Did Prince Harry Eschew British Airways And Fly American To London For His Grandfather’s Funeral?

Earlier I noted that ex-Royal Prince Harry flew to London for his grandfather’s funeral and made the trip without his wife Meghan Markle.

All of the royal drama aside – his walking away from his title, giving an interview to Oprah where he called his family racists – I thought there could be a bigger scandal in his first trip back to the U.K. in a year.

He reported flew British Airways to London Heathrow, but arrived at 1:15 p.m. which is when American Airlines flight AA134 lands. BA’s flight doesn’t arrive until a couple of hours later. Before the ex-Royals broke up with the Windsors, Meghan Markle too chose Air Canada over BA>

Well, it turns out that Saturday’s American Airlines flight from Los Angeles to London had 5 seats blocked from sale in first class.

  • 3 passengers were confirmed on the flight in international first class, out of an 8 seat cabin
  • But American wouldn’t sell the other 5 seats, upgrade anyone into them, or put a nonrev flyer in those seats. They were blocked.

This gives some circumstantial credence to the notion that Prince Harry was on board, perhaps with a couple of people as an entourage or a mix of an associate and another passenger who had been pre-booked into the cabin. Regardless, it was a VIP experience designed for discretion.

Of course I’d have been just as happy in business class on that flight where 6 passengers were confirmed as it turned over to airport control, and then four non-rev passengers were added into the 52 seat cabin. Coach, by the way, had only 22 of 216 seats filled on that flight.

About Gary Leff

Gary Leff is one of the foremost experts in the field of miles, points, and frequent business travel - a topic he has covered since 2002. Co-founder of frequent flyer community InsideFlyer.com, emcee of the Freddie Awards, and named one of the "World's Top Travel Experts" by Conde' Nast Traveler (2010-Present) Gary has been a guest on most major news media, profiled in several top print publications, and published broadly on the topic of consumer loyalty. More About Gary »

More articles by Gary Leff »



  1. lol. I’m sure the Daily Mail will pick up on this article, Gary, and somehow blame Meghan for it. 😉

  2. He did not say his family were racists. That’s an appalling interpretation of facts.

  3. Jimbo who cares? He ran from Canada because he knew they wouldn’t pay for his security thats a fact check it and where is he USA are we paying for his security NO. Check the number of 911 calls to his house interesting read,

    Now lets get back to important meaningful news.

  4. @Jimbo – what about the royal, presumably charles, who asked about how dark their then-unborn first child’s skin tone might be? they discussed how the royal family chose not to make their mixed-race son a prince (when prince william’s 2nd and 3rd children were bestowed the title).

    So when Harry says the family isn’t racist, what he’s really saying is they’re racist.

  5. Harry is a complete and utter wanker, in addition to being a woke idiot. As one is wont to say: “Go woke, go broke”.
    His life in the US will end in tears as anyone with half a brain realizes that Mewlin’ Megan will kick him to the curb as soon as he is no longer useful (sooner rather than later, IMO).
    As to Mewlin’ Megan, I’m with Piers Morgan (which doesn’t happen often).

  6. Gary —

    I really enjoy your travel posts, but on the subject of royal titles you are a bit off the mark.

    Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is a great-grandchild of the Sovereign. Letters Patent issued in 1917 stripped all male line great grandchildren of the sovereign — except the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales — of their princely titles and instead gave them the titles normally enjoyed by the sons and daughters of dukes.

    Ancient history you say? Well there are currently eight individuals in the royal family — all male line great grandchildren of a sovereign — in this case George V — who also don’t have a princely title.

    They are:

    The children of the Duke of Kent — George, Earl of St. Andrews, Lady Helen and Lord Nicholas

    The children of Prince Michael of Kent — Lord Frederick and Lady Gabriella

    The children of the Duke of Gloucester — Alexander, Earl of Ulster, Lady Davina and Lady Rose

    Yes, the Queen made an exception for the children of the Duke of Cambridge. But they are in the direct line. George will one day be king, Charlotte will likely be Princess Royal and Louis might well be the next Duke of York.

    Making unpleasant accusations simply because the Queen followed a well established rule doesn’t make sense. She didn’t make an exception for the eight individuals I’ve listed above — all born during her reign. Unless you think those eight people should be made princes and princesses along with Archie?

    Archie could be known as Lord Archie Mountbatten-Windsor or the Earl of Dumbarton. His parents are choosing not to use those titles.

  7. I responded to Gary’s comment about Archie not being made a prince and somehow it got deleted. Hmmm…

    So second try. Please stop blaming the Queen. There are eight other current members of the royal family (among the Gloucesters and Kents) who are great grandchildren of a sovereign — just like Archie — who make do with the titles usually given to the children of a duke. Just like it says in the 1917 Letters Patent. Archie has not been singled out. The Cambridge children are the exception, not the rule.

  8. Gary – stick to telling people how to go in debt by signing up for yet another credit card so they can fly across the country for their dream trip on miles.
    One of your competitors over at The Points Guy has written that
    Harry flew BA. And you may not like the monarchy and think
    Harry and Meghan are victims of a racist family but you know what – it’s not your country and not your family. Those two snowflakes deserve each other and the misery they will cause each other over their lifetimes.

  9. He’s ‘on the nose’ everywhere ( maybe except California); the interview was ludicrous. It couldn’t be described as journalism, as there was no attempt to question or check: just 2 hours of leading questions from a bloated old dragon ( who stood to make zillions out of shock/horror ‘revelations’).
    It is hoped he has the good sense (yes, a big ask , given he’s as dumb as a box of rocks) to get on the first plane back, the minute the funeral is over. I very much doubt that Charles or William will be in the mood to listen to his pathetic whining drivel…

  10. Harry has obviously found something she’s very good at. I can’t think of any other reason he’d be with her. He has really become a numpty. Completely whipped.

  11. Doesn’t every family speculate what their unborn children will look like? Will they have Mom’s blue eyes or Dad’s big nose? Would he be dark like Mom or a redhead like Dad?There was absolutely no context given about the skin tone comment but it was definitely presented to appear racist.

    And Oprah’s incisive follow up question was “What? Wow.”

  12. He wants to be just Joe regular guy in California, but resides in a 14 million dollar house paid for by “the firm” he snd his wife have thrown under the bus .
    I’m sure the same group that purchased the first class cabin on American Airlines for him.
    I have no respect for he or Megan – she didn’t go because the Queen most likely doesn’t want her husband’s funeral to be about Megan
    He might have gained some
    measure of a man by flying coach

  13. @Woofie :i’m with u on this one. for the 90mins of pure fantasy lies and propaganda forced thrown in our faces, harry should be grateful if eggs, tomatoes, and insults were the only things being hurled at him when he’s back in UK

  14. Claire,

    A well established rule? You do realise that a 1917 Letters Patent is anything but, in a Kingdom with over a thousand years of history. That rule was issued by the Queen’s grandfather. It isn’t a constitutional convention, or a centuries old royal tradition. In fact, it’s the exact opposite: it’s a shift in what was royal tradition up to that point.

    Also, since it’s a rule issued by the then-sovereign, it is a rule that the current sovereign can rescind, amend, or make an exception to. The Queen, the Crown even, is not eternally bound by that Letters Patent.

    Which brings me to the point the Duke and Duchess were actually raising, had you been paying attention. They do not want their son to hold the title of Prince for the sake of it. The institution told them that a royal family member’s security detail was contingent on their princely title. And, while the Letters Patent you allude to mean that Archie would indeed become a prince upon Charles’s accession to the throne, the institution was considering changing that rule to prevent it from happening. And, absent the title of prince, their son would not be entitled to a security detail.

    Add to all this the fact that the Duke was stripped of his security staff when he stepped out of his senior royal role (while his scandal-ridden uncle the Duke of York still enjoys the privileges of princedom, as do his daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie despite not being senior working royals), and you start to think what ulterior motive there must’ve been for such a grievance.

  15. at this point the only thing i was surprised by was how come harry and meghan haven’t launched a line of EV cars considering that they’ve already beaten Elon Musk to level 5 of Fully Self Serving.

  16. What a load of BS . Meghan cant stop the seeking attention that she thrives for . Blatant lies from her interview , she is indeed a Naccissist.
    She said she didn’t know anything about the Royals yet her bedroom walls where she lived as a child are full of photographs of Diana. She has tried to copy Diana with her clothes , her interview, and she marries her son! Scary stuff

  17. Amazing the amount of hate towards Harry and Meghan for taking British taxpayers off the hook and choosing a life not revolved around being puppets in the UK’s most overrated tourist attraction. Good for them.

    @Diana Knight the firm didn’t pay for their house.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *