How to specify the booking code on ITA
#63
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 40
The ITA wiki shows how to specify booking code/airline pairs, as follows:
But this syntax is rejected. I'm not surprised, it's very strange to have two dots like that.
What's the correct way to do this?
Code:
/f lh..f,aa..y
What's the correct way to do this?
#64
Company Representative - ITA Software
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 362
The ITA wiki shows how to specify booking code/airline pairs, as follows:
But this syntax is rejected. I'm not surprised, it's very strange to have two dots like that.
What's the correct way to do this?
Code:
/f lh..f,aa..y
What's the correct way to do this?
Code:
/f lh..f|aa..y
#65
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 40
Code:
LHR :: o:aa,ba+ / f ~aa..o&~aa..g&~aa..q&~aa..n&~aa..s JFK
Edit again (sorry).. It's really not working. I tried the following:
Code:
FRA :: f+ / f ~ua..M&~ua..E&~ua..U&~ua..H&~ua..Q&~ua..V&~ua..W&~ua..S&~ua..T&~ua..L&~ua..K&~ua..G&~ua..N ORD :: f+ / f ~ua..M&~ua..E&~ua..U&~ua..H&~ua..Q&~ua..V&~ua..W&~ua..S&~ua..T&~ua..L&~ua..K&~ua..G&~ua..N
Thinking that the ampersand doesn't work, I simplified the query:
Code:
FRA :: f+ / f ~ua..K ORD :: f+ / f ~ua..K
Last edited by zencat; Sep 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm
#66
Company Representative - ITA Software
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 362
Code:
FRA :: f+ / f ~ua..M&~ua..E&~ua..U&~ua..H&~ua..Q&~ua..V&~ua..W&~ua..S&~ua..T&~ua..L&~ua..K&~ua..G&~ua..N ORD :: f+ / f ~ua..M&~ua..E&~ua..U&~ua..H&~ua..Q&~ua..V&~ua..W&~ua..S&~ua..T&~ua..L&~ua..K&~ua..G&~ua..N
If you want to control booking classes, you want something more like "/f !bc=M&!bc=E..."
You can also use wildcarded fare basis codes; the industry uses a dash to indicate "any sequence of characters", and usually (but not always) the first letter of the fare basis corresponds to the booking code that will be used: "/f !ua..M-&!ua..E-&..."
#67
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 40
These are the fare basis codes, not the booking codes. So you're prohibiting fares called "N" and "K" and so forth, which actually don't exist, so the restriction doesn't do anything.
If you want to control booking classes, you want something more like "/f !bc=M&!bc=E..."
If you want to control booking classes, you want something more like "/f !bc=M&!bc=E..."
What you're suggesting would seem to negate booking code "M" and "E" for all airlines. But they have different meanings for each airline. E.g. class K on UA is worth 100% of the mileage, but class K on LH is only worth 50%.
So suppose I want the search to be open to all airlines, but I want it to exclude the booking codes M and E of LH, but allow M and E for all other airlines. How would that be written?
(edit) I'm quite confused about the difference between "fare basis codes" and "booking codes". The UA link in my post calls them "fare classes", and shows fare class M and E as being worth 100% mileage credit. "Booking code" is not in the FT glossary, but "fare basis" is, and fare basis is described as what I thought a booking code was.
Last edited by zencat; Sep 1, 2012 at 2:56 pm
#68
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 19
What you're suggesting would seem to negate booking code "M" and "E" for all airlines. But they have different meanings for each airline. E.g. class K on UA is worth 100% of the mileage, but class K on LH is only worth 50%.
So suppose I want the search to be open to all airlines, but I want it to exclude the booking codes M and E of LH, but allow M and E for all other airlines. How would that be written?
So suppose I want the search to be open to all airlines, but I want it to exclude the booking codes M and E of LH, but allow M and E for all other airlines. How would that be written?
Airlines: Air China OR United Airlines
Booking Class: Exclude N from Air China, but allow N for United Airlines ...
#69
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1
(edit) I'm quite confused about the difference between "fare basis codes" and "booking codes". The UA link in my post calls them "fare classes", and shows fare class M and E as being worth 100% mileage credit. "Booking code" is not in the FT glossary, but "fare basis" is, and fare basis is described as what I thought a booking code was.
Suppose we search a one-way itinerary between Vancouver (YVR) and Xiamen (XMN) on December 11th, 2013. One of the itineraries available to us is AC3 to Tokyo (NRT), followed by NH935. The fare basis for this itinerary is T7HXCNO. This is Air Canada's rules and restrictions governing this fare - since they are the carrier effectively selling you passage between YVR and XMN. As generally is the case, the first letter of the fare basis code corresponds to the booking class for flight AC3: T. However, the booking class for the NH935 leg is K. And as far as frequent flyer programs are concerned, it is the booking class that matters. So in determining how many miles you would be awarded for flying this itinerary, you would consider YVR->NRT on AC booking class T and NRT->XMN on NH booking class K.
#70
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: YXY
Posts: 3,506
How do I exclude a booking class from a specific multi-leg-itinerary?
I know I want to fly from ORD on UA with two stops to ATL, and I want to exclude booking class N.
If I search with "UA UA UA", I get the required routings, but many includes a leg in N. If I search with "/ f ~bc=N" I only get direct and one-stop routings.
How do I combine the two restrictions? I've tried many variations, but all result in "bad specification" error messages. TNX
I know I want to fly from ORD on UA with two stops to ATL, and I want to exclude booking class N.
If I search with "UA UA UA", I get the required routings, but many includes a leg in N. If I search with "/ f ~bc=N" I only get direct and one-stop routings.
How do I combine the two restrictions? I've tried many variations, but all result in "bad specification" error messages. TNX
#72
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Johannesburg
Programs: OZ *G, AB Sapphire
Posts: 34
searching in fare rules?
Is it possible with ITA to search on the textual contents of the fare rules? fi if i'm looking for flights for add-ons i'd need something like "add-ons permitted" in cat 10..
Category 10: Combinability
FARES MAY BE COMBINED ON A HALF ROUND TRIP BASIS WITH ANY
FARE FOR ANY CARRIER IN ANY RULE AND TARIFF TO FORM
SINGLE/DOUBLE OPEN JAWS/ROUND TRIPS/CIRCLE TRIPS.
ADD-ONS PERMITTED.
Category 10: Combinability
FARES MAY BE COMBINED ON A HALF ROUND TRIP BASIS WITH ANY
FARE FOR ANY CARRIER IN ANY RULE AND TARIFF TO FORM
SINGLE/DOUBLE OPEN JAWS/ROUND TRIPS/CIRCLE TRIPS.
ADD-ONS PERMITTED.
#73
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: YXY
Posts: 3,506
Ah! Thank you. According to the official descriptions, "F" specifies a single flight. I don't want a single flight, so I tried without the F. And that didn't work.
#74
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 297
Syntax for multiple airlines
Hello
I think this should work, but it doesn't:
/ f os..y|os..b|os..m|os..u|os..h|os..q|os..g|ca..y|ca ..b|ca..m|ca..h|ca..k|ca..w|ca..l
(I am wanting to restrict to 100% earning on OS or CA - but no results are returned - not an error)
Any ideas?
Thanks
LHR*G
I think this should work, but it doesn't:
/ f os..y|os..b|os..m|os..u|os..h|os..q|os..g|ca..y|ca ..b|ca..m|ca..h|ca..k|ca..w|ca..l
(I am wanting to restrict to 100% earning on OS or CA - but no results are returned - not an error)
Any ideas?
Thanks
LHR*G