i hate the term "direct"
Feb 12, 2002 | 5:09 pm
#16
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North Oregon Coast
Programs: AS, DL, HH Gold, National EE
Posts: 366
And "direct" is even worse than "indirect" because, as it's commonly used, there are still stops, AND because the flight number stays the same, you often only get credit for one "segment" toward elite status even if you had two or three takeoffs and landings. It's the worst of both worlds!
If I'm in a hurry, I'll look for nonstop. If I have to stop over anyway, I'll look for different flight numbers. I will NOT, unless there is no alternative, book where the flight number remains the same but we stop along the way.
If I'm in a hurry, I'll look for nonstop. If I have to stop over anyway, I'll look for different flight numbers. I will NOT, unless there is no alternative, book where the flight number remains the same but we stop along the way.
Feb 12, 2002 | 7:20 pm
#18
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI, AA Plat
Programs: AA
Posts: 163
Even worse, I recently found out that a "direct" flight BOS/NRT was actually a CHANGE of planes in ORD. AA credited the miles as they would if the plane flew the great circle route non-stop, giving many fewer miles than if my connection in ORD was with two flight numbers.
A very good to NEVER fly "direct" flights, at least on AA! Take a connection that's CALLED a connection!
A very good to NEVER fly "direct" flights, at least on AA! Take a connection that's CALLED a connection!
Feb 12, 2002 | 11:04 pm
#19
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Smoke filled room, TPA and FLL/MIA :UAL 1K and 2MM,AA EX PLAT and 2MM,Lifetime Plat Starwood
Posts: 4,318
I flew from YUL to CLT "direct" last month. Flew directly OVER AND 300 miles past CLT to ATL. Then BACK 300 miles to CLT.
How is a flight direct when you have to backtrack 600 miles??
How is a flight direct when you have to backtrack 600 miles??
Feb 13, 2002 | 7:37 am
#20
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: (SNA) Orange County, California USA
Posts: 3,641
Before FlyerTalk, I once flew more and received less miles due to direct flights!
I flew LAX-MCO-TPA roundtrip and received less miles than if I had flown only LAX-MCO roundtrip. I was scheduled on direct flights. I'll never make that mistake again.
------------------
He that travels fastest goes alone!
I flew LAX-MCO-TPA roundtrip and received less miles than if I had flown only LAX-MCO roundtrip. I was scheduled on direct flights. I'll never make that mistake again.
------------------
He that travels fastest goes alone!
Feb 13, 2002 | 10:29 am
#21
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Kingston, Ont, the limestone city
Posts: 975
How about the term "Express"... seen also in train and bus travel. Intercity Express... still has many stops between the two destinations. I guess it is all based on point of view. As long as it is not local service, then it is express.
In airlines travel, it is "direct" if it is not commuter travel.
In airlines travel, it is "direct" if it is not commuter travel.
Mar 13, 2002 | 5:04 pm
#22
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago Illinois
Programs: 1MM UA
Posts: 1,753
I'm just repeating a point here, but I think it might be useful to be explicit.
I just flew ORD-KIX on UA809. There was a change of equipment in SFO. I got 6480 miles. Flying back I flew KIX-SFO and SFO-ORD on separate flight numbers. I got 7259 miles for the exact same number of flight miles. So I could have gotten 779 more miles by taking a different flight to SFO, and there was one 40 minutes earlier.
I didn't think about it when I made the reservation, however.
No system has to make sense. I doubt they do this to scrimp on miles -- probably just a historical thing. But it seems strange
I just flew ORD-KIX on UA809. There was a change of equipment in SFO. I got 6480 miles. Flying back I flew KIX-SFO and SFO-ORD on separate flight numbers. I got 7259 miles for the exact same number of flight miles. So I could have gotten 779 more miles by taking a different flight to SFO, and there was one 40 minutes earlier.
I didn't think about it when I made the reservation, however.
No system has to make sense. I doubt they do this to scrimp on miles -- probably just a historical thing. But it seems strange
Mar 13, 2002 | 5:44 pm
#23
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CH-3823 Wengen Switzerland
Programs: miles&more, MileagePlus
Posts: 27,043
the 'direct'/one-flight number routing sometimes also works in my favor: I only need ONE voucher of my visit-the-USA voucher 'booklet' (one voucher per flight number needed).
[This message has been edited by Rudi (edited 03-13-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Rudi (edited 03-13-2002).]
Apr 20, 2002 | 5:18 pm
#26
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A Southern locale that ain't the South.
Programs: Bah, HUMBUG!
Posts: 8,014
In some cases there's not much one can do. In the case of AA69 (ostensibly) MAD-DFW, making a connection gets into DFW too late to connect onward. That and the MIA-DFW portion of AA69 is scheduled as an Atlantic config 777... hmm, that's a toooough choice, 500 miles or Flagship suite!
Apr 20, 2002 | 6:01 pm
#27
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: East Bay, CA UA1K
Posts: 813
I hate 'direct' too. If I have to go through the added time and agravation of landing/ reboarding, etc, I want the 500 minimum miles and the segment for it. Another reason is that, if I'm going far enough, I'll upgrade with a confirmable coupon or real miles, and I'd like to use those on a plane with a cabin worth spending those on.
Apr 21, 2002 | 12:46 pm
#29
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Programs: Avis Pref+, Hyatt Explorist, Marriott Life Gold, Honors Silver, IHG Plat via MC.
Posts: 6,789
http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...ML/006644.html
Same plane w/ (a) stop(s) called 'direct' or 'thru' = confusing & misleading to laypersons. I agree that it probably comes from old train/bus terminology.
But calling a 'change of aircraft enroute' a direct flight is IMO an outright LIE.
------------------
Flyertalk.com ...because miles & points don't grow on trees!
Same plane w/ (a) stop(s) called 'direct' or 'thru' = confusing & misleading to laypersons. I agree that it probably comes from old train/bus terminology.
But calling a 'change of aircraft enroute' a direct flight is IMO an outright LIE.
------------------
Flyertalk.com ...because miles & points don't grow on trees!
Oct 12, 2008 | 8:25 am
#30
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3
I agree. To call a connection flight "direct" just because it keeps the same flight number is a conscious deception. "Direct" once meant a flight on a single plane with an intermediate stop. But worst of all, and the reason I'm posting, is the now common
use of "direct" to mean "nonstop." If "direct" can mean anything from connecting flights to nonstop flights, then it has no meaning at all. Because it is now too late to control misuse of the term, and attendant confusion, I say purge "direct" from flight terminology altogether.
use of "direct" to mean "nonstop." If "direct" can mean anything from connecting flights to nonstop flights, then it has no meaning at all. Because it is now too late to control misuse of the term, and attendant confusion, I say purge "direct" from flight terminology altogether.