search results was only partially in jest - they could save a bunch of money by firing the IT geniuses that wrote the award search engine, just let MP members roll some dice or place their miles on a roulette wheel, and let the results dictate whether award seats are available... I'm not kidding, that makes about as much sense as what's in place now.

wpcoe

About 10 days ago I booked an open-jaw trip BKK-SAN // IAH-BKK Business Class ticket on united.com and for the return I wanted the connection via NRT using NH non-stop IAH-NRT.

Checking availability as IAH-BKK showed a really low price (P class booking, $907) if I used UA non-stop IAH-NRT, but about $1,000 more if I used the NH non-stop.

I decided to try IAH-NRT and NRT-BKK as separate segments. It showed the IAH-NRT NH flight at a much higher fare than the UA flight, but when the itinerary was finished -- voila! -- it priced IAH-NRT-BKK NH-NH at the same low fare which was only offered IAH-NRT-BKK UA-NH if I asked for IAH-BKK flights.

All that to say that finding the flights via multi-city search did NOT result in being charged point-to-point. Is it a YMMV situation, or was I just lucky?

[Edited to add:]
Holy crap! I totally missed the part about the post I quoted as being about *AWARD TRAVEL.* Doh.

Kacee

I would tend to believe it is operating the way UA intended it to, and thus is not broken in the way that word is commonly understood.

What's perhaps most disappointing is that some UA agents absolutely retain the tools to book segment by segment. For example, the "rebooking specialist" who resolve a flight cancelation issue for me late last year was able to rebook my outbound while preserving two partner flights (OS) on the return. But that capability seems to have been removed for most (all?) frontline agents.

I think most would say it's still better than DL or AA.

For most MP members, who don't give much thought to how to maximize their points, and tend to book very simple itineraries, the changes are probably not noticeable.

This thread is about award bookings, not paid tickets. Different animal

aln10788

I know I wont be able to book for awhile, But what are my chances of being able to nab 2 tickets in J for ORD-FCO or VCE on Aug 31st 2018. I have no reference for how availability will be at that time of year.

diburning

Try to book as soon as you are able to/as soon as the flights are bookable. Summer is peak travel season. They may not release very many award seats at the saver level if they think they can fill the plane with revenue passengers.

N104UA

Saver Availability? Slim to none until a few weeks/days prior to departure, although you might be able to find LH thorough FRA.

RandomBaritone

I agree with other posters that LH (and, I'd add, TK) will likely be your best bet, but you may get lucky flying out of ORD. There's already Polaris availability ORD>MUC>FCO and ORD>BRU>VCE for June 27 and 30, 2018, so perhaps you'll see the same thing as you approach T-330. Just be ready to pounce the moment they open up a couple of saver J seats for each day's departure.

aln10788

Is there a certain time of day/night that the seats show up online once it's 330 days out?

N104UA

The flight opens for booking slightly after midnight ET, But UA could release I inventory at anytime after that (I have also noticed sometimes UA releases 332 days out for booking)