dand99

I am booking a flight into LAS from Europe, probably via IST. Looking at the UA website, there are a ton of cheap (ish...) flights with impossible connection times (such as just over an hour in EWR to clear immigration, luggage, etc).

Having looked up past posts, consensus seems to be that United will take zero responsibility if I miss the connection, under that assumption it's my own fault for booking it (as opposed to theirs for offering it)

Would be glad to hear if anyone has booked some of these flights, and what happened when the connection was missed.

D.

SEA1K4EVR

I don't know what you're referring to by "zero" responsibility. They will get you to your final destination with no additional payment from you, and if the reason for the misconnect was mechanical, crew, or other thing within their control (basically not weather) they will also give you a hotel room and food vouchers, if necessary.

dand99

What I mean is that the connection times on some of the flights available on united.com are not realistic. Does offering for purchase a route with a connection that is too short come under "within their control" or not ?

I am not looking to debate whether or not it is right for UA to offer these flights, I am more interested in knowing what actually happened on the ground when pax missed these connections.

MSPeconomist

the question is whether these connection times are just short or are actually illegal, meaning below MCT. Have you checked MCT for your route?

Antipode

If they're legal connections and you miss it because of delays, either in arriving or clearing immigration/security, they should accommodate you on another flight. That said, there is some risk here that you might be delayed a long time if later flights that day are full and they can't rebook you until a much later flight, so it's better to avoid the situation altogether if you really think it's impossible.

anc-ord772

Bingo. UA sold us a 38 minute connection in SFO. We arrived 45 minutes after our connection had departed. It was the last flight of the night and there was only space the next afternoon. All earlier flights were sold out. UA moved us to a morning AS flight by request, but other passengers were not so lucky.

ralfp

I assume that is UA 905 and 1580 with a 1h19m connection. If you are on time into EWR then this is possible, in theory.

Don't do it if you want to get to LAS the same day, regardless of what the UA agent does. If you book this, your question is whether UA will, in the event of a missed connection:
- Give you meal & hotel vouchers.
- Route you on another airline if the next day's UA flights are sold-out.

If you misconnect the best case scenario is onto the 7pm to ORD with a 59min connection to an AA flight. There's a 620p DL via MSP, but that's only 26 minutes later and from a different terminal. There's also a 9:30pm B6 departure from JFK, but that's totally unrealistic. UA won't do any of those if they have any excuse (e.g. a 5 minute weather delay, etc.).

Regardless of the reason for a misconnect, you will get rebooked on the next "available" flight, whatever that means. In any case it would be the next day (via ORD then AA being the only real possible exception).

Materdei

I'm confused.

If you don't think the short connection will work for you, don't book it. Some of us are in the Global Entry program and don't check bags so these connections are very makeable. What you are suggesting they do is remove the option for me to select the flight because it might not work for you.

glasnost7

^

I should also add that I recently had three separate flights connecting in EWR, last flight of the day, with about 49 minutes to make it. Made all three even before boarding! Although sitting in the front of the plane, knowing my way around and packing light certainly helped.

ben237829624

UA has published minimum connection time at all their hubs. For example, at NRT connecting between UA/NH international flights required 45 minutes at least. If you transit time meet this requirement, UA will take the responsibility if anything goes wrong.

ralfp

Really? What if UA can use weather/ATC delays as an excuse? IME if there is any delay due to weather or ATC, UA will only rebook you. It won't pay for hotels, food, etc.

In any case, UA will rebook you on another flight. The question is one of timing (the next 5 flights might be full), whether UA will rebook you to another carrier (doubtful in case of WX/ATC), and what UA covers your hotel & food in the meantime (again, doubtful in case of WX/ATC).

JBHorner

The problem (loosely stated) with a forum that caters to frequent flyers is that the views are those from frequent flyers, that is, people who have the experience to inherently know when something offered by an airline might not be right. So, yeah, in the context of someone who regularly visits flyertalk, I'd say that s/he should know better.

Looking at the OP's original post, I have to say that my belief is that the airlines aren't taking their responsibility to heart when they publish fare/route combinations. In short, they're asking for trouble. Let's face it, the majority of the flying public isn't in Global Entry, doesn't know about transfer desks/re-entry through immigration in foreign airports, and generally doesn't have the experience to even look up general information on average times before they book that to-good-to-be-true ticket.

I have, many times, seen city pairs during the course of my travels that I just laugh and say, "who are they kidding?!" I've even called on behalf of business colleagues when they show me an itinerary that relies on everything going perfectly. The reps, 100% of the time, have said it's a "legal connection." That doesn't really help when one must spend 6 or more hours in an airport waiting for the flight on which s/he could be booked.

So, although the airlines do seem to step up when things go awry, it's often not without some significant pain for the ticketed passenger(s).

Joel

ralfp

While I agree with the rest of your post, I don't think they (the airlines) are asking for trouble. They get money that they would not get with more rational MCTs. The OP is an excellent example (if my guess about the flight #s is correct). UA could not sell an IST-EWR-LAS combo with a more reasonable MCT unless it included an overnight connection or an additional connection in Germany (via the LH revenue sharing agreement). If UA did either, some other airline would get the money.

If the connection dosn't work because of WX or ATC, then what does that cost UA? I assume it's very little. As for driving away repeat customers with bad connections, well... repeat customers would probably know better (or at least, like dand99, have the good sense to ask question the connection).

Driving by DCA

Right, but what's the alternative? Force someone like me who would only have a small carry on and has GE to sit around EWR for two hours or more when I can easily make the 1.25 hour connection?

If they set the MCT higher and refuse to book reasonable connections, that hurts a lot of folks too.

This is a case where the buyer has to participate in the process. If you have one set of circumstances, that's an easy connection. If you have another, it may not be.

The airline isn't your mommy. It's not their job to figure out whether you are checking bags or just carrying on, whether you have GE or not, or whether you have anything that might cause you to take longer to clear immigration/customs/APHIS.

Even without GE, that's a plausible connection for a U.S. citizen with nothing to declare and carry-on only. Especially in a premium cabin or at the front of coach. I used to make those before GE came along. Now I would just get some lounge time as well.

LaserSailor

When I started flying professionally about 25 years ago, commissions were paid on tickets to these very knowledgeable people called travel agents. It was quite quaint.
Now our fares are 20 bucks cheaper, but we spend hours trying to understand the system and listen to fools post on Internet forums instead of having a pro do the deed.

If you fly every week, you learn the tricks. The infrequent flyer is the one who was hurt by the demise of the professional travel agent.

I'm lucky to have an ex travel agent on staff, whom I pay to retain her TA credentials. She has seriously bailed out staff several times on IRROPS....