I flew United (actually the shuttle, now run by Sky West) from PHX to OAK last Sunday. It was supposed to be a direct flight.

I arrrived and saw the board behind the desk said Los Angeles. Double checking my ticket, I saw I had the right flight number, and checked in. Nothing else said.

Smaller plane, so had to check my bag at the gate. They wrote "OAK" on it. Again, nothing else said.

Arrived at LAX (late, due to fog there), watched everyone else deplane, and two of us for OAK are left. The stewardess said we had to get off, that the plane was going back to PHX. We pointed out that we were going to OAK, showed her our tickets, etc. The plane was parked in the boonies, far from any gates.

Soon, a van shows up, drives us and our luggage around the outside of the airport to an empty gate, where another plane with the same flight number had already left for OAK. The people at the desk said they wondered where we were when they loaded the plane (!?!). Finally got another flight to OAK, arrving there 10 hours after I had left home for a 2 hour flight.

Lost several hours, and was astounded that nothing or no one said anything about changing planes in LAX, or even going there. Also--it's apparent that United had two flights in the air at the same time with the same flight number.

Needless to say, United has lost my confidence and will receive a note from me later this week. I would be interested in your comments.

Never heard of that one before !!! and God knows United can pull surprises on you !!!
Sorry about your hellish experience on the new United !!!

Flight 7989, service from PHX to OAK via LAX is a regular United Express flight. It's not uncommon for a carrier to have a "direct" flight via an intermediate location. In some cases there is a change of plane at the intermediate location too. According to the schedule, your flight would have had 52 minutes on the ground. If there was to be a change of plane, the Sky West people should have assisted you in quick transportation to your new aircraft.

If you do write United, keep in mind that all services provided to you were by Sky West. UAL had nothing to do with your experience that day. I am sure they will send your comments to Sky West, but expect that to result in some additional time to get a response.

If it is helpful, the contact information for Sky West is:

Customer Relations
444 South River Road
St. George, UT 84790
435-634-3400

Thanks for the info. It was booked through United, so I feel they need to be filled in.

It really wasn't the delays that bug me--it was the complete neglect of anyone telling myself and the other OAK bound passenger what was going on.

JP

It *was* a direct flight. As others have pointed out, direct does not necessarily mean non-stop, or no change of aircraft.

While your flights were on Skywest doing business as United Express, there are heaps of United mainline direct flights which involve a stop and change of aircraft.

Since you say you booked your flight through United and it operated under a UA flight number, you might want to mention United's "Service Commitment" if you write.

Change of aircraft disclosure

We advise customers when their travel involves a change of planes. We share that information with them when they make their reservation, at check-in and on a printed travel itinerary.


http://www.ual.com/site/primary/1,10017,1515,00.html

And


Development of customer service plans

We have asked each of our domestic code-share partners to develop a plan that outlines how their company will fulfill United's customer service commitments. We have asked our United Express� partners to uphold the key provisions of Our United Commitment.

http://www.ual.com/site/primary/0,10017,1516,00.html


[This message has been edited by Quokka (edited 01-20-2002).]

I am curious... when the board said the plane was going to LAX and you thought you had a direct nonstop flight (which is what I am assuming from your comment) why didnt you just ask the gate agent about this problem?

That might have helped the situation. I know I have questioned that immediately... and not wait until I am on the tarmac at LAX...

William

There is one of the sources of the problem: "[i]direct nonstop flight[i]". There is no such animal.

Non-stop: One flight number, one aircraft, no stops between two city pairs.

Direct: One flight number between two city pairs with one or more intermediate stops and a change of aircraft possible enroute.

Connecting: Two or more flight numbers with [usually] a change of aircraft enroute.

Always Flyin': I thought the relationship between "direct" and "nonstop" was set:subset.

"direct non-stop" flights certainly do exist, although it's redundant to say it that way. Non-stop flights are direct, so the set notation is correct (non-stop flights are a subset of direct flights).

Usually there's an announcement such as "welcome to flight 7989 to LAX, continuing to OAK".

I would have said something at check in when I saw the board said Los Angeles and not Oakland. My experience with United Express/Skywest is that they don't often know what they're doing...and I dont just mean the counter people. It seems like they wing it sometimes as far as which aircraft are going to go where.

All direct flights have a non-stop in them; not all non-stop flights are necessarily a sub-set of a direct flight (e.g., terminating service at an out station).

Bottom line is that a non-stop flight has no [scheduled] stops enroute. Direct and connecting flights do.

My favorite is a direct flight when the first leg is delayed and the remainder of the flight takes off before you get there (e.g., UA 875: SEA-NRT-BKK. SEA-NRT is delayed. You arrive in NRT figuring the flight can't leave for Bangkok until you get there. Ha, ha, ha, ha. Laughs on you--it's on it's way to BKK.). So much for the same flight number...

Always Flyin, the definition of "non-stop" for this purpose is: does the customer make any stops between origin and destination? Two flights with the same flight number or two flights with different flight numbers, are both *not* non-stop.

The definition of a direct flight is one or more flights from the customer's origin to destination, all of which have the same flight number.

For example, if someone is flying DL from ATL to HSV, he/she can fly DL 289, a non-stop flight from ATL to HSV. That is also a direct flight, because it is "one or more flights" (namely one). You could also fly DL 289 from ATL to MLU via HSV. That is also a direct flight, but is not a non-stop, as the flight stops in HSV on the way to MLU.

As all non-stop flights meet the definition of "one or more flights with the same flight number", all non-stop flights are also direct flights. The set of non-stop flights is a subset of the set of direct flights.

JS:

I agree with your first paragraph.

However, I disagree with the remainder of your post. A non-stop flight is not also a direct flight. A direct flight has two or more legs--not one.

The other confusing factor is that you can speak of a particular passenger's itinerary as direct or non-stop, or you can speak of an airline's service between two cities (e.g., UA offers direct service between XXX and XXX.)

Expedia.com used to have an option "direct flights only". If you check that box, you would get both non-stop and multiple-stop direct flights. They've since changed it to be "non-stop flights only", probably due to customer complaints about the direct flight "scam". The definition of a direct flight is one or more, not two or more, flights with the same flight number.

Re passenger's itinerary between two cities vs the airline's service between two cities -- it's the same thing. If you want to fly between LGA and DFW on UA, not only is there no non-stop service, there is no direct service (there used to be a direct flight through IAD).

The comment that Skywest is to blame and that when you write UAL over the subject that UAL doesn't have anything to do with it, because it's a Skywest flight is total B#$*S(%T!

IF it is a published UAL flight then UNITED had COMPLETE responsibility for it. To say that they just have a "marketing agreement" is utter nonsense!!!