This part of the thread raises another question--how does 'triangular' flight operation impact capacity and potential traffic? I remember when UA still flew to Italy, the flight went IAD-FCO-MXP-IAD. In theory UA could be unable to handle all offering customers at Rome since there would be seats occupied by IAD to MXP passengers. On the other hand, who would want to fly to MXP via Rome?

Should we be surprised that this UA flight existed? Probably not, but like so many other UA oeprations, it exists no more!

Flyer 420

I'm sure the airline world must have raised a smile that in FT, of all places, there is questioning about any indirect routing of flights, given that we are past masters at this to gain a fare or points advantage !

To answer the question an airline will normally determine initially how many seats they will offer each day for each combination. So in the example, with say a 193-seat United 767 they may decide to offer 110 seats to Rome and 83 seats to Milan. If one of them starts to come close to limits for a given day revenue management will reassess and decide whether to change the balance or not. That is simplifying tremendously but you get the idea.

It is also notable that such triangular flights are normally those where the airline doesn't really expect to get a full load even when the two flows are added together, in this case on the transatlantic leg, so the chances of a "clash" between the two flows causing traffic to be turned away are low. Taken with the higher costs per seat compared to only operating direct flights such operations tend to be marginal. But it's a good way of hopefully building up demand to an aim of separate flights to each destination. Each route has its own commercial calculation to justify it.

Bear in mind that on some routes underfloor cargo is a significant proportion of the total revenue, and cargo doesn't really notice intermediate stops. I make this point because Milan is one of the premier air cargo points in Europe, it has many dedicated air freight flights.

I was looking up the registration of an aircraft on a LHR movements website for the benefit of a trip report and found this:

:confused:

I came to and went from IAD on these flights!

Emphasis added:

I disagree. The cost per MXP revenue seat mile and the cost per FCO revenue seat mile for an airplane that simultaneously carries MXP and FCO passengers is going to be less than the cost per revenue seat mile for an airplane going to MXP only or to FCO only (assuming revenue seat miles are the same either way). It's the same concept as a hub-and-spoke system but on a much smaller scale.

Many US airlines use "direct flights" to appeal to customers originating beyond their hubs. The flight you refer to had a domestic segment before it's international segment, so the flight technically origninated there (your info says Orlando, but the reference I have says the flight originated in Denver that day?)

Anyhow, the net effect is that on most arrivals information screens at the final destination, it will read something like "flight XXX, from city Y, via city Z". It looks like your source only archived the "city Y" info.

I'm afraid you misunderstand me. I was speaking simplisrically about costs per available seat, not connected with revenue. To understand it, consider if traffic required TWO flights per day. It would obviously cost more for two flights to both chase one another round the triangular route than for one to serve just Rome and back and the other to serve just Milan and back. What you have described however is a situation where the loads for both points will fit into one consolidated flightm which of course was the actual situation here, and then the higher costs per seat are acceptable because you only need provide one flight, not two.

At a higher level you ofetn hear aircraft manufacturers describe a new larger aircraft having lower costs per seat than the current equipment. That's all very academic until you know you can sell those extra seats.

Fraser:

This is a fraud perpetuated by US airlines to pretend they have "direct" flights to destinations like Orlando. The same flight number is used for a flight from London to Washington and then for a domestic flight leaving some time later with a quite different aircraft type from Washington to Orlando. Central reservation systems identify this single number as a "through" flight and put it in with the "direct" above the display of all the connections. It's a way of getting lazy travel agents and unsuspecting passengers to think there is no intermediate change of plane. TWA were long the past masters at this, almost every Transatlantic flight number had a continuation flight to some often obscure US point.

Rest assured everyone has to get out at Washington and go through the procedures and recheck their baggage. And if the transatlantic plane is late the ongoing one will not wait. There has been adverse comment in the past about unaccompanied minors being booked on such flights when their parents had been told it was a "through flight" and imagined no leaving of the aircraft.

In the airline industry it is known as a "change of gauge" because they cannot admit it is a change of flight !

Mr Bowler's website which you quote uses an automated database which only shows the fnal destination of each flight number.

I think this is in the spirit of the OP, but if not, I apologize. Nevertheless, here's a routing (not a specific flight) that I was surprised to find yesterday while planning a trip from NY to DC.

I was trying to fly from NY to Reagan and was given the following option:

HPN to IAD
IAD to ORD
ORD to DCA

I don't recall the pricing on this route, but I'm pretty sure that from a cost/time benefit standpoint, I'd always be better off jumping in a cab at IAD to get over to DCA, rather than fly to Chicago, change planes and fly on to DCA!

CO was flying EWR-HPN on RJs until just recently.

I flew a US DC-9-30 from ITH to ELM which continued to PIT in the early '90's. 12 minutes from asphalt to asphalt.

DL flew a 72S on SYR-ROC which was part of round-robin service to ATL.

WHBM, ^^^ Thanks for that info, have been wondering what all that was about!

Are BA operating a similar thing? I looked up a BA flight I took (again to IAD) and it said BA217 went to Houston (IAH)...... :confused: The flight definitely terminated at IAD

No, that is a separate problem with the website in question's database of flight numbers, which I have e-mailed the webmaster about in the past. Basically it's old data being used of the relationship between flight numbers and destinations which has not been updated. The flight number is correct.

If you look at the site's "More Info" option instead that uses a separate set of data which is correct but you need to know your ICAO airport codes.

Really a PM type of response but others may be interested in the detail of all arrivals and departures at Heathrow here :

http://www.lhr-lgw.co.uk/

Alaska Airlines operates the DCA-LAX nonstop route now, which also offers few connecting options at its western end except on AA codeshares.

Is it because BTS is what FR would call Vienna-East, given its proximity to the Austrian capital?

I would have reckoned BUD-BJS as an improbable flight, but Hainan Airlines fly it, codeshared with MA.

Slightly less improbable but still surprising to me: PRG-DXB-CMB-MLE on OK.

But Vienna is a small city after all. Less than a million inhabitants!


Neither of them is improbable! BUD-BJS is a hub-to-hub service that (from what I've seen) offers connections at both ends: It's perfectly possible to fly a route like OTP-BUD-BJS-CAN (if you can stand so many transfers that is).
And I think (not 100% sure) that the OK DXB flights continue to either CMB or MLE depending on day of the wk. Both Ceylon and MLE are very popular destinations for the middle classes of the Czech and Slovak Republics and probably other neighbouring countries as well!

Pakistan International Airlines
Houston (IAH) - Manchester (UK) - Lahore (Pak) - Karachi (Pak) (21 hours)
every Wednesday and Sunday night at 8:00 p.m.

BTW, PIA's 777 aircraft and inflight service is really fabulous and their IAH-MCH economy fares (also ORD-MCH and JFK-MCH) are generally around the $200-300 mark.