Why do airlines use the same flight # for multiple segments?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 13
Why do airlines use the same flight # for multiple segments?
Many airlines use the same flight number for multiple segments. This is done for some flights, but not all.
For example UA 497 is EWR=>SFO and SFO=>SAN.
Why not simply use 2 different flight numbers?
For example UA 497 is EWR=>SFO and SFO=>SAN.
Why not simply use 2 different flight numbers?
#2
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: OKC
Programs: IHG Spire, National Exec, AA Plat
Posts: 2,274
Purely a guess, but i'd suspect it is due to systems not being programmed for more than 4 digit flight numbers, and they need more than 9999. Similar to the Y2K bug.
(I absolutely hate this too, as well as when they change the flight # of the same flight just to cheat and reset their stats).
(I absolutely hate this too, as well as when they change the flight # of the same flight just to cheat and reset their stats).
#4
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
While the technical reason above is part of the problem there is a slightly more sinister version as well. A direct flight (single flight number, even if a connection and change of aircraft) historically would show up above a traditional connection in a GDS interface. So searching SAT-GUM would have always listed CO 7 first, even though it was a 737 to IAH and then a 777 on to Tokyo and a 764 continuing to Guam. Southwest generally uses this to its advantage still in terms of how it schedules flights while the other legacy carriers are getting better about avoiding it on domestic itineraries.
The EWR-SAN connection in this example is something of an exception, but UA also only has an 8a, 5p and 8p nonstop so it slightly fits in the schedule (though the 10a with a DEN connection is less total travel time).
The EWR-SAN connection in this example is something of an exception, but UA also only has an 8a, 5p and 8p nonstop so it slightly fits in the schedule (though the 10a with a DEN connection is less total travel time).
#5
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: California
Programs: AS,WN,UA,B6,hotels
Posts: 4,239
There are some airlines where a multi-segment flight with the same flight number does stay on the same aircraft through all of the segments, but that is not true for all airlines. Where it is not true, there is the usual risk of missing the connection and the like.
WN 2325 is flight where the same aircraft goes from OAK->MSP->MDW->PHL. A passenger can book it on Southwest's web site, which shows it as a two stop flight with no plane change.
However, UA 497 uses different aircraft from the EWR->SFO (777-200) and SFO->SAN (737-900) segments.
WN 2325 is flight where the same aircraft goes from OAK->MSP->MDW->PHL. A passenger can book it on Southwest's web site, which shows it as a two stop flight with no plane change.
However, UA 497 uses different aircraft from the EWR->SFO (777-200) and SFO->SAN (737-900) segments.
#6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,360
Part of the curriculum was to mention what you highlight above. Namely, that it's possible to miss a connection on a direct flight because the airline might operate each segment on different equipment. All the trainers got together and decided to skip that part of the lesson. It just confused most people and it wasn't something the agents would ever explain to guests. (If a guest experiencing IROPs ever called, they were immediately transferred to the Air Desk.)
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,371
in the U.S. at least, it isn’t all that uncommon to find turnaround flights between the airline’s main hub(s) and outstations that carry the same number for both segments ... most of my experience is with DL, where most of these flights are actually operated by their regional affiliates like GoJet, Endeavor, or SkyWest
#9
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Exile
Posts: 15,656
Another reason is that in some parts of the world (notably ASECNA countries), overflight charges are capped at a maximum amount per flight number per day. So multiple segments with the same flight number will get charged only the capped fee rather than multiple fees for each segment.
#11
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA LT Gold; BA Silver; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 3,081
While the technical reason above is part of the problem there is a slightly more sinister version as well. A direct flight (single flight number, even if a connection and change of aircraft) historically would show up above a traditional connection in a GDS interface. So searching SAT-GUM would have always listed CO 7 first, even though it was a 737 to IAH and then a 777 on to Tokyo and a 764 continuing to Guam.
My sinister reason: you don't get mileage credit for the actual miles flown- you get less because they count them as if you'd had a nonstop. If I were in charge of the world it would be illegal to assign the same flight number if an aircraft change is required.
#13
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: California
Programs: AS,WN,UA,B6,hotels
Posts: 4,239
I used to train Reservations Sales Agents at Disney World. We sold packages that included air. The difference between a nonstop and direct flight (aka multi-segment with same flight number) was incredibly difficult for some people to grasp. No matter how many times we covered it, the majority of people still got it wrong on quizzes.
Part of the curriculum was to mention what you highlight above. Namely, that it's possible to miss a connection on a direct flight because the airline might operate each segment on different equipment. All the trainers got together and decided to skip that part of the lesson. It just confused most people and it wasn't something the agents would ever explain to guests. (If a guest experiencing IROPs ever called, they were immediately transferred to the Air Desk.)
Part of the curriculum was to mention what you highlight above. Namely, that it's possible to miss a connection on a direct flight because the airline might operate each segment on different equipment. All the trainers got together and decided to skip that part of the lesson. It just confused most people and it wasn't something the agents would ever explain to guests. (If a guest experiencing IROPs ever called, they were immediately transferred to the Air Desk.)
#14
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Exile
Posts: 15,656
That is probably because most people outside the airline and travel industry habitually use "direct" synonymously with "non-stop". Having "direct" mean what it means in airline jargon is the source of this confusion, and probably leaves some passengers disappointed or angry that their "direct" flight involved a stop and a connection that they missed.
#15
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,360
That is probably because most people outside the airline and travel industry habitually use "direct" synonymously with "non-stop". Having "direct" mean what it means in airline jargon is the source of this confusion, and probably leaves some passengers disappointed or angry that their "direct" flight involved a stop and a connection that they missed.
But, our Reservations Sales Agents took a lot of calls from travel agents. So, there really wasn't any wiggle room when it came to terminology.