Is there a difference between a nonstop flight and a direct flight? If you ask the average person, they’d probably assume there isn’t. Meanwhile if you ask a frequent flyer, they probably do know the difference. In this post, I’d like to take a closer look at this topic — let’s first talk about nonstop flights, and then we’ll talk about direct flights.
In this post:
What is a nonstop flight?
A nonstop flight is exactly what you think it is — it’s a single flight that takes off and lands once. The flight doesn’t make a stop on the way. In other words, if you fly without a stop from Tampa to Chicago, or from New York to Tokyo, or from Los Angeles to Paris, those are all nonstop flights. Pretty simple, right?
What is a direct flight?
You’d think that a direct flight would be the same thing as a nonstop flight. After all, the word “direct” is defined as “moving from one place to another by the shortest way without changing direction or stopping.” For whatever reason, airlines decided to redefine the word altogether.
A direct flight is a single flight number that includes one or more stops along the way. When you book a direct flight:
- You have the same flight number for the entire journey
- You generally have the same aircraft for the entire journey, so there’s no risk of misconnecting
- You may or may not have to get off the plane at the connecting airport, as it depends on the specific airline and airport
- For us mileage geeks, you typically only earn miles for the distance between the origin and destination, and not for the connecting airport (this only matters for frequent flyer programs that credit miles based on distance flown rather than dollars spent)
This differs from a standard connecting itinerary, where you typically have two or more flights with different flight numbers, operated by different aircraft, with the risk of misconnecting.
For example, Singapore Airlines flies between Los Angeles and Singapore. The airline has up to two daily nonstop flights, which operate between the two airports without making any stops, and take around 17hr10min. Then the airline also has a “direct” flight, which operates via Tokyo with the same flight number the whole way, and takes 19hr55min. Passengers do have to get off the plane in Tokyo.
Southwest Airlines is also known for its direct flights, though in the case of Southwest, you can stay onboard during any stops. For example, flying between Tampa and Baltimore, there are some flights with connecting itineraries, and some with “direct” flights, where you have the same flight number and aircraft all the way through. The below example shows a direct flight through Buffalo.
What’s the point of airlines operating direct flights with one or more stops?
- They’re typically operated either because the economics are better of making a stop along the way, or due to general limitations with how far an aircraft could fly; for example, Qantas operates from Sydney to London via Singapore with a direct flight, which is because there’s not currently an aircraft that can operate that route nonstop
- Direct flights are often used as a marketing technique, both to make consumers feel like an itinerary is efficient, and also to give them the peace of mind of knowing that they won’t misconnect; so rather than selling an itinerary as offering a connection, the airline can instead sell it as being “direct”
Are nonstop flights also direct?
Here’s a topic that tends to divide avgeeks. Is it wrong to refer to a nonstop flight as direct? If you ask me, it isn’t wrong. After all, a nonstop flight is basically the very definition of “direct,” which is to move without changing direction or stopping. Yet that’s not how the term is generally used in the airline industry, where direct has a completely different meaning.
So if you ask me:
- Technically it’s not wrong to refer to a nonstop flight as being direct, since it meets the very definition of the word
- However, it’s more precise to refer to a nonstop flight as nonstop rather than direct, given the other meaning of direct; and if you’re talking to people who know a lot about the airline industry, referring to a nonstop flight as direct will perhaps make you seem a bit less knowledgable
Bottom line
Nonstop and direct flights aren’t the same thing, at least as the airline industry views it. A nonstop flight goes between two places without stopping, while a direct flight goes between two places with one or more stops.
Unlike a standard connecting itinerary, though, a direct flight is typically operated by the same aircraft the entire way through, limiting the inconvenience of having to change planes and minimizing the risk of misconnecting.
What’s your take on the nonstop vs. direct flight distinction?
When I worked for tour operators I mainly noticed that older generations like Baby Boomers and some older GenX thought Direct meant Non-stop. And when they booked the flights like CX via YVR they felt lied to when the plane stopped in YVR. I still say Non-stop and don't bother using or even mentioning direct because its not important that its the same flight # to the passenger or to me. It's still two or more flight segments.
Ben, technically you are correct, But you are disingenious. Most 20 or 30 somethings would not know the difference. When I was that age, direct flights were very common. It eventually led to the practice of getting off at the intermediate stop, because it was cheaper than a non-stop flight to that same intermediate stop.
Times change. Here is where you are being disingenuous. What if the passenger does not know about the intermediate stop?...
Ben, technically you are correct, But you are disingenious. Most 20 or 30 somethings would not know the difference. When I was that age, direct flights were very common. It eventually led to the practice of getting off at the intermediate stop, because it was cheaper than a non-stop flight to that same intermediate stop.
Times change. Here is where you are being disingenuous. What if the passenger does not know about the intermediate stop? And your arrival time at said stop is so late, that the next flight departs before you land? Yes, you will receive some compensation, at the risk of ruining the reason you are flying.
This is not about semantics. It is about a fact.
I think you are the one being disingenuous. The distinction Ben is setting out is well known, if far from universally. You may have missed where he said that since the distinction has blurred in some circles, airlines and others often use different wording that removes the potential ambiguity. Widespread misunderstanding of the difference in meaning between two words does not make using them in their precise meaning incorrect, or disingenuous. Deliberately using the confusion...
I think you are the one being disingenuous. The distinction Ben is setting out is well known, if far from universally. You may have missed where he said that since the distinction has blurred in some circles, airlines and others often use different wording that removes the potential ambiguity. Widespread misunderstanding of the difference in meaning between two words does not make using them in their precise meaning incorrect, or disingenuous. Deliberately using the confusion of meaning to deceive someone is a manipulative and dishonest, and that is a problem.
Since, with some exceptions that Ben and some posters have noted, the second and any subsequent sectors of a direct flight are flown by the same aircraft as the first, I struggle to understand how it could depart an intermediate stop before it arrives.
Depending is paying! If I am forking out then a minor delay is worth it. So for instance I am going London - Bangkok soon. I am using Finnair instead of British Airways. 2 or 3 hours extra time and exactly half the price. That is worth it for me. $3000 less (biz class) so about $1000 an hour. No brainer. But if a client is paying - who cares? Except when I tell them - they are impressed.
JamesW, I was intrigued by your statement that a Finnair J flight London to Bangkok was “Exactly half the price” of a BA flight. After an intensive search I can only find about £300 difference, which is certainly not worth the hassle to my mind. Can you assist me with more details please?
JamesW, as I wanted to ensure that my initial investigation into the ticket prices quoted in your post were incorrect, I have carried out an additional intensive search.
My conclusion is that your figures do appear to be incorrect old bean. Would you care to elaborate?
Oh, the air of superiority, the practised condescension, the confidence of misplaced certainty. Reminds me of someone else. But I digress. If someone speaks to their own experience of a price comparison, a fool may well say that since they couldn't find a similar difference then it didn't happen. Almost every fare search I do, I find fares between city pairs that are a factor of two, three or more higher than the lowest priced...
Oh, the air of superiority, the practised condescension, the confidence of misplaced certainty. Reminds me of someone else. But I digress. If someone speaks to their own experience of a price comparison, a fool may well say that since they couldn't find a similar difference then it didn't happen. Almost every fare search I do, I find fares between city pairs that are a factor of two, three or more higher than the lowest priced fare, even on comparable airlines. The AY example would not be a direct flight, so outside the scope of this discussion thread, but that doesn't invalidate the point it was making.
Ask any airline agent worth his/her salt from the previous generation, myself included, and they will know the difference. Well, at least the agents who worked the counter for the majority of their careers and not so much gate agents. The current generation of agents at major carriers, not so much.
The term "non-stop" is not used much in West Africa, as it has a negative connotation.
I learned this when I spoke with a passenger that refused to book on a non-stop flight because she really thought that the plane doesn't stop at its destination and the passengers have to jump out.
For all practical purposes in B2C marketing, "direct" is used to describe "non-stop" flights and "1-stop" is used to describe "direct" flights.
Interesting insight
@ Sean; in that part of the world nothing seems "much used" besides corruption.
Much like squares and rectangles, all nonstop flights are direct, but not all direct flights are nonstop. IATA defines a direct flight as "(a)ny flight ticketed as a single flight coupon, irrespective of whether there are en route stops and/or changes of aircraft types", which includes both nonstop flights, and flights that make en route stops. It is less precise, but no less accurate, to refer to nonstop flights as direct.
When discussing airfare and flights, particularly for publication, the term "non-stop" should be used.
When in conversation, particularly with Far Eastern Asians, the term "direct" is often used and is ok. (Talking with anyone from Lesotho, it doesn't matter because nobody has ever heard of that country) However, once the topic becomes associated with specific bookings or airlines, the distinction between direct and non-stop should be observed.
When TWA and PanAm were the main US...
When discussing airfare and flights, particularly for publication, the term "non-stop" should be used.
When in conversation, particularly with Far Eastern Asians, the term "direct" is often used and is ok. (Talking with anyone from Lesotho, it doesn't matter because nobody has ever heard of that country) However, once the topic becomes associated with specific bookings or airlines, the distinction between direct and non-stop should be observed.
When TWA and PanAm were the main US carriers flying to Europe and Asia, direct flights were often not even the same plane. Hypothetically, there could have been a ORD-JFK flight on a Boeing 727-200 and a JFK-BRU flight on a L-1011-100. There would not necessarily be peace of mind because if the ORD-JFK were delayed, the JFK-BRU could depart, leaving the ORD originating passenger to have to take a flight the next day.
haha. I've heard of Lesotho.
Even Northwest had so called direct flights with the same flight number but with a change of aircraft.
South Africa to Singapore has a direct flight: CPT-JNB-SIN. Pax get on in Cape Town, short 2 hour hop to Joburg. You stay in your seat while more people get on and then the plane continues to Singapore.
Same with SAA who goes JNB-CPT-GRU a couple of times a week.
@UncleRonnie - bad example. The JNB-CPT-GRU operation is NOT a direct flight as there are different flight numbers for JNB-CPT (SA 317) and CPT-GRU (SA 226) even though its the same aircraft.
Meh. Passengers don’t care about flight numbers. Practically it’s the same flight.
You need to disembark at the domestic terminal, exit the building, go to the international terminal, go through security and immigration again, and then reboard the plane 2 hours later.
Hardly "the same flight".
Oceania as a region seems to be filled with direct flights. Probably since it's fundamentally just very far from everywhere.
China Airlines runs them for AKL via BNE and used to do MEL as well. There's the classic SYD to JFK/LHR directs. As well as a lot of Europe flights from SYD via PER.
Middle Eastern carriers and Turkish have some. Emirates does DXB-SYD-CHC. And used to do DXB-SIN-MEL, which TK does instead now....
Oceania as a region seems to be filled with direct flights. Probably since it's fundamentally just very far from everywhere.
China Airlines runs them for AKL via BNE and used to do MEL as well. There's the classic SYD to JFK/LHR directs. As well as a lot of Europe flights from SYD via PER.
Middle Eastern carriers and Turkish have some. Emirates does DXB-SYD-CHC. And used to do DXB-SIN-MEL, which TK does instead now. TK also has directs via KUL. Qatar runs a direct from CBR via MEL. And I think ran some from ADL during the pandemic.
With respect to South America, LATAM also has a direct flight from SCL via AKL to SYD. Most recently we have the PVG-AKL-EZE.
And back in the day ANZ had their AKL-LAX-LHR. Probably some more that I'm missing.
* my bad on the Emirates CHC one, that one isn't direct because of the different flight numbers.
But also Air Canada has direct flights to Australia from YYZ.
Not so, EK412 flies DXB-SYD-CHC. My google search came up with cheaper flights on the day I picked that connected to EK412 from a different EK flight into SYD, with an overnight layover.
The only "Direct" flight I ever took was with AF back in time CDG-LAX-PPT because there wasn't and there still isn't a plane who can cover that distance Nonstop. It's a while ago but I believe they had all the way the same Flt number, as you mentioned. We had to deplane in LAX for about two hours if my memory helps me, but continued with the same plane but different Crew obviously.
Also, you have to clear customs & immigration in the US on such flights even if you're not leaving the airport because you are still "entering the country". I don't know why the US CBP doesn't understand the concept of international transit.
They understand it. They’re too cheap to design terminals with airside connections.
"For whatever reason, airlines decided to redefine the word altogether."
Well, maybe they did, but they've stopped. I don't think you've noticed, but airlines have almost completely ceased using the word 'direct' like flight nerds do. As you can see in your examples, neither Southwest nor Singapore refers to their flight as a direct flight. Ethiopian doesn't either. They all just call it a one-stop. OTAs also don't call it 'direct' either: JFK-FRA-SIN is just...
"For whatever reason, airlines decided to redefine the word altogether."
Well, maybe they did, but they've stopped. I don't think you've noticed, but airlines have almost completely ceased using the word 'direct' like flight nerds do. As you can see in your examples, neither Southwest nor Singapore refers to their flight as a direct flight. Ethiopian doesn't either. They all just call it a one-stop. OTAs also don't call it 'direct' either: JFK-FRA-SIN is just listed as a one-stop, etc.
Meanwhile many airline websites refer to a nonstop as a one-stop. Go to Royal Air Maroc's website and plug in IAD-CMN and you'll be told it's a direct flight. Many other examples I can cite as well.
So basically, for flight nerds there may be an important distinction between "direct" and "nonstop," but within the industry there are just nonstops and one-stops.