http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=450598

This route affects the OWE in some rather important ways, IMO:

* xONE3 via/ex South America or SWP, for the first time, I believe.
* xONE2 possible (change in rules required, of course).

I get the feeling that OW will soon revisit the OWE rules because of this new route (and we all know that such revisions are seldom for the better).

Anyhow, interesting development, I think.

I agree with what you say about them seldom being for the better, but why would they revisit? I don't see what the difference would be between someone traveling from the US to Delhi via Hong Kong versus via Chicago.

An AONE3 from Oz has always been possible, just not sold except as a circle pacific. From South America it's not possible.

An AONE2 is by definition a round trip.

The changes that youre thinking of would be going against the core of the fare itself. In other words, it would destroy it. I can't see any of that happening, to be honest. If they were going to destroy the fare, it would have happened by now. No excuses are really needed.

Because of this rule:
46N . 4. TRAVEL MUST INCLUDE A POINT
47N . IN AREA 1, AREA 2 AND AREA 3...


Uh? Oneworld Explorer is one thing, Circle Pacific quite another. An AONE3 from Oz is not currently possible, AFAIK, but if I'm wrong I'd sure like to know how you would route it.

That's my point. How would you route it with ORD-DEL? It would still be a Circle Pacific trip. In other words, you have NA, Asia, and the SWP. You need to get back to NA somehow. If it's via the Pacific, it's a Circle Pacific. If it's via Europe, it's an OWE4. Either way, there is a fare fo it.

And the first would be exactly the same as it is now. You need to hit three continents at a minimum. With the ORD-DEL flight, you have two. North America and Asia. If you go back via the Pacific, it's a long, complicated round trip. If you go via Europe, it's an ONE3. Again, maybe I am missing something, but I frankly don't see the difference between PHL-ORD-DEL-LHR-PHL (three continent, NA/Asia/Europe) and PHL-LAX-HKG-DEL-LHR-PHL (three continent NA/Asia/Europe).

I still don't see what Circle Pacific has to do with the Oneworld Explorer of my post, but, to address the apparent discrepancy point, I _think_ you are considering ORD-DEL as Trans-Pacific? The way I understand it this route is likely to be considered Trans-Atlantic, which changes things in relation to the rules of the *Oneworld Explorer*.

I understand now where our disconnect is and I can't imagine ord-del being considered trans-atlantic. I don't think that it warrants a complete revamp and realistically could be taken care of easily by just adding a rule stating that the flight is considered a trans-pacific flight, end of story. That way the Alliance isn't redoing a full set rules for only one flight that could be dropped anyway. There is certainly a history of US carriers dropping Indian services. AA isn't the only one in the Alliance and, at that point, six other airlines are not stuck dealing with a bunch of worthless changes without seeing any tangible benefit. The rules themselves are based much on the "spirit" of the fare rather than flight technicalities and I think this will be viewed the same. There are many flights that just don't fit neatly into categories that the fare has dealt with in the past, and I think this will be no different. Considering this a trans-atlantic also sets a very harsh precedence. For instance, JFK-BKK, SIN or KUL would be considered trans-atlantics. Who knows....

I hear you, but the actual flight path, from what I read, will be trans-atlantic, in the sense that it will fly -East- of ORD, South of the North Pole, over North of Europe and then into Asia, not the other way around, so from a purely Great Circle flight path point of view it just cannot be considered trans-pacific (again, based on what I have read so far). The interpretation OW wants to give it, for the purpose of the OWE rules is, of course, a different matter, and there, I agree, they could call it whatever they like.

Edited to add: I do hope they call it trans-pacific for OWE purposes, and leave everything else as is (otherwise Europe is out), as it would make for a great mileage run segment on a North America - Asia westbound OWE itinerary.

If I were going to suggest a rule for this, I would say that if the degrees west longitude of the origin -plus- the degrees east longitude of the destination is less than 180, then the route is "over the Atlantic." If the sum is more than 180, then the route is "over the Pacific." Thus, LAX to DEL would be "over the Pacific" while ORD to DEL would be "over the Atlantic." Is JFK to SIN considered "over the Atlantic"? It would be under my proposed rule....

You can see it easily, using this tool.

To clarify, my question was whether the oneworld rules currently consider JFK to SIN to be "over the Pacific" or "over the Atlantic."

The rules do not answer that question, and to my knowledge it has never been tested, because there are no oneworld flights JFK-SIN.

Sure there are, if you make a connection (not a stopover) between JFK and SIN.

Nope. If you 'touch' a continent you 'pay' for it, so what counts in the case of a connecting or stopover point would be the continent where that point is. JFK-xLHR-SIN is trans-atlantic, JFK-xHKG-SIN is trans-pacific, and neither is an intercontinental flight, as defined in the OWE rules.

They will probably just add a codicil to the rules that goes something like "All direct travel between Zones 1 and 3 shall be deemed a Transpacific routing" regardless of the actual great circle path.

No, but realistically to do something like the 180 degree thing is really not going to work. These rules don't exist in a vacuum. They exist in a world where people who do it every single day still royally screw them up on a consistent basis. All airlines do, though I am sure each who has done more than one has a horror story about a specific airline or two. To ask an agent to try and figure out the longitudes of flights is a non-option. Most probably don't even know what a longitude is or how they work considering that I doubt most people who don't have a specific reason probably don't know what they are. Additionally, these fares have two components. A seller *and* a buyer. Is Joe Blow who wants to go to a few countries as a retirement trip going to try to decypher longitudes? No, and an airline is stupid if they ask them to. What a way to piss off a client and have them go to an easier system. I can see BA especially laying down the law and telling AA to deal with things in a different manner. Finally, actual flight info has little bearing on how things will be considered for the purpose of the rules. The rules will be modified to reflect realistic market changes, of which I see few if any, and according to what is going to be easiest to implement. They have a choice of either overhauling the system and making it unduly complicated or just making a logical, well thought out modification or two that create as few problems as possible.

Nostradarren's predictions. One option will happen. 1) a rule modification will be introduced that states that nonstop flights between the US and India are considered "trans-pacific" for the purposes of the fare. or 2) a rule modification will be introduced that states that nonstop flights between the US and Asia are considered "trans-pacific" for the purposes of the fare.

I expect the former for two reasons. First, Oneworld tends to be conservative with changes and makes them as they arise. It takes care of the immediate and all reasonably foreseeable issues (like LAX-BOM or NYC-BOM). Second, if MH joins Oneworld (as has been speculated for a while) then they are not locked into the rule for MH's EWR-ARN-KUL flight and can charge for three continents for that one flight. If TG joins (as has also been speculated though less likely, imo) then the rule can be changed to incorporate the NYC-BKK flight. I believe AA has the rights NYC-BKK but I can't frankly see them being used any time soon so the only way I see it coming up is if TG joins.