Think nonstop and direct flights are the same thing? Think again, says Alex McWhirter.

For many years the airline industry has defined flights in three ways: nonstop, direct or indirect. That’s how we old hands still describe air services, but in recent times the distinction between nonstop and direct flights has become blurred, causing a lot of confusion. So first of all, let’s understand what the difference is.

John Strickland, aviation consultant and fellow Business Traveller contributor, explains: “As its name suggests, a nonstop flight means just that. Examples: London-Los Angeles with Virgin Atlantic or London-Singapore with Singapore Airlines. Direct is same plane throughout – but with en route stop(s). Example: London-Singapore-Sydney with BA, or Dubai-Milan-New York with Emirates. Indirect is where there’s an en route plane change. Examples: Manchester-Singapore-Jakarta with Singapore Airlines, or London-Dubai-Johannesburg with Emirates.”

When direct means nonstop

Qantas’ nonstop Perth-London service is surely something to be boasted about. It was billed as both “nonstop” and “direct”, and the description – one correct, one not – appeared to depend on where the press release originated from. Qantas is not alone.

In recent months British Airways described its London-Santiago (Chile) route as “direct” and similarly with London-Durban, but the fact that both were nonstop (indeed Santiago is the farthest destination on the BA network) meant BA was doing itself a disservice.

The BA spokesperson later told me “customers today think of direct as being nonstop” and “nowadays there are not as many direct flights as there used to be.”

The latter statement is key. Decades ago there were many direct flights as B707s, DC-8s and B747s did not have the long range of modern aircraft. Almost every flight between Europe and South East Asia would need to make a stop en route in the Gulf. Every flight linking the Gulf or India with North America would stop in Europe.

Multiple players

“Fifth-freedom rights” mean passengers can be carried between two destinations by the airline of a third country. Fewer seats are wasted as a result. Singapore Airlines, when it operated directly between London and Singapore (stopping in Dubai), was allowed to sell seats for the London-Dubai and Dubai-Singapore legs. Likewise Kuwait Airways for the Kuwait-London and London-New York sectors.

Although there are fewer direct flights now, they do exist, and generally because the route cannot support nonstop operation – but this could change if Qantas was to acquire an ultra long-haul plane for Sydney-London nonstop (and Qantas have been speaking to Boeing and Airbus about creating such an aircraft).

So we now see Air New Zealand operating directly London-Los Angeles-Auckland, or KLM flying Amsterdam-Kuala Lumpur-Jakarta or Qantas flying London-Singapore-Sydney.

Out nonstop, return direct

You might think it strange, but in the case of New York, BA operates direct flights westbound, but nonstop eastbound. Why? Here I refer to BA’s flights from London City. Westbound they operate directly because BA must stop in Shannon to refuel the A318 (the smallest aircraft Airbus make), with which it operates the route. The aircraft needs to be light to take off from London City’s short runway; it then loads its full complement of fuel at Shannon. There’s no such problem going the other way, as it’s landing light.

Emirates operates flights that travel either nonstop or direct between Dubai and New York. Its indirect flights – where a change of aircraft is required – are routed Dubai-Athens-New York or Dubai-Milan-New York. Of course, today’s aircraft could do the trip nonstop, but here it seems Emirates seeks a new market opportunity.

Perhaps there is another reason why the word “direct” has been distorted. Nowadays there are many sixth-freedom carriers – those where passengers are flown indirectly between two destinations by the airline of a third country – who exploit the market to the detriment of others.

That would explain Qantas’ use of “direct” for its Perth-London nonstop service; or why BA bills its London-Santiago service as “direct” to distinguish it from its indirect rivals located in mainland Europe.

My point is, for the passenger, caveat emptor. If you are tempted by a “direct” flight, don’t assume this means nonstop; it might mean a stop en route and a chance to stretch your legs, but a longer journey time.