Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Airways Again Reshuffle European Flight Numbers  
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 5 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4357 times:

Starting 25MAR07, another reshuffle of US Airways' European flight numbers, this time, standarized to US7xx....

PHL - LGW: US774/773 -> US730/731
PHL - MAD: US1411/1412 -> US741/740
PHL - BCN: US743/742
PHL - FRA: US782/781 -> US700/701
PHL - MUC: US914/915 -> US706/707
PHL - MXP: US1565/1564 -> US717/716
PHL - FCO: US1402/1403 -> US718/719
PHL - AMS: US1442/1443 -> US748/749
PHL - ARN: US755/752
PHL - LIS: US738/739
CLT - LGW: US1494/1495 -> US732/733
CLT - FRA: US1593/1592 -> US705/704

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4249 times:

I guess they are borrowing a page from TWA's history. TWA's flights to Europe and the Middle East all featured 7XX, 8XX, or 9XX flight numbers.

ContinentalEWR


User currently onlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11018 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4195 times:

Quoting ContinentalEWR (Reply 1):
I guess they are borrowing a page from TWA's history.

Or United.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4076 times:

Quoting ContinentalEWR (Reply 1):
I guess they are borrowing a page from TWA's history.

US also had flight numbers to Europe in the 7XX category. I remember PIT-FRA was always US741.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlineYOW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4042 times:

Or AC to Europe with 8XX.

User currently offlineJetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2986 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3809 times:

Quoting ContinentalEWR (Reply 1):
I guess they are borrowing a page from TWA's history. TWA's flights to Europe and the Middle East all featured 7XX, 8XX, or 9XX flight numbers.



Quoting D L X (Reply 2):
Or United.

Come on. Who cares how US numbers their flights?

I'm sure they're not "pulling" from any other airline in the past.

It's just how they number flights.



Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
User currently offlineHPLASOps From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3757 times:

Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 5):
Come on. Who cares how US numbers their flights?

I'm sure they're not "pulling" from any other airline in the past.

It's just how they number flights.

[checkmark] Ding.

US 1-699 are old HP flight routes (chosen because HP had fewer flights at the time and it was just easier to restructure the numbering system that way). 700-1999 are traditional East routes, and they decided to make Internationals the lowest of the new numbering system. Once intergration is fully complete, if there are any new int'l flights added, perhaps a low number could be in order (1-10 are occupied by PHX-ORD legs currently) for that flight, but that will be determined when it happens.


User currently offlineA330323X From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 3039 posts, RR: 44
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3729 times:

Quoting HPLASOps (Reply 6):
US 1-699 are old HP flight routes (chosen because HP had fewer flights at the time and it was just easier to restructure the numbering system that way).

Please explain, specifically, how it was "easier" this way.  Silly



I'm the expert on here on two things, neither of which I care about much anymore.
User currently offlineHPLASOps From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3708 times:

Quoting A330323X (Reply 7):
Please explain, specifically, how it was "easier" this way.

East already had a large chunk of flight numbers higher than 700, even up to 1400, IIRC, they were used to seeing 4 digits on a bag tag, HP never had a flight number higher than about 930, so for the sake of bag handling efficiency, better to keep the lower numbers to the west side and the higher numbers to the east. Plus, since it's HP's CEO in charge, we can put the lower numbers on the west routes.


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6581 posts, RR: 32
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3667 times:

Quoting HPLASOps (Reply 8):
HP never had a flight number higher than about 930

Bzzzzt. When HP and CO were codesharing back before 2002, most of HP's flight numbers were above 2000, since the HP flight number and the CO codeshare flight number would be identical in that case. The only way it might have been "easier" would be less renumbering to do in SHARES.


User currently offlineHPLASOps From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3649 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 9):
Bzzzzt. When HP and CO were codesharing back before 2002, most of HP's flight numbers were above 2000, since the HP flight number and the CO codeshare flight number would be identical in that case.

Maybe the passengers saw a codeshare flight# on the ticket, but I was bringing up a ramp baggage handling perspecting, and you should know that a codeshare flight# never goes on a bag tag. If it is an interlining passenger, the original flight numbers for both airlines (with respective airline codes) goes on the bag tag, and that was the perspective I was going for.


User currently onlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11018 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3545 times:

Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 5):
I'm sure they're not "pulling" from any other airline in the past.

That was kind or my point. I certainly don't care, but I do prefer a cohesive system.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Airways To Test 'In-Flight Cafe' posted Wed Mar 19 2003 00:35:37 by USAIRWAYS321
Brussels To BE US AIRWAYS' Ninth European Destinat posted Wed Sep 13 2000 22:55:29 by Hypermike
US Airways Flight Attendants Protest posted Tue Oct 31 2006 16:32:55 by Wsan581
US Airways Flight Number Changes posted Sun Aug 20 2006 21:31:39 by RthrBeFlying86
US Airways Flight Number Changes posted Wed Jul 5 2006 16:38:15 by BigOrange
US Airways Flight Attempting An Emergency Landing posted Wed May 17 2006 04:45:21 by Ydahman
Us Airways Flight 1303 posted Wed May 10 2006 18:43:52 by M180up
US Airways' Flight To The North Pole posted Tue Dec 6 2005 17:40:51 by Pmg1704
The New US Airways European Expansion? posted Tue Oct 18 2005 02:30:31 by Markdirk
US Airways JFK-San Antonio On Flight Tracker posted Sat Oct 15 2005 17:14:11 by RJpieces