Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster
For gods sake I'm aware of the industry definition of a direct flight, I'm commenting on how weird the airline definition of 'direct' is, when that flight is anything but direct.
If someone told me draw a direct line between two dots I sure wouldn't do this:
The only person on earth who would describe this as a direct line is an airline executive. |
Taxi drivers do not take you "directly" to your home either. They try to take whatever route is MOST direct, but they are bound by little things like road networks, not to mention traffic lights, traffic congestion, road construction, and the choice of taking a "more direct" route along side-streets vs. taking a more comfortable route along arterials.
If any taxi driver was driving between Commercial/Broadway and Central Park in Burnaby, the
most direct route would be (in-part) along Vanness Ave which parallels the Expo Line ( in part )... but no Taxi Driver is going to take that zig-zag route when they could just zip down Grandview and up Boundary ( despite the direct route being 1min faster according to map apps ).
I realize that it's weird, but in context of a plane where you're the passenger, direct just really means you don't have to leave the aluminum tube of the plane ( or your seat, usually ).
In fact, even flights that 'look' direct on a map aren't actually direct for many flights across oceans, where ETOPS rules are in place and avoiding dark clouds (mostly for reasons of passenger comfort).
I DO see what you mean if you look at a map, but from a passenger perspective, it doesn't change anything if you purchased a 10-hour flight from point A to B with a pause at Stop C. You're in the tin can for the same amount of time that you paid for... it's just that the scenery stops moving for a few hours sometime in between.
Prev
Linear Mode
