Flight Numbers - why have more than one?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Numbers - why have more than one?
Genuine query which has puzzled me for years -
Why are multiple flight numbers assigned to certain flights? Now I'm not talking codeshares here - those are clear enough. I'm referring to a flight having several different callsigns/flight codes issued by the operator.
For example - in the good old days way back the BA shuttles inbound to Belfast used to have a callsign of "Shuttle 4 Alpha/Bravo/Charlie/etc" with the Heathrow bound ones being "Shuttle 5 A/B/C/etc". The actual flight numbers were BA9999 where the 9999 differed per flight. Same idea for all the other Shuttle destinations.
Today I'm tracking my daughter's flight from ZRH to LHR which is BA711, but it also comes up, and is displayed as, BAW5ZL on Flightradar24. Why have these two? Can the flight not be published as BA711 and the callsign also be "Speedbird 711"? What benefits are derived from the two code system, and who benefits? I'd guess ATC wouldn't have any difficulty just using "Speedbird 711". Interestingly the BA712 also now en route LHR to ZRH doesn't appear to have any alternative at all!! Curiouser and curiouser.
Similar with most airlines of course, not just BA. See flybe and easyJet flight numbers and callsigns.
Many thanks in advance for your responses
Why are multiple flight numbers assigned to certain flights? Now I'm not talking codeshares here - those are clear enough. I'm referring to a flight having several different callsigns/flight codes issued by the operator.
For example - in the good old days way back the BA shuttles inbound to Belfast used to have a callsign of "Shuttle 4 Alpha/Bravo/Charlie/etc" with the Heathrow bound ones being "Shuttle 5 A/B/C/etc". The actual flight numbers were BA9999 where the 9999 differed per flight. Same idea for all the other Shuttle destinations.
Today I'm tracking my daughter's flight from ZRH to LHR which is BA711, but it also comes up, and is displayed as, BAW5ZL on Flightradar24. Why have these two? Can the flight not be published as BA711 and the callsign also be "Speedbird 711"? What benefits are derived from the two code system, and who benefits? I'd guess ATC wouldn't have any difficulty just using "Speedbird 711". Interestingly the BA712 also now en route LHR to ZRH doesn't appear to have any alternative at all!! Curiouser and curiouser.
Similar with most airlines of course, not just BA. See flybe and easyJet flight numbers and callsigns.
Many thanks in advance for your responses
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They're not flight numbers, there's one flight number per airline on each flight, don't add codeshares as that just overcomplicates the question(!)
The BA123 will have a callsign used by ATC which may or may not be "Speedbird123" writtenas BAW123. However it may also have an aplha numeric random callsign like BAW1TC if the BA133 and BA123 are likely to be on the same frequency at the same time.
This is good practice but not universal as Emirates have a lot of similar sounding traffic in Dubai at the same time. I think the kick off was British Midland which had BMA1, BMA51, BMA81, BMA331 and BMA441 all in or around the Bovingdon stack in the first wave....
So it's not a benefit, more of a precaution. Most BA flights use the flight no as the callsign, most easyJet flights don't, however some do. Even some Virgin flights now carry a letter suffix on the *ATC callsign* for the same reason, i.e. VS901 / VIR901V.
The BA123 will have a callsign used by ATC which may or may not be "Speedbird123" writtenas BAW123. However it may also have an aplha numeric random callsign like BAW1TC if the BA133 and BA123 are likely to be on the same frequency at the same time.
This is good practice but not universal as Emirates have a lot of similar sounding traffic in Dubai at the same time. I think the kick off was British Midland which had BMA1, BMA51, BMA81, BMA331 and BMA441 all in or around the Bovingdon stack in the first wave....
So it's not a benefit, more of a precaution. Most BA flights use the flight no as the callsign, most easyJet flights don't, however some do. Even some Virgin flights now carry a letter suffix on the *ATC callsign* for the same reason, i.e. VS901 / VIR901V.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 24th Jul 2014 at 19:39.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So basically it's belt and braces in case of ATC transmissions being misheard or misinterpreted with similar sounding flights in the same area at the same time? I can see the logic in that. Just seems random to those not in the industry.
Thanks for the explanation.
Thanks for the explanation.
So basically it's belt and braces in case of ATC transmissions being misheard or misinterpreted with similar sounding flights in the same area at the same time? I can see the logic in that. Just seems random to those not in the industry.
Out of interest, who decides what the alpha numeric callsign will be?
Is it the airlines own system?
Is it the airlines own system?
Last edited by DaveReidUK; 25th Jul 2014 at 08:17. Reason: typo
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
look like they have a bloke who sticks his finger in the air and makes one up