Can I do the following.

Depart from Washington-National (DCA) to Chicago and onto Hong Kong on a westward RTW.

Then... fly London (LHR) to Washington-Dulles (IAD) and continue to Dallas Forth Worth (DFW) and then return to Washington-National (DCA).

My logic. DCA and IAD are separate just like LAX and the various airports in the Los Angeles area are differentiated. Thus, returning to IAD is not the same as returning to the point of origin - DCA.

But, does 'point' of origin mean airport or city?

It used to be, I think, that multiple airports in a given city were considered 'co-terminous', such that you could transfer between them without regard to your xONEx. In that view, what you want would clearly not be allowed. But now they are differentiated, such that transferring from e.g., IAD to DCA is now considered a ground segment and one of the 16 allowed sectors in the ticket. Arguably, if the point of origin is the airport and not the city, your idea is logical. Unfortunately, the way these things usually work is that the rule is interpreted for the advantage of the system and not the pax, so I wouldn't hold out hope. But good luck!

cheers,

Henry

What type of RTW ticket ? There are many.

Ticket type. OneWorld Explorer.

BWI, DCA and IAD are 'co terminals' under the city code WAS.
However, oneworld removed the ability to use 'co terminals' a few years ago so transferring with a city such as arrive DCA, depart IAD now uses up one of the sectors on the ticket.
eg, Sydney-Tokyo-Osaka is 2 sectors, but if that connection in Tokyo requires changing NRT-HND, then it uses 3 sectors on the ticket.

Flying LHR-IAD-DFW-DCA-ORD-HKG is fine and uses the amount of sectors flown.

My last DONE3 had -SEA-ORD-LAX-IAH-ORD-AMM-. I had additional off ticket flights out of ORD (ORD was just a connection point for stops in STL, DTW and DCA, but as far as the DONE3 was concerned, it was 2 stop overs in ORD). Ticketed just fine via the online tool.

This would be a little different because one would fly DCA-ORD-HKG.... and then return to the United States but at IAD-DFW-DCA. I have not tried this yet with the on-line tool. Sometimes the RTW desks get a bit twitchy when it comes to rule interpretation - as noted above - they take the interpretation that is favorable to the airline - no surprise.

It seems we don't know the answer to the question of whether travel through a co-terminal of the airport of origin counts as travel via the point of origin and thus violates rule 4(d):But OP - if you are intending to stopover in Washington and then later stopover in Dallas then you will be in violation of rule 8(2):

From a practical viewpoint, ending at the point of origin is academic as long as you have an extra segment remaining when you get to where you really want to end. Just book but do not fly the final flight back to your point of origin. While it is true that they then have the legal right to charge you the difference between what you paid and regular fares on the point-to-point flights you actually flew, this has been discussed numerous times here on FT in the past and no one has ever reported that it has happened.

Looks like this question was first asked in 2002 by swanhunter without no conclusions reached:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...origin+lhr+lgw
And again in 2004, at which time a poster gave a definitive answer that all the coterminals listed for that city/metropolitan area would count as routing through the point of origin. No support for the answer was given. See:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...ty-origin.html

That was when coterminals still counted as a single stop (ie, SYD-NRT/HND-ITM was 2 sectors, not 3 as now). It may have changed ~07/08 when they removed the 'coterminal' allowance from the rules.

Except that 'ending at the point of origin' doesn't really even come into it -- with an extra segment remaining or not -- because there are plenty of exceptions including one big enough to fit a continent in (e.g., "Africa").

cheers,

Henry

It wasn't that there was any specific language in the rules, it was because we were able to use city codes when booking with paper tickets back then. With the change to etickets it became difficult, if not impossible, to use city codes and about the same time we started getting the interpretation that XXX-LHR, LGW-YYY, (along with other coterminals) was an extra segment.

Regardless, the same rule about using the point of origin has been in the rules unchanged all this time and we have speculated more than once about how to get around it including by using coterminals. Personally I believe, as with most of these rules we parse, that the airlines will interpret it in a way that benefits them and point of origin means city and travel through LHR and LGW (or LCY) will be travel through the point of origin. Whether or not travel through BWI will be allowed on a xonex originating in DC or EWR for an xonex originating New York, is more difficult to predict. I believe some airlines will interpret the rule in that manner. Personally I think with those airports physically located elsewhere like BWI or EWR, it is not travel through the point of origin as you are traveling through a different city (or state). One would want to ignore any talk of coterminals and argue that originating in a different city (or state) and then traveling through BWI or EWR is not travel through the point of origin.