margarita girl

SQ's mileage calculator is the closest one with 3943 miles.

jarusoba

If AC publishes a timetable that says 3946, we should be awarded 3946!
Why the discrepancy?
Why is there ALWAYS less awarded?

Why are ALL the other "sources" MORE than we are awarded ALL THE TIME?

NordsFan

Again, do you give miles back when you get more than the number of miles appearing in the timetable ?

ACflyerDE

LH M&M credits 3952 miles, which is exactly the same distance the Great Circle Mapper shows (43°40'38"N 79°37'50"W to 50°01'35"N 8°32'35"E).

jarusoba

When do I get more than the number of miles appearing in the timetable, notwithstanding the rule that says 500 miles for flights that are under 500 miles?

VivoPerLei

I'm interested in these discrepancies, particularly as I've written flight planning software that makes extensive use of this calculation. It appears that Great Circle Mapper uses 3963 mi as the radius of the earth, which tends to be at the high end of the scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_radius
Our software uses 3956 which is sort of midrange between the high and the low estimates and seems to correlate with what AC is using. The other source of difference seems to be exactly which latitude/longitude point is used in the calculation, e.g., control tower, runway, geographical center, etc. Since airports can cover many square miles this can result in several miles difference, depending on the points selected.

NordsFan

We agree that the 500 mile attribution for short-hauls is an exception in the client's favour. That being said, I'm more than happy to take the "free" 355 Q miles I get on YQB-YUL.

I also agree with you that except in those cases, I have never seen a segment where the pax earns more miles than what appears in the timetable. I have not studied the entire timetable to confirm that though ....

However, I think that most of the differentials between timetable and posted miles are less than 20 miles per segment, perhaps less.....why does this discrepancy exist ? I don't know. Some here have pointed out possible "technical" reasons for such variations.

Could the timetable be published with the actual credited miles ? Sure, probably.

Is it a big deal ? No.

Is it fraud ? No.

Those of us who aim to hit status thresholds know the actual miles given for the segments that we fly and we plan accordingly. <shrug>

jarusoba

Agreed with you.

I'm just perplexed about why we are ALWAYS getting less than what AC publishes. Not a big deal. But AC could save a lot of miles if they shortchange everybody in every flight by 5 miles each. Just like if a utility company charges everybody 1 penny extra per bill, nobody would complain but they could make a good few extra thousand dollars a month.

CapitalC

From a legal perspective that depends on the intent. I suspect that the internal discussions on the subject would be quite damning if revealed in court but that they have taken steps to erase the paper trail.

I am sure that each time this controversy flares up here, AC management reminds their personnel not to discuss the matter and to "follow the document management policy" for any email or documents that might be embarassing.

The solution could be as simple as to stop publishing the distance in the timetable, since there is no conceivable use for it other than predicting your mileage credit. I often wonder why they haven't done that.

Perhaps they believe that any action will be a recognition that they have been short-changing over the years and they will be compelled to fix it retroactively.

In the meantime, they are clearly in the wrong. Why should we have to trawl the internet and discussion forums on our own time to figure out the credit when they brazenly continue to mislead with their published numbers?

Next time you want to know what distance you'll get credited, call Air Canada and badger their call center person until you get the number. Sure, you will spend hours on hold, but maybe eventually they will get the point.

CapitalC

SQ and other airlines have a similar incentive to rig the calculation as much as possible in their favor. They can use the minimum accepted value for the circumference of the earth, pick the extreme edges of airfields as the endpoints, and round down.

AC still comes up with less. At least, for Aeroplan purposes.

CapitalC

If you start with published revenue-seat-miles, make some conservative assumptions about Aeroplan membership, fraction of fares which qualify for miles, fraction of flights which are shaved (ie exclude all the stuff under 500 miles), distance shaved per flight, and value points at half a cent per mile, you get to:

AC saves roughly $1M per year by shaving miles.

Is that a lot? Depends on your perspective. If you ask a flyer who loses out on a few cents worth of points it's probably not worth complaining. Ask the AC exec who gets a bonus for saving costs, and maybe it's as good as winglets, or cutting meals, or not offering real champagne.

CapitalC

I admit to using a bit of hyperbole. It's a consumer protection and contract issue. The remedy would be a civil suit. I wonder if anyone here would like to be a lead plaintiff (millions of miles on AC long-haul)?

The terms of the Aeroplan contract say you get distance flown or 500 miles. When you get 500 that is compliance with the terms, not a mistake in your favour.

When you get 1990 miles for a 2000-mile flight once, that's a mistake.

If you get distance minus 0.5% on every long flight, every day of every year for every route, that's an intentional, systematic, willful breach. Call it what you will, it's not right.

What if Honda odometers were off by 0.5% and warranties expired 0.5% earlier, saving the company millions of dollars in service expenses? What if Honda says they made the best odometer they could and it's within normal specs for a mechanical device? That's not a theoretical question, it was the basis of a recent class action. Honda settled. Is AC using an analog mechanical calculator that's unintentionally a little bit off, or are they using a spreadsheet and a little bit of evil?

Enough of me on my soapbox though, if you all think it's benign.

airbus320

+ 1 for benign

tcook052

+2 for benign.

I can't see AP & AC being a few miles out on a long-haul flight part of some sinister plot, just institutional differences between two separate companies that for whatever reason can't get on the same page, which IMHO they should and have the timetable match the AP credit if only for consistency sake. But that's just MHO.

VivoPerLei

Not to beat this to death, but ITA's route planner lists YYZ-FRA as 3939 miles, and the OAG lists the route as 3931.

For comparison purposes, can someone please tell me how much AC actually credits for YYZ-HKG and YVR-SYD?