FlightNurse

Damn, Would this be legal then, LAX-LHR-JFK-YVR-LAX. LHR is the desination and YVR would be the stopover.

TheBOSman

Not if you wanted a stopover at YVR. You'd have to book awards for LAX-LHR, LHR-JFK-YVR (assuming the fare is published for AA/BA TATL and CX JFK-YVR), and YVR-LAX. LHR-JFK-YVR-LAX "should" be legal (again assuming a published fare allowing the routing, which seems highly unlikely), as you are traveling LHR-LAX overall, but you can't stopover at YVR with that routing as there are no ways to make it qualify as your North American point of entry, i.e. no LHR-JFK and JFK-YVR flights that have the same flight number, this is an important distinction that is not made around here enough. AA's ORD-NRT flight has the same flight number as a BOS-ORD as an example, so in theory I could book (again assuming published fare) something like JFK-BOS-(ORD)-NRT (or onward), and be able to stop at BOS despite it not being the physical point that I leave the country. The computer sees my ticket as JFK-BOS-NRT, as my flight only stops at ORD (despite the change of aircraft from 738 to 772).

This is a more general award question and so these last few responses should perhaps be merged to the partner award thread.

ChurchofTee

WOW that is big news. Thanks SFO777 for posting this info. I am glad I got my next CX F already booked before then. Was the other 747 still listed on EF?

Austinrunner

http://airlineroute.net/2014/01/03/cx-744-s14update1/

MAH4546

No. Also, what I meant is that it is literally illegal (against U.S. government laws), not that it's against AAdvantage rules. You can't fly between two U.S. cities via Canada.

tng11

Just got myself a seat on CX879 on April 11th in F. Glad that I'll have a chance to fly this big bird in the nose before it goes away!

audio-nut

I know its illegal for a Canadian carrier to transport a passenger between two US airports. Why is it illegal for a US carrier to transit people between two American cities via a 3rd country?

Austinrunner

Because the applicable international treaties and agreements do not allow it.

audio-nut

Is that only true for Canada? Do you know if Japan has the same stipulation?

MAH4546

Yes, but with Guam and Saipan carved out.

ckpeter

This is the case for most countries. They do not allow foreign carriers to conduct what is essentially domestic transportation.

For example, you are not going to see a Korean carrier be allowed to carry traffics between two Japanese cities by connecting in a Korean airport.

audio-nut

I know, that's not what I asked. I asked why a Japanese carrier can't ticket people between two Japanese cities via Korea.

waterandwoods

So I booked CX 879 in F on May 9, yay! I used Avios for myself and I'm using AA miles for my sister (her itinerary is currently on hold). I would REALLY love to sit in 1A & 1K on the 747. When I go to my booking on CX website it shows me in 2A, and 1A & K are blocked/occupied. However, expert flyer shows 1A-K as open and not blocked. CX website will actually let me choose the seats in row 4 which are blocked on expert flyer. (I do have a lap infant but don't need the bassinet seat-- he is too big). Is this normal? How can I get1A, by calling?

azepine00

out of curiosity how much was the charge for lap infant in F on CX?

waterandwoods

I used Avios instead of AA miles so that the cash outlay would be much less. Of course the miles required are huge, but I have a lot so I went that route. For SFO-HKG in first I am using 105,000 Avios for myself + 10,500 for the infant and roughly $141 in taxes for each of us (total $279).

If I had gone with AA miles, the mileage would be MUCH lower and I could have added more segments in the U.S. but best case scenario infant fees would have been $900+ (10%). When I price the SFO-HKG flight in cash on Cathay website it shows infant fees of over $2,000 (25%).