Newark
As United and Continental prepare to become one airline, they are making changes that, though necessary, are affecting negatively their customers. One consequence is that upgrades on international flights will be harder to get in the short run, and more expensive in the long run.
The carriers announced last month that they would begin “cross-fleeting” — swapping routes in each other’s network — and some of those changes have already been loaded in their schedules. Both United and Continental will be serving certain routes in the next several months, but each of them is taking over other routes entirely.
For example, all Anchorage flying goes to Continental, as do the Washington-Paris and Washington-Amsterdam routes, now operated by United. The current Continental flights from Newark to Zurich and Brussels, as well as its Houston-Lima flights, will be flown by United.
That practice is not unusual in airline pre-merger situations. While the United-Continental merger was legally completed late last year, they will be operating as separate airlines until they secure a single certificate from the Federal Aviation Administration, which is expected to happen by early next year.
However, United and Continental are implementing the route changes before resolving some technical issues that will harm their customers.
If you are a United 1K flier and have system-wide upgrade certificates, you can’t use them on the previously United flights now operated by Continental — and the other way around. The same applies to your confirmed regional upgrade certificates on domestic flights. As of now, it’s technically impossible for the carriers’ reservations systems to accept upgrade certificates from the other airline’s frequent-flier program.
Mary Clark, a Continental spokeswoman in Houston, confirmed that certificates will be “carrier-specific” for the time being. “We are in the process of aligning the programs, and changes to the current policies will be announced as they are rolled out throughout the year. We aim to fully combine the programs by 2012.”
United is expected to adopt Continental’s reservations system eventually, but until then, there may be another way to resolve the issue. The carriers announced this week that miles can now be transferred between United and Continental accounts. I wonder if they can make it possible for upgrades to be transferred as well. It’s unclear if they looking into such an option yet.
There is another issue with the United system-wide upgrades whose impact is just now becoming apparent. For years, they have been allowed only on tickets booked in W class or higher, which makes S, T, L and K classes ineligible. Continental recently adopted the same rules.
This means that customers often have to spend hundreds of dollars more than the lowest available fare, just to qualify for an upgrade request — and if the upgrade doesn’t clear, they are left with a lot less money and the same coach seat they would have had if they had paid much less for it.
Things are getting even worse. In January, because of the merger, United added a 14th coach booking class, G, which was a regular published booking class on Continental, but on United it was previously an unpublished travel-industry discount class — it didn’t earn miles and was ineligible for upgrades.
Now, instead of four, there are five booking classes ineligible for system-wide upgrades. So what? you might ask — just a small technicality. Not quite. As a result of this change, W fares are getting more expensive. For example, a base fare of $800 that might have booked in W class before, now books in S or T. A few days ago, I helped a friend with a ticket from Washington to Bangkok, and the W base fare was more than $1,400 round trip — including taxes and surcharged, it came up to $1,900.
There is no question that fares have been going up for some time. A few years ago, a W fare to Bangkok was about $900, including taxes. In 2002, an H fare was $900. So the trend is clear and it didn’t start yesterday. But adding one more booking class makes things even worse.
It’s worth pointing out that American Airlines system-wide upgrades are allowed on all published booking classes.
Another negative change as a result of the United-Continental merger is that, similarly to the upgrades, discount vouchers from one airline cannot be used on the other. So if you want to use a United voucher for a ticket to Anchorage, you can’t, because United has given its seasonal service to Continental.
This week, the United website seems to be including Continental flights in electronic certificate-discounted itineraries, but the official policy hasn’t changed. It may be a website glitch, given that it also allows Lufthansa flights, and the vouchers’ terms and conditions specifically say that they are not valid on code-share flights.
One positive merger-related change is that United customers can now avoid StarNet blocking — it has diminished but still exists — by transferring their miles to Continental, which doesn’t block Star Alliance partner award seats.
NOTE: Several months after this column was published, United and Continental made it possible to use upgrades on flights operated by the other airline, including on mixed itineraries.
Related stories:
United, Continental execs at odds over loyalty program
United executive breaks old barriers
Keeping United international first class
Continue reading about United fliers hit by pre-merger changes
Are you one of those travelers who wait until they get to the airport to find out that their flight has been delayed or canceled? It’s time to become a proactive flier and learn how to predict disruptions, so you can get rebooked before anyone else on your flight, with a minimum impact on your travel plans.
Although there is no guarantee that your prediction success rate will be 100 percent, because airlines often swap aircraft, the method I’ve adopted works most of the time. It’s actually rather simple: I track the planes assigned to my flights by matching arrival and departure gates. Continental Airlines makes it even easier by providing the most advanced data in the industry, but more on that later.
The aircraft for a United Airlines flight I recently took from Washington to San Francisco came from Sao Paulo. Had the flight from Brazil been late, I would have known hours in advance, which would have allowed me to get rebooked on the phone before even leaving home.
You might ask why you need to waste time tracking planes and matching gates, when airlines usually send e-mail and phone alerts in case of delays and cancellations. I find that I’m usually ahead of them, because for some reason their systems often take hours to update.
If I see that United 952 from Washington to Frankfurt is four hours late, I know immediately that the return flight 953 will be delayed, too. But I’ve seen United take hours to reflect that in its system, perhaps hoping that the plane will make time in the air. That can be a valid reason to wait for a final determination, as can be the possibility that another aircraft may be found to replace the delayed one.
So why am I so sure Flight 953 won’t depart on time if Flight 952 is four hours late? There is only one Boeing 767 flying to Frankfurt daily, and it operates both 952 and 953, which leaves no room for aircraft substitution. In addition, the turnaround time for that plane on the ground in Frankfurt is less than two hours, so there is no way the plane will leave Frankfurt on time after arriving from Washington four hours late.
Knowing the type of aircraft assigned to your flight would make the gate-matching exercise much faster, especially at a hub like Washington Dulles or Chicago. To make it even easier, you can use your departing airport’s website, which will display all arriving flights in a certain time frame with their gates on the same page. If you know your flight leaves from Gate 72 in Los Angeles, save yourself time by going to the LAX website, rather than the United site.
Most planes, of course, operate several flights a day, so if I have time, I track my planes since their first voyage in the morning. Yesterday, for example, the Boeing 767 I flew on from LA to Chicago had started the day in LA, flown to Denver and Chicago before returning to LA to pick me up. By the way, the tail number of that plane was N666UA.
What about aircraft replacement? That’s another reason to do your homework. That flight from Washington to San Francisco I mentioned earlier was scheduled to be operated on a Boeing 767 — with a domestic seat configuration, which means two cabins and those utterly unimpressive domestic first-class seats. As soon as I learned my plane was coming from Sao Paulo, I knew there had been a swap to an internationally configured, three-cabin Boeing 777, so I’d sit in a much more comfortable business-class seat. Since the substitution changed seat assignments, I quickly logged in and grabbed my favorite seat in the business cabin.
All major U.S. carriers’ websites show gate information, but Continental beats them all to the punch by displaying much more valuable data — it actually shows the tail number of the specific aircraft assigned to your flight and tells you where it’s coming from, including the inbound flight’s number. For instance, you are flying from Newark to Berlin on Flight 96 today, your Boeing 767′s tail number is N158CO, and it’s coming from Zurich as Flight 79. Right next to that information on the Continental site is a link to the real-time status of that flight.
Continental goes even further, offering descriptions of beverage and meal services for that particular flight, as well as data on in-seat power, entertainment, aircraft features and seat configuration.
This is a great example of a customer-friendly policy, which the merged United should adopt on its website. In fact, all airlines should provide that information — it would certainly make our lives much easier.
Related stories:
Preserving upgrades in case of rebooking
Flight schedule changes overwhelm agents, travelers
Dulles Airport enters the modern age
Continental shows new transparency
Lufthansa agent’s ‘mistake’ stacks up
Continue reading about Predicting flight delays and cancellations
I’ve always been puzzled by the grand “international” designation of numerous small airports throughout the United States, just because they boast the odd flight to and from Canada.
While Canada is, indeed, a foreign country, this week’s incident with a Virgin Atlantic plane at Bradley Airport in Hartford, Conn., provides sufficient justification for my bewilderment.
The image on the left is the official logo of the airport at issue, with the word “international” displayed very prominently. Yet, when the Virgin flight from London to Newark, N.J., was diverted to Hartford because of bad weather further south, about 300 passengers were forcibly confined to the aircraft for four hours without water or food. Some of them got sick and fainted, and chaos reined on board, according to press accounts.
Why? Because there was no one from the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) division — immigration and customs officers, in plainer English — to process the travelers.
It’s unclear why it was decided that the plane should land at Bradley, instead of Boston, for example, which has a fully operational CBP facility. I wouldn’t be surprised if whoever made the decision didn’t even think about the lack of immigration and customs in Hartford.
Or perhaps they assumed that having “international” in the airport’s official name actually meant that it could handle international arrivals. Alas, flights from Canada don’t require such processing, because all CBP procedures are done at the respective Canadian airport, and those flights are treated as domestic arrivals once they land in the United States.
So it’s time the U.S. government rethought its “international airport” designation policies and made sure those designations match an airport’s true capabilities.
Continue reading about U.S. should change ‘international airport’ designation policy
Having covered American diplomacy for a decade now, I’ve received many “diplomatic” answers to my questions — but none more so than “Yes, but not really.” I was reminded of it by the recently negotiated Open Skies aviation agreement between the United States and Japan.
The idea of the Open Skies accords, which Washington has with more than 90 countries, was to liberalize air travel between the signatories, allowing flights from any city in the first country to any city in the second without the previously imposed government restrictions.
However, the deal reached with Japan in December has one glaring exception — U.S. carriers can have only four pairs of takeoff and landing slots at Tokyo’s Haneda Airport, and only between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Even though the document hasn’t been signed yet, there are no plans to change the Haneda limits…
Who says that cheap plane tickets are a thing of the past? How would you like to go skiing in Utah this winter for less than $150 round trip from the East coast, including all taxes? Rather visit a warmer place? How about a ticket to Hawaii for less than $300?
Yes, these are real prices, but you might need to do some homework to get them. Airlines now publish low fares less frequently and often pull them off the market within hours.
We’ve all heard travel experts warning that air fares have nowhere else to go but up, mainly because of record-high jet-fuel prices, as well as predictions that the era of affordable air travel is over. That may well be what the future holds. The present, however, begs to differ…
