Code Sharing

[Niallo]

On a recent trip I noticed that the Flight Information Displays in major airports are overflowing with multiple entries for the same flight, ie codeshares, where one airline pretends to be another.
This must be confusing for pax thinking they are flying on one carrier, but at the airport discovering they are on another.
It is annoying to see the same flight repeated many times, and wasteful of the flight information systems.
I can understand that airlines want to extend their ticketing reach, but why does it have to be done in such a clumsy way?

[HXdave]

as a travel agent, i would agree with the above. it also goes further, where in some cases there might be 2 totally different flight numbers for the same flight. for example, just looking the following flight on one of my reservation systems:

man - phl
phl - man

it shows available with both BMI & USAirways, exactly same flight times. however the BMI flight Nos are BD2405/2504 & USAirways flight Nos are 0735/0734. to compound this, BD operate from T3 @ man, where as USAirways operate from T2 - totally confusing for the clients.

[ExXB]

A little history for you

Code-sharing isn't done for all the marketing reasons your favourite carrier is telling you, it's done because an online connection takes priority over an interline connection in the GDSs. The airlines use this to steer you to the connection they want you to make, which isn't necessarily the best connection for your purposes.

[Capetonian]

Code sharing also gives a carrier traffic rights over a route it could not normally operate, and thus access to new markets. Commercially it makes sense, from a passenger perspective the benefits, in theory, are seamless handling, single terminal transfers, mileage benefits (they are worth sod all anyway) and preferential handling by partner carriers within alliances. In practice it's a confidence trick.

The biggest con is a type of flight operation known as a 'change of gauge' or a 'funnel flight' where an airline, the main culprit being Iberia, operate a flight with a single flight number, between say BCN and JNB, it's ticketed on a single flight coupon, and you may even get a single boarding pass with two seat numbers. There is of course a change of aircraft en route.

This gives them a higher position on GDS displays and thus a higher probability of being sold - which Iberia desperately need based on my miserable experiences with this excuse for an airline, a disgrace to the people of Spain.

[Avman]

I often fly between BHX & BRU with SN. Look at this:

10:45 SN 2039 Brussels 1 SN 2039
10:45 BD 5339 Brussels 1 BD 5339
10:45 AA 7762 Brussels 1 AA 7762
10:45 9W 6039 Brussels 1 9W 6039
10:45 EY 7251 Brussels 1 EY 7251
10:45 LH 5362 Brussels 1 LH 5362

Yes, it's getting ridiculous!

[Remers]

I agree it could be confusing but it does have to state on the ticket the operating airline so if you read more than just one line on your ticket you will know who the operator is.

[lilflyboy262]

Quite often the Codeshare flight is printed on the boarding pass.

A example of this is NZ99 AKL-NRT.

There is a codeshare with JAL. That flight number is JL5199. This is what is printed on the boarding pass. Even though the passenger checks in with AirNZ staff, and at the AirNZ check-in counters, the passengers still look out for JL5199 on the FIDS.

The only flight shown on the FIDS is NZ99. This leads to passengers getting confused and lost. Cue delayed flights and angry passengers when they miss their flight.

[Seat62K]

I remember a very busy day at Terminal 4, Heathrow, when staff were pulling out passengers from the long queue to check in for flights which were nearing check in deadlines. The BA person called out BA flight numbers only. Some acquaintances who I happened to bump into were flying on a BA flight to Vancouver, but had a Canadian Airlines' flight number. Not being seasoned travellers they would have ignored the request to come forward had I not pointed out that they were flying BA not Canadian and that this was their flight number.

[WHBM]

The way in which the FIDS (information screens) at airports are now cluttered up with unnecessary codeshared duplicate flight details has now become ridiculous. Some BMI flights in the UK have six or more numbers, for each separate Star Alliance member the flight might connect with.

It is of course well within the wit of those who build GDS systems etc to still show these flights in the current sequence where there are such agreements, or to give the relevant frequent flyer credit, but to stick to one number for the actual flight.

If you are not familiar with the codeshare detail, a rule of thumb is that where multiple flight codes are shown, it is the one with the lowest number of all those shown who is the actual operator. There are some codeshared routes (eg Heathrow to Helsinki, where every flight of both BA and Finnair has both airlines' codes on it) and you do need this informaion to work out who is the actual operator.

Change of Gauge has always annoyed me and I am surprised there have not been legal challenges to its "direct flight (but see footnote)" approach. Worst have always been US carriers on "through" flights from overseas seeming to continue with US domestic sectors. Not only are they not direct, but the through passengers are given nothing more than any other connection to any other point. If the first sector is late arriving the second sector does not wait at all for them.

[Capetonian]

Change of Gauge has always annoyed me and I am surprised there have not been legal challenges to its "direct flight (but see footnote)" approach.

I took this up with the EU Commissioner for Transportation after having an exceptionally bad experience with Iberia (bad even by their standards) when we flew from BCN to JNB on a COG flight. We knew it involved a change of a/c in MAD but we did not expect to miss our long haul connection, our luggage to go missing, and to be treated like dirt for daring to complain. I also did not expect to have to be a translator because the Iberia/AENA staff were too ignorant, lazy, and monoglot to make the announcement about the delays in any language other than Spanish. When I told them that the announcements should be in English as 50% of the passengers were English speaking, I was told that they must be 'idiots'. Idiots indeed, to be travelling with such a diabolical airline.

Anyway back to the EU, I received a letter stating that the practice was legal. However the CRS code of conduct makes the COG flights display in a lower position than nonstops or genuine directs.

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by Capetonian

I took this up with the EU Commissioner for Transportation ...... I received a letter stating that the practice was legal.

I was told that they must be 'idiots'.

Looks like it is the EU Commission for Transportation who are idiots. Who are they paid to represent ? The populace of Europe or the Marketing Departments of airlines ?

[bealine]

The legal issues state that the selling airline or the travel agent must clearly state who the operating carrier is.

I have to say, most of the BA customers I come across nowadays seem to know - unlike a few years ago when there was a steady stream of passengers in the Queen's Building corridor at Heathrow racing between Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 because they had found out, almost too late, that their "IB" or "BA" prefix was only a codeshare agreement!

Almost as bad, however, is Continental's practise of showing one Flight Number for a connection that involves a change of aircraft. An example is the CO5 from London Heathrow to New Orleans. What they explain, in very small print, is that the aeroplane changes to a 737 at Houston!

................so, why is it one flight number unless it is to fool the unsuspecting public?

Departing Arriving Travel Time OnePass Miles

Depart:
11:40
London, England (LHR - Heathrow) Arrive:
19:05
New Orleans, LA (MSY) Flight Time:
13 hr 25 mn

Travel Time:
13 hr 25 mn OnePass Miles
4,630 Flight: CO5
Aircraft: Boeing 777-200ER
1 Stop. Time on the ground in Houston, TX (IAH - Intercontinental) is 1 hour 50 minutes. Change Planes. Equipment changes in to a Boeing 737-700.

[lexxity]

Almost as bad, however, is Continental's practise of showing one Flight Number for a connection that involves a change of aircraft. An example is the CO5 from London Heathrow to New Orleans. What they explain, in very small print, is that the aeroplane changes to a 737 at Houston!

We regularly check pax in on this flight from MAN. Most paperwork does not mention this at all and when we tell the pax they are extremely surprised.