Originally Posted by
Starman
Thanks for the interesting reply! The situation is that SJC-BWI direct shows L>4, but the individual segments have L>0 segment 1, L=0 segment 2, the classic married segment situation, so creating two segments will not yield the L fare.
Sorry, I misread. OK so
SJC-BWI search: UA1851 SJC-BWI "direct" inventory T9 L4
SJC-IAH search: UA1851 SJC-IAH inventory T9 L4
IAH-BWI search: UA1851 IAH-BWI inventory T9 L0
Multicity search SJC-BWI+BWI-IAH: UA1851 SJC-BWI displays as T9 L0 and also UA1851 BWI-IAH displays at T9 L0.
Agent searches SJC-BWI and somehow "sells" SJC-IAH + IAH-BWI: Somehow you get L.
Wowzers. That makes more sense but makes the result even stranger, yeah!
Originally Posted by
Starman
Your proposed test is interesting but doesn't work out the way you predicted. If I book the earlier SJC-IAH segment 1, segment two still yields L=0. I can only conclude that the web booking engine is not quite as smart as the agent's engine, and she (inadvertently) forced a through L fare for the two segment trip, even though segment 2 showed L=0 for both her and me. Perhaps the availability function and the booking function are somewhat divorced, so that even though the availability is 0, the booking engine is more forgiving.
That is very cool. Good find.