[Anonymous]

[MartynSinclair]

This question is being raised following a discussion on the current Turkish thread (see left). However, it is an important question as no one has come up with a definite answer…

I know airports (and terminals) have different Minimum Connection Times (MCT) for onward travel.

However, the question is, are minimum connection times based on LANDING TIMES or TIME ON GATE.

On the basis you have a 1 hour MCT to catch an onward flight on a through ticket.

The example is, you are due to land at 13.00 for an onward connection at 14.10.

You indeed land 5 minutes early at 12.55, but due to a long taxi and perhaps a blocked stand or a bus to the terminal, you do not enter the terminal until 13.30 leaving 40 minutes. There are q’s at security and you reach the gate too late!

Are airlines obligated to re route you or can the airline demand you buy a new ticket.

From experience, BA in T5 go on Time on Gate to decide whether to re route OR in my experience have use Time on Gate… but the story being told on the Turkish thread, gives a totally and very worryingly, different story.

Has any one had a similar problem with missing a flight following a delay getting onto a stand and what were your experiences…

[canucklad]

Morning Martyn
I also commented on the Turkish thread, and like you, went away and did some googling. No definitive answers, but the closest I got to common sense was this…..

“ FWIW, whenever one checks FLIFO (flight info) for a trip via a reservation system, four times are recorded:

OUT – time OUT of the gate
OFF – time OFF the ground
ON – time ON the ground (touchdown)
IN – time IN the gate

It is my understanding that the time IN/OUT is recorded (at least in SABRE) automatically (as mentioned previously) when the brakes are applied/released. “

It’s my considered opinion that airlines will muddle the figures to suit their own purposes. If they want to stress their on-time credentials I’m convinced they’ll use the OUT & ON figures. If their penalising their contractors, they’ll quote their OFF & in times.

As an aside, FRightmare proudly celebrates they’re on time as soon as the cabin crew can press the

always worth a listen : )

[stevescoots]

I have not actually missed a flight but had a 1 hour transit which assured was enough from BA in LHR that due to waiting for a stand was 30 minutes late getting off resulting in a sprint from A to C gates, some argy bargy in security to get through and I was last to board the flight. Unfortunately my bags didn’t make it.

I have been refused a flight despite being inside the transit time. NWI-AMS, we landed and got out of plane on time and I was at the gate to board next flight to CAN just as it opened, however I was refused to board on the basis that they did not have enough time to security check my bags, despite them being checked in NWI. There was a bit of a row as this was either BS and they had actually just oversold the plane or in fact the stated transit time was not long enough. I ended up being put on another flight 4 hours later to CAN via DBX, it was that or wait 24 hours for the next direct flight!

[MartynSinclair]

My interest in the question is not really about the flight stats… but rather how MCT is defined.

Irrespective of the credibility of the Turkish posting… can an airline justifiably make a passenger buy another ticket if the aircraft landed outside the MCT, but passengers disembark within the MCT and they are holding a through ticket?

[first_class_please]

This seems a great question for “Ask Alex”….

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Well I had a quick chat with out head of customer relation on this who worked for an airline for many years. In essence MCT is defined by your “On stand” time. So when airlines put there schedule together it is called Block to Block time which is basically what Canucklad has mentioned. Some airlines apparently take there on time performance figures by landing times – but not on stand times which as we know can be very different.

With regards to responsibility for MCT once the plane is “On Stand” – not doors open – then the airport is responsible for the throughput of people – not the airline. So if doors don’t open for what could be a myriad of reasons this is not the airlines fault – but the airports. So if a passenger then misses a connection – they don’t have to re-protect you (though any airline worth their salt would). I was told this is why you should take insurance which includes Missed Connection / Departure – as airlines may say this is an insurance issue.

So I think this is the official position that I have been able to establish. Gives a second question that if an airline (via what the airport allows as minimum connection time) doesn’t help then could a passenger make a claim against the airport?

[canucklad]

Agreed, a great question
Alex, if you are going to ask the question, could you please challenge the usual suspects with a definitive answer s’il vous plait ?

As a passenger I’d expect the MCT to be terminal time, i.e. from disembarkation to gate close time. But disembarkation can lead to issues, arriving from EDI @ CDG, you end up nowhere near the main complex and if you’re unlucky enough to be connecting to another remote stand flight, the usual behaviour of ground staff crew is to shut up shop early, to give time for the “last bus” to travel to the aircraft and passengers board, as if the bus was an extension of the terminal. Which means that in reality you have to minus the bussing time from the actual gate close time.

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi Canucklad

Just to add – the other half of MCT is Push Back time from the stand (normally departure time on ticket) – not gate closure time (otherwise no idea how Doha could do a 30 minute transit). Obviously somewhere like Doha where they offer such a short MCT – the airline has to be working with the airport to achieve this, otherwise it is ludicrous for an airline / airport to offer such a short connection. However if they offer a short MCT then it comes back to the question of the airline then taking some responsibility for it?

[AMcWhirter]

Over the years I have received many MCT queries for the Ask Alex column.

For someone who spent some years in the travel trade I have always understood that MCTs are based on airline schedules as displayed by OAG or by airline booking systems, timetables and so on.

It has to be that way, otherwise how can network carriers plan their global schedules ?

But of course as the above examples have shown, MCTs are easily undone by events on the day of travel. For example, strong winds this morning at Dublin mean that connecting flights from the UK mainland are having to be delayed or diverted and this will mean that hundreds of passengers will miss their (transatlantic) connections.

If travelling on a through ticket then an IATA airline is obliged to look after you and honour the onward flight booking even though you may be travelling on a restricted ticket.

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi Alex

Just picking up on the last sentence you write

If travelling on a through ticket then an IATA airline is obliged to look after you and honour the onward flight booking even though you may be travelling on a restricted ticket.

Totally understand if under MCT that an airline on a through ticket has to take responsibility. But if a plane lands on time and MCT allowances and people then get stuck in security for example – can the airline deny responsibility should a passenger not make connection. From what I understand they could.

[AMcWhirter]

Tim – Cannot give you a definitive answer and I don’t believe anyone will be able to, given the complexity of global aviation (i.e. so many different airports, airlines let alone the quality of staff etc worldwide), a definitive answer.

As I have mentioned before, MCTs used to be accurate and reliable years ago but then airports/airlines began using them as a marketing tool and nowadays they may only be achieved under perfect conditions. I say “may” because some airline/airport MCTs are more generous than others.

So the advice is always to allow lots of extra connecting time in addition to the MCT.

[MartynSinclair]

Alex – this discussion was the result of the Turkish thread… the problem with that thread is the OP has not returned.

What really caught my eye is the way an airline demanded a new ticket is purchased, when it should have been dealt with by a re route.

Without asking specifically about the thread in question, but have you heard of a passenger being forced to buy a new ticket in similar circumstance..

[AMcWhirter]

Martyn-

No I haven’t. But of course it must be a through ticket which has been issued and used correctly.

[esselle]

MCT has to be based on scheduled block to block time otherwise it is impossible to measure and thus meaningless.

It is evident by for example the BA departure/arrival time for MAN-LHR, which is far in excess of the actual time you spend in the air.

Assuming liability for holding/taxi/bussing etc is a fruitless exercise as there are too many variables to take into account to make anything stick.

[Author]

Posts