CLT-IAH Meal in F
#16
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BOS
Programs: Marriott LTG, HHonors Diamond, Nat'l Exec
Posts: 3,580
Everyone keeps saying this, but I don't believe it's true.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
#17
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: AAdvantage, MileagePlus, SkyMiles
Posts: 4,153
Your explanation makes the most sense. I knew 1,000nm was way too high.
It does bother me, however, that US didn't just adopt a 900mi threshold like UA/DL in the first place. At least then, they would be aligning themselves to UA/DL, and presumably so, AA would too in September. I hope that's the final endgame, if not retaining AA's current 2:00 thresholds by September. 1000mi would leave out quite a lot of markets.
Any takers why a 900mi threshold was not initially adopted?
It does bother me, however, that US didn't just adopt a 900mi threshold like UA/DL in the first place. At least then, they would be aligning themselves to UA/DL, and presumably so, AA would too in September. I hope that's the final endgame, if not retaining AA's current 2:00 thresholds by September. 1000mi would leave out quite a lot of markets.
Any takers why a 900mi threshold was not initially adopted?
Everyone keeps saying this, but I don't believe it's true.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
#18
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MSP/BUF/BNA/LFT
Programs: AA Plat, Priority Club Gold, Choice Privileges Gold
Posts: 1,223
Everyone keeps saying this, but I don't believe it's true.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
#19
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: OKC
Programs: AAdvantage EXP, Marriott Rewards Gold, Hilton Honors Diamond, TK M&S Elite
Posts: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by sriegert
it's not within the rule. the rule is 1000 nautical miles.
Everyone keeps saying this, but I don't believe it's true.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
Originally Posted by sriegert
it's not within the rule. the rule is 1000 nautical miles.
Everyone keeps saying this, but I don't believe it's true.
The only evidence we had of a 1000nm rule was a single leaked internal communication from months before the change. Even if it was accurate at the time -- which hasn't been confirmed -- the details may well have changed afterwards.
Nearly all of the routes with new meal service are under 1000nm -- e.g., CLT-SAT has meal service but is 951nm. And a 1000nm flight would be closer to 3:15 than 2:45; as an example, PHX-SEA is 962nm and ranges betwen 2:59 and 3:10.
So what happened? I think there are two good possibilities:
1) The rule shifted to 2:45 before it rolled out, and service is based on the shortest flight on a given route.
2) The rule is actually 1000 statute miles, and the leaked memo was simply typed wrong.
The problem with #1 is that PHL-MSP is never under 2:45 -- so there would be no reason to list it as an exception. Therefore, I'm going to theorize that 1000mi is the actual rule implemented on 4/1.
I think they went with the 1000 statute miles option in reality.
#20
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NY
Programs: AA Plat Pro, KrisFlyer Elite Gold
Posts: 578
CLT-IAH Meal in F
PHX-MCI doesn't resolve the discrepancy discussed above, as it is over 2:45 westbound. pending further examples it seems it still could be time blocks rather than 1000 "status" miles
#21
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CLT
Programs: AA-EXP, MR-PP
Posts: 3,440
Thank you for contacting US Airways.
Your question requires further research and has been forwarded to the appropriate individuals at US Airways. We will reply to you once we get more information; however it may take some time.
Thank you for being a member of our Dividend Miles program. We look forward to assisting you with any future needs.
Your question requires further research and has been forwarded to the appropriate individuals at US Airways. We will reply to you once we get more information; however it may take some time.
Thank you for being a member of our Dividend Miles program. We look forward to assisting you with any future needs.
#22
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NY
Programs: AA Plat Pro, KrisFlyer Elite Gold
Posts: 578
sitting on US 2065 right now.
Asked FA about new meal policy, she pulled out the manual with the flyer they got on April 1:
it says in chart form: "hot meal" on flights 1000 miles or greater. in parenthesis it then says: (2:45 or longer).
i read that to mean 1000 status miles, regardless of time block.
hopefully this clears up some confusion.
Asked FA about new meal policy, she pulled out the manual with the flyer they got on April 1:
it says in chart form: "hot meal" on flights 1000 miles or greater. in parenthesis it then says: (2:45 or longer).
i read that to mean 1000 status miles, regardless of time block.
hopefully this clears up some confusion.
#23
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CLT
Programs: AA-EXP, MR-PP
Posts: 3,440
It does make sense, however one thing or the other has to change. US either has to change the rule published to 1000 miles or start serving on flights of 2:45 and longer. As it is standing right now it looks like a false advertising.
#24
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: AAdvantage, MileagePlus, SkyMiles
Posts: 4,153
And a bit stingy, too. I think 2:30 would've been a more reasonable threshold, or 750/900mi - but then again, it's US Airways. Let's hope by September 1st, the more reasonable AA standards will take over, even if it goes to 800/900mi to benchmark UA/DL eventually.
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PHX & AGP
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, Hilton Gold
Posts: 11,408
sitting on US 2065 right now.
Asked FA about new meal policy, she pulled out the manual with the flyer they got on April 1:
it says in chart form: "hot meal" on flights 1000 miles or greater. in parenthesis it then says: (2:45 or longer).
i read that to mean 1000 status miles, regardless of time block.
hopefully this clears up some confusion.
Asked FA about new meal policy, she pulled out the manual with the flyer they got on April 1:
it says in chart form: "hot meal" on flights 1000 miles or greater. in parenthesis it then says: (2:45 or longer).
i read that to mean 1000 status miles, regardless of time block.
hopefully this clears up some confusion.
#26
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 1,032
I better report back since I promised to do so: no meal. Snack basket only. No difference from sub-500 mile flights.
#27
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CLT
Programs: AA-EXP, MR-PP
Posts: 3,440
Thank you for contacting US Airways.
We have sent over to the website to fix the verbiage on the website to read: "Of Most Flights of 2 hours and 45 minutes". When you go online to book the flight 2069 from Charlotte to Houston it does tell you that a meal is not served.
We have sent over to the website to fix the verbiage on the website to read: "Of Most Flights of 2 hours and 45 minutes". When you go online to book the flight 2069 from Charlotte to Houston it does tell you that a meal is not served.
#29
formerly RZachSmith
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: U.S.
Posts: 187
Reviving this thread - upgraded on US1749 tonight IAH-CLT and it's showing "Dinner" on the US website. I guess this was part of the alignment that happened later this year. Any recent reports on what the meal included?
#30
Formerly known as jlars77
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: ORD
Posts: 361
My last two flights were chicken or lasagna and beef or lasagna. Everything is inedible or close to it...so I would eat beforehand and enjoy a couple beverages!