![]() |
one world explorer rule question
while rereading the oneworld explorer technical rule sheet (thanks to whomever posted this) i am confused by two seemingly contradictory paragraphs.
from point 4 (e): "Only one intercontinental departure and one intercontinental arrival permitted in each continent except as follows: 1. Two permitted in North America. when one is a transfer without stopover. 2. Two permitted in Asia when one is a transfer without stopover or on direct single plane service between the Southwest Pacific and Europe." i interpreted this to mean that you may visit asia and/or north america twice as long as one of the visits is only a connection to another intercontinental flight and not a stopover. but point 4 (i) states: "Travel between Australia and Europe on a single flight number is considered travelling SW Pacific-Asia-Europe through three continents." can this be interpreted to mean that the "asia twice" clause in 4 (e) is superseded or does it simply mean that going from europe to the swp requires 3 continents regardless if you stopover there or not? fyi, i recently ticketed two aone6 itineraries. one through ba in mru and the other via cx in jnb. neither of the ticket offices would let me connect back through north america scl-(lax)-lhr to get from latin america to europe. both offices were insistent and refused to allow me to have that routing as they said it constituted backtracking. even though i felt my routing was legal, in the interest of getting the tickets issued i acquiesced and routed scl-gru-lhr. is there some new interpretation of the oneworld explorer rules that i don't know about which made them disallow my scl-(lax)-lhr routing? in the past, i have had no problem routing this way. |
The rule meaning in reality, as it stands today is simple: you can ONLY enter Asia twice if one of those entries is a transit without stopover between SWP and Europe; period. The other rule means that the moment you touch Asia you pay for it, stopover or connection makes no difference, you still pay.
The transit without stopover rule in NA is different. In NA the transit without stopover is between SA and another continent, so it can be SA to Europe or SA to Asia or SA to SWP. |
Originally Posted by alemdohorizonte
(Post 9397807)
or does it simply mean that going from europe to the swp requires 3 continents regardless if you stopover there or not?
|
Originally Posted by alemdohorizonte
(Post 9397807)
...fyi, i recently ticketed two aone6 itineraries. one through ba in mru and the other via cx in jnb. neither of the ticket offices would let me connect back through north america scl-(lax)-lhr to get from latin america to europe. both offices were insistent and refused to allow me to have that routing as they said it constituted backtracking. even though i felt my routing was legal, in the interest of getting the tickets issued i acquiesced and routed scl-gru-lhr.
is there some new interpretation of the oneworld explorer rules that i don't know about which made them disallow my scl-(lax)-lhr routing? in the past, i have had no problem routing this way. |
Originally Posted by Viajero
(Post 9397856)
The transit without stopover rule in NA is different. In NA the transit without stopover is between SA and another continent, so it can be SA to Europe or SA to Asia or SA to SWP.
so regarding my disallowed scl-(lax)-lhr connection, it was legal, correct? full itinerary was mru-jnb-(hkg)-syd-drw / syd-hkg-nrt-hkg-lax-sjo-lax-jfk-gig-scl-(lax)-lhr-dxb-lhr-mru (i know that the mru-jnb-(hkg)-syd was technically illegal but they didn't care about that...... |
Originally Posted by alemdohorizonte
(Post 9397902)
...so regarding my disallowed scl-(lax)-lhr connection, it was legal, correct?...
Even without an itin let me put it this way: as long as you are paying for NA this partial itin is perfectly legit: ...HKG-oLAX-oSCL-xLAX-LHR.... |
Originally Posted by alemdohorizonte
(Post 9397902)
...full itinerary was mru-jnb-(hkg)-syd-drw / syd-hkg-nrt-hkg-lax-sjo-lax-jfk-gig-scl-(lax)-lhr-dxb-lhr-mru
(i know that the mru-jnb-(hkg)-syd was technically illegal but they didn't care about that...... |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:02 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.