41–50 of 79 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And whatever the valid reason, why isn’t it an import of some official list?
It is an official list: a list of airports visited by OpenBSD developers. It's just a bit of culture, don't worry about it so much.
I'm not familiar with BSD but when I was using Kali if I was using a share it was to feed into something else, classic example being wordlists fed into hydra[1] or something.
"One can say anything about Lublin airport, but they sure do consider IATA codes are serious business. The tone was set right from the parking lot entrance." The reason Lublin's IATA code is so prominently exposed is because the word "luz" in Polish means - among others - the state of being relaxed, chilled out. Just a bit of marketing on the city's part.
Not your everyday caveats section: https://man.openbsd.org/airport.7#CAVEATS
> Once again, the more astute reader will not have missed the fact that the rules do not stipulate any flying requirements. Neither did henning@, who not long after airport.7 was committed, added an entry for XFW, (the Airbus factory) which he had visited but not flown from.
Fair enough - he wrote the requirement, after all.
However, the Caveat in the man page seems to contradict this, and indicates that you do have to fly in:
> There are also railway stations with IATA codes. These may not be listed, except if someone landed there by plane and survived to update the file.
Not your everyday caveats section: https://man.openbsd.org/airport.7#CAVEATS
There seems to be a conflict here. The author of the linked article interprets the guideline, "New airports can only be added by OpenBSD developers who have visited an airport and thereby have verified its existence," as only requiring that you have been to the airport, not necessarily having flown from: > Once again, the more astute reader will not have missed the fact that the rules do not stipulate any flying requ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that there's a bug. while TLV would appear to imply that the airport is in Tel Aviv, it is not. :)
And they list OSL as "all airports around Oslo, Norway". That's not the case, OSL is one particular airport (the main one, Gardermoen). They correctly list the second airport as TRF.
Why it's designed this way with namespace collisions, I have no idea. Technically QSF also is a tiny airport in Algeria.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And they list OSL as "all airports around Oslo, Norway". That's not the case, OSL is one particular airport (the main one, Gardermoen). They correctly list the second airport as TRF.
OSL is also the IATA metropolitan city code for Oslo, basically meaning "all airports around Oslo". Some booking engines support these for convenience - for example, ones using Sabre as a backend may support QSF (also listed in this file) for all airports around San Francisco. I flew to Oslo recently and know I saw OSL used as a metro code first on at least one booking engine. It doesn't really make sense to put thes…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Up until very recently United had codeshares with Amtrak on the north-east corridor, and could even rebook onto Amtrak in the event of flight disruption. Lufthansa still offers connections to and from Deutsche Bahn on the same ticket ( https://www.lufthansa.com/tr/en/rail-and-fly )
I hope to never see the day that air traffic is so disrupted that getting rebooked on Amtrak seems like a better option. For a variety of reasons, Amtrak's adherence to schedules is abysmal. Has anybody here had this happen? 9-11 is the last occasion I could imagine where this could possibly be a win.
Not your everyday caveats section: https://man.openbsd.org/airport.7#CAVEATS
Which makes you wonder why some railway stations would have a IATA code.
Because you could (still can?) book a trip that way.
Just like if you try to fly from Boise to Tokyo, you'll get a ticket set from BOI → SFO → NRT.
You could book a trip from ORD → PHL → whatever the code is for Penn Station in New York.
I don't think it's done that much anymore, but it used to be pretty common.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope to never see the day that air traffic is so disrupted that getting rebooked on Amtrak seems like a better option. For a variety of reasons, Amtrak's adherence to schedules is abysmal. Has anybody here had this happen? 9-11 is the last occasion I could imagine where this could possibly be a win.
Amtrak's adherence to schedules varies by line -- the problem on many of them is getting trapped behind freight trains, but on the Northeast Corridor specifically, Amtrak itself owns most of the track, and the rest is shared with other passenger rail operations (various commuter rail), so they're about as reliable as airlines (which themselves are... not infrequently disrupted by weather).
I recently read in a railfan magazine that this is becoming worse because of the supply chain mess.
Fright train companies are running longer trains because of higher demand. Longer trains run slower, because there's only so many engines to go around.
Making things worse — slow freight trains would often pull onto sidings to let fast passenger trains pass. Now the freight trains are too long to fit into the sidings, so more and more the passenger trains have to wait.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The disappearance of staff makes sense. I’d have thought integrated security would be far more secure since the baggage goes and stays behind the secure boundary until the conclusion of the trip vs being retrieved, checked in, retrieved, checked in, etc
My favourite modern intermodal baggage transport is in Japan. They have a small number of specialist baggage couriers called Takuhaibin (宅配便). These couriers will take your bags between any two destinations of your choice (Hotel-Hotel,Hotel-Airport etc.) for a reasonable fee. The pick-up and destination can (basically) be anything in Japan with a postal address. Its not true check-through as you still have to pick up…
We have these in America, too. They're call couriers. They'll even pick up your luggage that went to the wrong airport in a different city and bring it to you at your hotel in the right city. (Happened to me with a bicycle.)
unlike, say UPS or FedEx, a Takuhaibin will take your baggage, your furniture, your clothes or pretty much anything else as long as its safe and legal
This sounds exactly like UPS and FedEx. I shipped baggage, furniture, and clothing via UPS as recently as last year. I even had a service come over and pack it up for me.
UPS and FedEx will ship anything. How do you think elephants and whales get from zoo to zoo?