FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1971 posts, RR: 3 Posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4534 times:
I can't recall seeing this discussed, so what do people will think will happen with flight numbers once the merger ramps up next year and UA/CO start moving to one certificate? In particular I'm curious to see what happens to international flight numbers.
UA generally uses the UA8xx series for flights to Asia and Australia and the UA9xx series for flights to Europe and South America.
CO generally uses the series below 100 for international flights across the Atlantic and to Asia, though a number of flights are now numbered in the CO1xx series due to the increased use of the 752 across the Atlantic. Only certain South American flights see the use of low flight numbers.
So what will happen? Will the CO international flights take up numbers in the traditional UA8xx and UA9xx series? Could the UA7xx series be turned over to Latin American flights? Or will the combined carrier move to generally use the lowest flight numbers for international flights, like CO does now?
Finally, what do people think UA1/2 will be? Currently this flight is ORD-HNL (UA1) and HNL-ORD (UA2). IAH-HNL-GUM is CO1 and GUM-HNL-IAH is CO2.
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3528 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4494 times:
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Thread starter): Finally, what do people think UA1/2 will be? Currently this flight is ORD-HNL (UA1) and HNL-ORD (UA2). IAH-HNL-GUM is CO1 and GUM-HNL-IAH is CO2.
Well, if the new United is all about blending both airllines, what about ORD-HNL-GUM for UA1?
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2234 posts, RR: 7 Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3769 times:
With so many flights, numbers don't seem as important these days. many carriers use plenty of 4 digit numbers. However, the merger UA may place all long haul international flights in lower numbers or may not. My guess is that long haul international flights will go (or stay) in some type of series, but other flights won't.
CO has gotten into using the last two digits to indicate a route, CLE-IAH flights mostly end in 45, IAH-LAX many end in 95, etc. I believe in the past Frontier had a scheme where departures from DEN were in a series to assist in operations at the hub. These days, most flight documents are done through computers as are printing of bag tags, so numbers aren't as critical to worry about.
Whether the merged carrier comes up with some similar or dissimilar scheme is yet to be determined. Now However, schedulers may have enough on their plate to work with and to find numbers to utilize that do not conflict throughout the ATC system. Additionally, CO does a lot of non-daily flights, which require additional numbers.
scorpy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 398 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3568 times:
Given that UA was stronger in Asia, and CO stronger in europe, it might make sense to use 8xx for asian flight numbers, 0xx for primary european and 9xx for overflow european and latin american. That way they can renumber the least core international flights.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2234 posts, RR: 7 Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3053 times:
Quoting scorpy (Reply 5): Given that UA was stronger in Asia, and CO stronger in europe, it might make sense to use 8xx for asian flight numbers, 0xx for primary european and 9xx for overflow european and latin american. That way they can renumber the least core international flights.
I agree, but you can go through a lot of series if you want to include growth. Something like this may work, which groups numbers with European markets and countries:
Putnik From Serbia, joined Aug 2007, 208 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2733 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 8): Something like this may work, which groups numbers with European markets and countries:
I have problems in following the proposed flight number plan. In my mind, flight numbers should be grouped in logical groups... all flights to Germany should carry similar numbers, same with Southern Europe, Britain, Scandinavia, Russia. Switzerland should be bundled with either Italy or Germany...
All domestic should go 4 digits, international 3 digits, this way "Domestic hub to hub" block is freed for international expanson, Canada perhaps?
scorpy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 398 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 2591 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 8): I agree, but you can go through a lot of series if you want to include growth. Something like this may work, which groups numbers with European markets and countries:
With all the codesharing going on, airlines are running out of flight numbers, so I expect to see a lot of 'direct' flights to minimize flight numbers used to allow for more codeshare numbers and express flights.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2234 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 2447 times:
Quoting Putnik (Reply 9): Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 8):
Something like this may work, which groups numbers with European markets and countries:
I have problems in following the proposed flight number plan. In my mind, flight numbers should be grouped in logical groups... all flights to Germany should carry similar numbers, same with Southern Europe, Britain, Scandinavia, Russia. Switzerland should be bundled with either Italy or Germany...
All domestic should go 4 digits, international 3 digits, this way "Domestic hub to hub" block is freed for international expanson, Canada perhaps?
I was working toward what you're suggesting, but I guess it may need some refinement. Surely, countries/areas could be placed together.and I thought I did that at least to some extent.
Maybe you're right and all domestic should be 4 digit. Hub to hub was just an idea as was Hawaii. the below would spread out the 1-000 numbers. Maybe this is what you're looking for
1-50 LHR only
51-100 Rest of UK plus Ireland
101-200 Germany
201-250 Belgium/Holland/France/Italy/Swiss/Greece
251-300 Nordic/Russia/Eastern Europe Poland and north
301-350 Italy/Greece/Eastern Europe south of Poland
351-400 Spain/Portugal
401-500 Africa
501-550 Asia (including TLV/DXB/KWI)
551-600 India
601-699 Canada
700s South America
800s Pacific/Western Asia
900s Mexico
1001-1899 Domestic Mainline
1900-1999 Mexico (RJs), Note Mainline Mexico 900s
2000-9999 Express Domestic, Additional Domestic Mainline and Code Shares
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2234 posts, RR: 7 Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 2378 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 12): I think DL used to use the 800/900s for the DC8s, 1000/1100s for the L1011s....
CO had 900 for DC10s and 600 for 747s in the 1970s.
PacificClipper From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
One thing to be missed as a result of the merger is that UA tries to primarily use 3 or fewer digit flight numbers. There's just a certain ring to announcing a 3 digit flight number over the public address. Alas with so many flights after the combination that won't be possible.
The777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6115 posts, RR: 56 Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week ago) and read 2123 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 11): 1-50 LHR only
51-100 Rest of UK plus Ireland
101-200 Germany
201-250 Belgium/Holland/France/Italy/Swiss/Greece
251-300 Nordic/Russia/Eastern Europe Poland and north
301-350 Italy/Greece/Eastern Europe south of Poland
351-400 Spain/Portugal
401-500 Africa
501-550 Asia (including TLV/DXB/KWI)
551-600 India
601-699 Canada
700s South America
800s Pacific/Western Asia
900s Mexico
1001-1899 Domestic Mainline
1900-1999 Mexico (RJs), Note Mainline Mexico 900s
2000-9999 Express Domestic, Additional Domestic Mainline and Code Shares
It seems like a good system although is it really necessary to have 50 flight numbers for Spain/Portual and 50 for India ?
The777Man
Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....GA, T5, CI and LX 777s
mogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1969 times:
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 14): I can't speak for ORD-HNL, but HNL-GUM is a very profitable route for CO that is primarily VFR/business-oriented, not tourist.
VFR is just low-yield as tourist... and what "business" is there between two beach destination islands in the middle of the Pacific? you'll still have some rich tourists who are willing to pay for J, but more probably they're paying out of pocket, not a corporate account
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2175 posts, RR: 7 Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1912 times:
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 17):
VFR is just low-yield as tourist... and what "business" is there between two beach destination islands in the middle of the Pacific? you'll still have some rich tourists who are willing to pay for J, but more probably they're paying out of pocket, not a corporate account
CO's HNL-GUM-HNL was (haven't seen the most recent publicly-available numbers) its highest-grossing single domestic flight by a considerable margin, and most people in the company I've spoken to are very concerned about another carrier (cough, DL, cough) entering the market and depressing yields. I can assure you that this is a very high-yielding route, as most low-yield tourist traffic to Guam does not come from Hawaii or North America, but Japan. Likewise, Guam does not generate much tourism on its own. HNL-GUM serves the significant business and military ties between the two cities, and links Micronesia (via GUM) to North America and the rest of the world. While VFR traffic does not seem to be high-yielding when evaluated along the likes of JFK-SJU, consider that the fares paid to these Pacific islands are rather astronomical, owing to the lack of competition.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1971 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3528 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2234 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21679 posts, 
From Serbia, joined Aug 2007, 208 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
