jsloan

That's a good point. It's possible for an agent to make the change, but it may require IRROPS. And you might end up with a little extra bonus when the flights credit (or, at least, I was -- but it was credited to MP). I don't recall if the app will let you do it or not (there's another thread on direct flights as well. .

OP: BTW, the reason that it was more expensive to split the legs was that YYJ-YYC-EWR and YYJ-SFO-EWR are both valid routings, but YYJ-YYC-SFO-EWR is not.

EmailKid

Yup, back when I used to regularly fly DFW-SFO-Asia would have a heck of a time with DFW-SFO-NRT as single flight number, and the 737 obviously not making the SFO-NRT flight

Then it changed to SFO-NRT-BKK and/or SIN before UA dropped the flights, obviously making earning miles more challenging. I was able to split the segments a couple of times when requesting an u/g, claiming married segment would make u/g harder to clear, other times I was not allowed to split.

And will say, I too would rather fly (and do if givne the choice) YYJ-YYC than YYJ-SFO to avoid the flying Devil's chariot torture chamber and fly AC's pre-reclined prop. If YYJ-YVR is available as starting segment, it's a no brainer @:-)

TerryK

Call it a scam or not but there won't be this thread, and many others, if this connection-appears-to-be-direct was made clear at booking.

jsloan

While I agree with you in general, in this particular thread, the OP wasn't misled about the connection point -- there was just a question about getting mileage credit for the full distance.

PS: It technically is direct, which is the root of the issue. It's direct with a stop and change of gauge. Direct and nonstop are not synonyms.

EmailKid

Even veteran fliers get confused with nonstop v. direct flights.

Back to OP, way back when CO started to fly EWR-PEK, there was a thread in PMCO forum about single flight number getting LESS miles than EWR-PEK due to the "lucky" 888 flight number on CO888 BOS-PEK with a gauge change at EWR.

sexykitten7

If you leave it as is you may or may not get the miles as flown. Safer to split it if you can get a good agent. Explain that it's a direct flight (somehow agents can't see that in the new system) and ask them to force split.

Even I accidentally booked one earlier this year! You really can't tell based on the website (this is actually 2 flights, not 3). Direct flights are already deceptive enough without further obfuscating them!

jsloan

Sorry, but what you've shown here is exactly how direct flights need to be displayed to the user. Your flight is stopping twice. (It'll also show you the correct number of PQMs -- which may not be the number you'd like -- if you look at the details). Sure, you might prefer that they call out the fact that there's no change of flight number, but the average traveler is much more concerned about the number of times they need to stop.

The deceptive part comes about when direct flights appear higher than connecting flights in search results, or when some OTAs don't call out the extra stop this prominently. A buddy of mine had to get his parents from SGN to JFK. He booked them on PR via MNL, because he didn't think his parents would want more than a single stop. MNL-JFK has a technical stop at YVR, which he completely missed because it was so non-obvious in the search results. (Happy ending: the parents apparently loved the chance to walk around the plane and stretch their legs in YVR for an hour, so it all worked out). That's deceptive. This isn't.

sexykitten7

Ha! I suppose the show all stops method is deceptive to frequent flyers who care about EQM/S. It makes it pretty hard to detect direct flights. And the consolidated method is deceptive to kettles, who care about stops and often overlook pesky notes like "time on ground xxx/change of gauge".

Of the 2 methods, I think mine is clearly the hardest to spot. But I agree it benefts kettles to spell it out. Too bad they can't do both. E.g. Maybe shade in the all stops method to show the direct.

Repooc17

K fares on UA earn (at best) 50% on other FFP, so reduce 50%+ from the actual flying distance.

SkiBikeBeer

Hi FT Community,

I'm concerned about a PQM discrepancy about my routing as the difference will leave me short of 1K as I was planning on United crediting the actual PQM flown. The flight numbers are the same, so how is the PQM earnings different?

BR75: TPE > BKK > AMS, when booked directly, United is showing PQM to only be 5,890 miles.


When booked as individual segments, United is showing:

BR75: TPE > BKK: 1563 miles
BR75: BKK> AMS: 5709 miles
Total: 7272 miles





This difference of 1382 miles is the make or break for me to get to 1K without doing an upfare/mileage run/SDC.

Is this normal? Or is this an error in the PQM calculation from United on a BR partner flight?

Thanks,
SL

IAH-OIL-TRASH

ual744777sta

If you bought BR75 as TPE-AMS without a stopover in BKK, you will be credited with 5890 PQM. If you have a stopover in BKK the system will count it as two separate flights and you will get PQM for TPE-BKK and BKK-AMS. This is the rule for flights with the same flight number and not an error.

WineCountryUA

Direct flights, flights with a single flight number but with 2 or more segments, credit as if it was one non-stop.
So a AAA-CCC direct flight with a stop at BBB, credit as an AAA-CCC flight.
If you book this AAA-BBB then BBB-CCC you will get the sum of the two segments

Yes, it is a bummer, But it is about how you buy the flight

This normal UA policy -- However, not all airlines do this, so for a partner flight it can go either way. It is up to the partner to decide how to post.

Probably best to ask on the Eva/BR forum which approach BR takes.

UA_Flyer

emcampbe