Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

viewfromthewing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 461 posts

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#171

Post by ginko »

zeagle wrote: post #80

Clearly the successor solution is to use eight groups of four hexadecimal digits each, separated by colons. Then each individual seat and peanut could be addressed to it's final destination. More seriously the solution suggested of giving the 3 companies other unused prefixes like D* U* and A* to use with their codeshares and non rev flights to start seems the easiest.

Why do airlines even need separate flight numbers for codeshare flights? Why not just use the flight number of the operating airline in the booking? IMO it's just confusing for passengers as well.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#173

Post by thaumasiotes »

davchana wrote: post #142
thaumasiotes wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty sure they want to keep flight numbers short because that's how passengers identify their flight. That wouldn't describe any passenger I've ever known, including myself. We identify our flight by destination and departure time. Airport boards are conveniently sorted by departure time. In case of a tie, I'd fall back to airline, also indicated separately on the board, but a tie over destination and departu…

> Airport boards are conveniently sorted by departure time. Not true always. Often I see them sorted alphabetically by Destination, then time (in west coast US). Or occasionally (in middle east) by Airline Name & then Time. All Qatar Airlines together. Sometimes even whole LCD Labeled (digitally, on screen) as A-E, F-M etc. and a bit frustrating way, because often I know my flight destination, but not precise time (&…

> Not true always

Except that you go on to describe boards being sorted by time? They may also sort by destination or airline, which are the other pieces of information that I noted passengers already know. You can't use an airport without knowing your departure time and airline, and while it's technically possible to use the airport without knowing your destination (sort of... in point of fact, whenever I check in, the clerk invariably asks me where my final destination is), that's not a scenario that's ever going to come up.

Nobody knows their flight number, and therefore they don't use it for any purpose, including the purpose of identifying their flight.

> and a bit frustrating way, because often I know my flight destination, but not precise time (& sometimes time shifts around), sorted by pure time.

What's the frustrating part? If you don't know the precise time, why does that matter? Knowing it to within an hour will unambiguously identify the flight.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#174

Post by konimex »

petesergeant wrote: post #65
dataflow wrote: post #56

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.

It's common in Asia, with regional affiliates like the different AirAsia, LionAir, and VietJet companies having virtually identical branding but different flight prefixes.

I can confirm for AirAsia and Lion Group, and IIRC Ryanair also do this with their UK subsidiary with different flight prefixes and different aircraft registration numbers.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#175

Post by thaumasiotes »

Pinus wrote: post #163
thaumasiotes wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> provided I reimbursed them for the cost of the personal portion How does that work, given that the cost of the personal portion isn't independent of the rest of the booking? I was just looking at a flight plan on kiwi.com that they could book for $900, with the individual legs costing $250, $350, and $500 if booked through the carriers.

I’m not familiar with Kiwi, but I noticed a comment thread about them on travel.stackexchange.com recently, discussing whether to describe them as “fraud” or just “using booking practices that subject the client to extreme risks”. Be sure to read the fine print on that booking!

The only problem with them is that they will search for and book flights with exactly the maximum luggage allowance that you specify, and they don't make this clear or really point out that you need to specify an amount of luggage corresponding to the amount you'll be taking with you.

They will also show you itineraries that result from booking separate legs of the flight separately, which I'm guessing is what you're referring to. That's not in the fine print; you cannot possibly avoid being made aware when that's happening.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#176

Post by pmontra »

If it's a problem for only 3 airlines in the world, give them a new two letter code, if there are any of those codes left. So airline AA will start using also code ZZ for some of their flights. Travelers will be a little puzzled at first but they'll stop noticing soon.

I sorted the airlines by two letter codes [1] and the list is pretty busy but hex 20 for Space is still available.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_codes

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#177

Post by Dalewyn »

kalleboo wrote: post #127
bsimpson wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know of any easy ways to book an arbitrary itinerary across carriers?

I don't know about "arbitrary" but most of my travel I book with something like Expedia ends up being split across carriers without using codeshare numbers. E.g. over Christmas I visited my parents in Australia and the domestic leg to Tokyo was a JL flight number, and international leg was a QF flight number, both on the same itinerary/using the same confirmation code.

JAL (JL) and Quantas (QF) are both members of Oneworld, so they can share itineraries (and things like frequent flyer status and fare class) in a single booking regardless of codeshare.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#178

Post by Tor3 »

rswail wrote: post #160
kalleboo wrote: post #75

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…

Recently, I flew with gf on Etihad from MEL to CDG, via Abu Dhabi. We weren't allowed into the Etihad lounge in Abu Dhabi because even though our flight from there to CDG was an Etihad code, it was codeshare with Air France. Believe me when I say I was pissed and made sure everybody knew, including the travel agent that booked us that deals with high end corporate travellers. Etihad lost a bunch of business from AU b…

That's some particular Etihad setup then? When I travel there's often codeshare involved, but as long as the ticket (and the boarding pass shows this) is from the airline I booked with, then I get lounge access (if my ticket allows it) and everything else if there's anything. Doesn't matter if the actual flight is with some other company.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#179

Post by conductr »

layer8 wrote: post #109
DidYaWipe wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any well-written article should anticipate, ask, and answer the obvious questions. For example: Why not use alphanumeric characters? And if the answer isn't known by the sources the writer quotes, the writer should say so.

Answered in this comment by “hagbard celine” under the article: https://viewfromthewing.com/airlines-are-running-out-of-flig...

That comment explains the issue but exaggerates the impact. Sure, a change can be made and alphanumeric may not be right. No it won't be anything like the recent Crowdstrike issues. The impact of making a change on downstream systems is solved by planning it out. Communicating the intent and setting a switch over date. Some people may not heed the notices and their systems will crash. That's unfortunate, but just like Y2K or other mandatory updates, it must be done and when a crash happens it will suddenly become very important for that downstream app to issue a patch and at least they will know where/why the break happened.

In terms of datatypes, I like the idea of just going with a 5 digit integer. It seems fairly straightforward to change in most databases/systems. And while having a much smaller upper limit, it's 10x bigger than the limit that's taken us 60 years to reach.

Also, he mentioned no Alphanumeric datatype in Excel Format Cells. It's called General, because it's the default and most of that apps user's don't know what VARCHAR is.

Re: Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers

#180

Post by missedthecue »

growse wrote: post #145
missedthecue wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if they aren't, they are unsustainable. It's good to have self-sustainable industries rather than endless businesses (state owned or not) forever sucking on the public teet.

> It's good to have self-sustainable industries... There's no such thing as a 'self-sustaining industry'. They all rely on common transportation infrastructure which they use to ship their materials and goods around and get their employees to work. They all rely on a predictable and fair marketplace whose fairness is governed by the state, and they all rely on people not coming and burning their premises down because…

Self sustaining means they generate enough revenues to cover their costs. Not that they are closed systems with no interaction with general society.
Post reply on HN