Codeshares - a confounded nuisance
 

Yes, I know getting miles on another carrier is great, but all that could be done on the computer WITHOUT actually assigning multiple flight numbers. However, there are so many downsides to codesharing.

1. Airport arrivals boards, timetables, etc are filled up and made confusing with multiple entries for the same flight.

2. Passengers go to the wrong terminal for their flight, or cannot find a check-in for "their" airline.

3. Passengers have no idea who is actually operating a flight.

4. Different standards of service, eg BA is now codesharing with Swiss, where Swiss charge for on-board meals.

5. Tedious pre-flight announcements about different flight numbers which just sound gobbledygook to the normal traveller.

I have never objected to commuter operators painting their aircraft and flight numbering them as part of a major airline - that is part of the major airline's method of working. But sticking a whole string of extra flight numbers on a flight (Star Alliance are particularly bad at doing this on each other's flights) is just so confusing.

I don't think this is ever the motivation for codesharing, at least for US carriers. To give an example, NW and CO codeshare with each other quite a bit. But, FF members already earn full credit including status bonuses and elite qualification on either carrier's flight, so there's absolutely no benefit from a FF point of view.

I think that traditionally, codesharing is done by mainline carriers to "extent the reach" of a carrier, filling in holes in their route maps.

This should never be the case, at least in the US. A law was passed a few years ago requiring that the carrier actually operating a codeshare flight be disclosed to the passenger before they buy a ticket. All of the online booking systems, whether they be run by an airline or a third party, now make this quite clear. I also think the airline phone agents disclose this. I would assume that travel agents are under the same requirements, but there are no doubt some that are sloppy and don't do it.

I think you have made some valid points though.

This once nearly made me homicidal!

RS... "Violence is not an option." I have had to remind myself of the same.

My pet peeve was trying to find United counters/agents at Copenhagen (the SAS hub) a few years ago. Thankfully, it's a small airport.

[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Nov 29, 2003).]

Yeah its a total PAIN!!! Especially when one of the connecting partner airlines lose/delay bagage!!!

For ex. a few years ago when AirFrance and Continental had codesharing, I flew from Florence to Paris on AF and Paris to Ewr on CO. AF left my bags in Paris, CO counter claimed they were not resposible and I'd have to wait 2 days to get my bags on AF flight. I mentions, well aren't u guys codesharing partners, can't u put my bags on the next CO flight from Paris? They NO!!Anyway I got my bags 3 days later!!

When there's codesharing within connecting flights, it's always the other airlines fault as they always claim!!

I personally think codesharing is a great thing. It allows you to earn miles to so many more destinations. There is a law that airline and travel agency personnel must disclose "at the earliest reasonable opportunity" which carrier is operating the flight. It also prints on your itinerary, usually underneath the flight information, and says something like, "UA8828 operated by Lufthansa." Seems to me that as long as you read the itinerary, you will check in at the right place. As far as onboard announcements, I like the KLM version when they simply say, "Welcome aboard KLM flight 641 to New York. This flight is operated in cooperation with Northwest Airlines." Sounds simple enough. As far as the lost luggage comment, it's the responsibility of the carrier you arrived on to get the bags to you, so it makes no difference who lost it. If you flew CO on your final leg, they have to get the bag to you.



------------------
sftrvlr

This is something that I have though of, when you buy a ticket with an airline you expect their standards. I would feel really fooled if I knew less about the industry (so I wouldn't know about the differences for example) and were put on a carrier with lower service.

Airlines are all over codesharing when it suits them, they run from it when it doesn't. They love to publish those great, sprawling routemaps implying that they cover the earth, but when the other/operating carrier loses your bag, suddenly it's not their problem.

And when SR111 went down off Nova Scotia a few years ago, it was a Delta codeshare with Delta ticketholders on board and a DL flight number. Before the accident Delta never missed a chance to tout "their" nonstop MD-11 to Zurich. After the accident Delta couldn't say Swissair, Swissair, Swissair often enough and did everything they could to distance themselves from the operation.

Ultimately, yes, I do think codeshares mislead more than they help...

The only way to have "codesharing" without different flight numbers, operating carriers, and so forth, is for the airlines in question to merge.

The fact that Piedmont Airlines doesn't publish two different flight numbers (just the US one) is irrelevant. Ever try to buy a ticket directly from Piedmont?

Give me a row of monitors full of flight numbers for three aircraft any day over a massive merger of airlines (never mind that the feds wouldn't allow it).

------------------
"It's as easy as 1, 2, C" -- Kelly, Married With Children

[This message has been edited by JS (edited Dec 02, 2003).]