The OW timetable is wrong. :)
Edited to add: the latest version, dated 13-JUL-06, now includes this flight.

LAX-SJO added to "0.95" :)

AA938 operates daily from about mid-Dec through mid-March. I had it as part of a DONE4 in January.

A fellow OZ FTer has pointed out the cached version is not correctly processing the setting for the 'earn' radio button element when "Qantas status credits (post May 25,2005)" is select. It seems to be giving results for pre May 25 irrespective of this setting.

I suspect he/she is not using IE as the browser? Interestingly, this is supremely ironic :) (FWIW I see the same behaviour with Firefox - i.e. ignoring the selection). I'll try & figure it out (again :D ). Thanks!

This should be fixed now. It was a browser-interoperability problem (in the "setearn" function). I don't think I've fixed it in the most elegant way possible (suggestions welcome!) but I have tested it OK on Firefox 1.5.0.5 and IE6.

I've also hidden the list of changes I added in the yellow box at the top - to see these, just choose the "changes" link which will toggle their visibility.

GIB is now recognized as a European location for the purposes of counting towards allowed EU sectors on a OWE. Previously it was shown as "intercontinental" - this could have led to the incorrect belief that something like GIB-LHR-DXB-LHR-HEL-LHR-JFK-HKG-LHR-GIB was valid. Force a reload (shift-refresh) if you see unexpected results to ensure your browser isn't working from old data.

Note also that this thread is referenced from the end of the second post in the sticky in this forum (thanks SanDiego1K :)) - so it should always be easy to find.

KEF could do with the same treatment as it too is showing up as intercontinental.

Cheers SLF!

Done. Note that "intercontinental" is a catch-all designation, meaning that the sector didn't match any specific rules. Any sectors showing as "intercontinental" should be scrutinized just in case some rule has been missed.

The 0.95001 version will accept OWE routes with the following:

• containing spaces (these are discarded)
• using the "//" notation for a surface sector ("," is already supported)
• using -xAAA (transit) or -oAAA (stopover) to explicitly indicate transit/stopover in AAA (note the number of stopovers is not checked, this could be a future enhancement)

Thus (from another thread ), the following route will now be processed correctly:
ARN-MAD-GUA-MIA-SXM-JFK//DCA-SLC//SFO-JFK-GIG-SCL-xLAX-HKG-MNL-HKG-SIN-HKG-AMS-MAD-ARN

SLF,

First of all, thank you for maintaining this tool. I have a question about the most recent change:
This implies that "x" is for stopover and "o" is for transit. However, you then use the following example:

ARN-MAD-GUA-MIA-SXM-JFK//DCA-SLC//SFO-JFK-GIG-SCL-xLAX-HKG-MNL-HKG-SIN-HKG-AMS-MAD-ARN

where it seems that "xLAX" indicates a transit. So, which way is it? I would suggest that "x" should be for transit, and "o" should be for stopover since I believe that is the way it shows up on airline tickets (although I don't have any handy to verify this).

FWIW, I've been lurking on this forum for quite a while, and people seem to use "x" sometimes to mean transit and sometimes to mean stopover. Perhaps a standard way of specifying itineraries could be documented and added to the "sticky" so that (hopefully) people will write itineraries in a more consistent manner.

monster,

You are correct: "x" is transit, "o" is stopover.

Thanks monster for pointing this out. Currently in the validator there is no distinction between 'o' & 'x' (they're treated exactly the same - they're ignored!) Unfortunately, I can see that my earlier post carried this lack of distinction over into the explanation where due bad word order I added confusion :(. I've now edited my earlier post to clarify this :)

I've noticed a bug in the most recent version concerning the calculation of QF SCs. Flights in the '4801-5800' mileage bracket (eg. BKK-HEL) show up as earning 45 SCs in Y when in fact they earn 35. The values in J and F appear to be correct, however.

Thanks, done (0.95003). I also verified the other ones against QF's table, they were all OK.