Re: United's flight number scheme (was Re: AC's 3xxx flight #s)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I think that the language is pretty much uniform all around, except a
few...  Atlanta's exception using Dixie for D is kind of understandable,
when you consider the volume of Delta operations there...  using D-Delta
could get confusing at busy times.

Jim


On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Mark Greenwood wrote:

> I have experienced the same think, Americans use King instead of Kilo and
> Queen instead of Quebec.
>
> Mark
>
> Matthew Montano wrote:
>
> > As an aside, I've noticed that the phonetic alphabet standard is not all
> > that standard.
> >
> > Atlanta ground control uses "Dixie", Chicago (and much of the rest of
> > the world) uses "Delta."
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Matthew
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU] On Behalf Of W
> > Wilson
> > Sent: January 27, 2002 10:52 AM
> > To: AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
> > Subject: Re: United's flight number scheme (was Re: AC's 3xxx flight #s)
> >
> > Not really an issue, because of the international phonetic alphabet.
> > The numbers could be read individually. The Aeronautical Information
> > Manual reference for ATC communications can be found at
> > http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/aim/Chap4/aim0402.html.
> > Always a good read...LOL.
> >
> > Walter
> > DCA
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matthew Montano" <mmontano@direct.ca>
> > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU>
> > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 13:23
> > Subject: Re: United's flight number scheme (was Re: AC's 3xxx flight #s)
> >
> > > Insightful.
> > >
> > > United's 7xxx are now Express flights.
> > >
> > > Another curious question, though I have no direct evidence of it
> > > myself. = Are there any flight numbers that due to linguistic reasons
> > > are not = used? For example manufacturers of products with serial
> > > numbers with = either use 1's or I's, but never both (same goes with
> > > O's and 0's.)
> > >
> > > Matthew
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU] On Behalf Of
> >
> > > = Michael C. Berch
> > > Sent: January 25, 2002 12:31 PM
> > > To: AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
> > > Subject: United's flight number scheme (was Re: AC's 3xxx flight #s)
> > >
> > >
> > > As of a year or two ago, United's scheme was approximately this:
> > >
> > > UA1-UA2                                 Round-the-world flights (gone
> > =
> > > now?)
> > > UA3-UA799                                       General domestic and =
> > > Canada flights
> > > UA800-899                                       Pacific flights (incl.
> > =
> > > US continuation segments)
> > > UA900-999                                       Atlantic flights
> > (incl. =
> > > US continuation segments)
> > > UA1000-1999                             General domestic and Canada =
> > > flights
> > > UA2000-2999                             Shuttle by United (gone now)
> > > UA3000-3999                             Code shares on other carriers
> > > UA4000-6999                             United Express (operated by =
> > > contractors)
> > > UA7000-7999                             Unused?  Charters?  Cargo?
> > > UA8000-8999                             Reserved for ATC renumbering*
> > > UA9000-9999                             Special flights - charters, =
> > > extra "passenger
> > > protection" sections,
> > >                                                         delivery and =
> >
> > > repositioning flights, etc.
> > >
> > > Normally even numbers are eastbound, odd are westbound.
> > >
> > > * When flights with a similar or the same number would overlap in an
> > > ATC = sector, one of the flights is renumbered, usually flight number
> > +
> > > 8000.   For example, let's say UA921 operates LHR-ORD-LAX (with a
> > change
> > > of equipment in ORD).  If the inbound from London is seriously
> > > delayed, = UA may dispatch the domestic continuation (most of whose
> > > pax have no = idea "their" flight is delayed inbound, since there's an
> >
> > > empty 767 = sitting there at the gate), and the inbound LHR-LAX pax
> > will be
> > > accommodated on other flights.   The domestic leg will be redesignated
> > > UA8921 for ATC purposes so it does not get confused with the "real" =
> > > UA921 coming in from LHR.
> > >
> > > These schemes have been upset by the termination of Shuttle by United;
> >
> > > = it would be nice to know UA's current scheme, although I'm sure it
> > > is = somewhat similar.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michael C. Berch
> > > mcb@postmodern.com
>

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]