That is a tricky one. I think a one-way to ASB could raise some alarms with ICC as they may think you could abandon the last sector IST-ASB trying to get a cheap Z8-Z2 at Z8-Z8 rates. You could always cancel the second one-way that takes you back from TAS to ICN/NRT after completing your first OW outbound.

I know there is no real other way using *A but as others have remarked before that should not mean that one can always get any routing as long as it is the only route. I could easily see the ICC suggest that this will have to be 2 OW tickets instead of 1 OW. Chances may increase if you would be willing to book this as an open jaw RT reducing the risk of dropping off in IST. Just my opinion. YMMV.

hum maybe I should try to find availability and leave from ASB, flying into TAS.
Wanted to take advantage of the free stopover in each direction (outside of Europe) while on the trip, so that's why two OW...

Today, ICC is refusing me IAH-LAS(s.o)-LAX-MEX as one redemption, because it is not the most direct route. They want me to do it as two redemptions: IAH-LAS and then LAS-LAX-MEX

They are now strictly enforcing the "most direct route" rule and stop over can only occur on compulsory transit points (i.e: LAX, in this case).

What do you think about it?

I think they are right. Instead of a 763 mile journey, you are looking at over 3,000 miles with your excursion west. No great surprise that this isn't being allowed IMO.

In that case, why people doing "nrt-icn(s.o)-sfo" are not invited to make two different redemptions?

Completely different. For starters in that example you are going between zones on far bigger journey. NRT-ICN is a bit of a backtrack, but it only adds circa 25% to the total milage. Yours adds triple miles on top of your routing.

Because this route is only 18% more in terms of actual mileage than the direct route, plus it's a valid *A routing.

Your proposed route comes in at 329% greater than the most direct route, so it's completely different

I'm currently planning a redemption from Cape Town to London, with a stop over in Nairobi.

I'm trying to do dummy bookings or looking on ITA to get an idea of taxes, but I am having a bit of a problem.

If I just do NBO - LHR, ITA suggests SWISS as an option (which is what I would like)

If I try and do the whole thing, CPT - JNB - NBO (SA) [STOP] - ZRH - LHR (LX) it just wont give me it as an option, no matter if I even specify via Zurich.

Any ideas? Is this a valid route?

Try using the ITA route language using '::LX+' after the NBO-LHR query.

I guess MNL-BKK-DPS is a valid routing. However, I'd like to have a night in BKK and still fly SQ.

Any idea if MNL-BKK-SIN-DPS would be a valid routing?

They might approve MNL-BKK(so)-SIN-DPS if there are no free award seats BKK-DPS on the requested date. Why do you want to add another segment by flying via SIN?

Well, the plan is to fly SQ MNL-SIN-DPS (wide choice of flights with 2 J seats), but I'd like to stop in BKK to meet some friends. But if it's TG all the way, I'll just take SQ for a nice lobster lunch SIN-DPS for us and do BKK another time.

TG 747 (or A330) with old seats and breakfast is just not my idea of great J experience.

PS. Ok, do you think MNL-BKK-KUL//KUL-SIN-DPS is acceptable? This drives the YQ thru the roof though but I'll pay that.

Thanks for the tip... I tried that, and now it just says no flight available at all! It's like these 2 trips can't be wedged together into one routing...

BKK-DPS has been a 772 more often than not recently

LHR-ICN-BKK and Back
 

Can anyone tell me if I can book LHR-ICN-BKK with 80,000 miles (zones 1-7), instead of 70,000 (zones 1-8) + 30,000 (zones 7-8)?

Thanks,