91–100 of 461 posts
The is where we all say “not my problem” and don’t give it another thought. Don’t waste your time on these guys.
I don't even understand the point of code-share flight numbers. The first thing I do when I see one is look up the original flight number. Most flight search engines will also show you the original carrier. Why not just get rid of them and book on the original flight number? Is it needed somehow in their systems to know how a flight was booked or what flights are eligible? Can that be fixed instead of the flight numb…
Generally it's easier to book a trip with legs on different carriers if they have a codeshare arrangement, because you can just do it as a single itinerary through one carrier's web site. Otherwise you often need a travel agent to be able to put together the itinerary (that's not strictly necessary though, just the way they make it work so no technical reason they couldn't just offer non codeshare flight numbers) The…
If it's a connecting flight, and the incoming flight is running late, then the airline "sorts you out". Basically they know sboit your connection and make a plan.
I've been on a plane out of Heathrow that waited for a 30-min late incoming flight. I've also been on a late flight where my connection has been rebooked for me because we arrived late.
If you book "2 tickets" you're basically a no-show to the first flight, and you're on your own dealing with that airline.
Obviously the solution is airline code + iata source airport + iata dest airport + airline scheduled flight # for the day/week UA-LGA-LAX-001 LH-LHR-FRA-012 /obviously/
UA001 from LGA to LAX
LH012 from LHR to FRA
Wouldn't the easy solution be to use two sets of letters for IATA coded flights for the same airline? Something like "DL1234" and "DZ1234" for Delta? I know a lot of the two-letter codes are claimed too, and I'm sure there must be some reason this wouldn't work OK, but it would seem like they they would each have at least one code left over from the various airlines they've acquired over the years? If an American Air…
That's not such a great solution, it kicks the can down the road and it's super confusing to humans to have the same airline be represented different ways.
Wouldn't the easy solution be to use two sets of letters for IATA coded flights for the same airline? Something like "DL1234" and "DZ1234" for Delta? I know a lot of the two-letter codes are claimed too, and I'm sure there must be some reason this wouldn't work OK, but it would seem like they they would each have at least one code left over from the various airlines they've acquired over the years? If an American Air…
That is, could you partition the flight network such that nobody has purchased or ever will purchase a single ticket that spans flights from both ranges? Assuming maybe that a significant number of “backbone” flights (e.g. between hubs) can themselves be “codeshared” between the new DL and DZ ranges. If so, how much new flight number space could you buy, considering the tradeoff between “codeshare all the new DL/DZ flights” and “free up the most new flight numbers”?
I love that so many people here think they can think about the problem for 10 seconds and come up with a solution that hasn't already been considered a thousand times and discarded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not such a great solution, it kicks the can down the road and it's super confusing to humans to have the same airline be represented different ways.
As a traveler, I already know the airline name because it's printed on my boarding pass, so I don't really care what two-letter prefix they use; to me it's just another part of the opaque handle they call a flight number.
I love that so many people here think they can think about the problem for 10 seconds and come up with a solution that hasn't already been considered a thousand times and discarded.
And if the answer isn't known by the sources the writer quotes, the writer should say so.
> Except they don’t. American Airlines, Delta, and United are running out of flight numbers, and nobody knows what to do about it. All of the above mentioned airlines are the size they are because of mergers. Why don’t they use the IATA codes of the airlines they absorbed. For example Delta merged with Northwestern. In addition to DL, they could also use NW. American merged with USAirways. They could use US in additi…
>For example Delta merged with Northwestern. Northwest Airlines. I'm sorry if I'm pedantic, but Northwest was my childhood airline flying with my dad on many of his business travels and I have many fond memories with them. My Delta SkyMiles account hails from Northwest WorldPerks, opened in 1998! I might also have a soft spot for Delta because of that too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Enormous path dependance. There's a photo in that article that shows the problem: the flip-tab sign that has space for four numerical digits. I was thinking they could just switch from 0-9 to 0-9A-Z but that photo showed why that would be a disaster. Plus any solution has to be approved for use worldwide. Fortunately the two-digit IATA codes have already switched to 0-9A-Z (e.g. JetBlue is B6) so allowing constrained…
How many airports still have flip-tab signs? Do they need to stay? Aren't they adding to an already noisy area? What's their maintenance cost vs. a LCD? What's their energy consumption vs. a LCD?