Wikiposts
Search
Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

BA174 JFK/LHR

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 29th Apr 2016, 12:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BA174 JFK/LHR

I have noticed that on certain days there are two BA174 flights into LHR from JFK usually following each other.

At first I thought it was a misprint on Planefinder but saw them again yesterday.

Any reason for 2 BA flights with the same flight number ?.
Sandy Boots is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2016, 13:05
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How does ATC cope with two aircraft with the same callsign?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2016, 13:14
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,812
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Originally Posted by Sandy Boots
I have noticed that on certain days there are two BA174 flights into LHR from JFK usually following each other.
I think you are mistaken.

Airlines don't schedule two flights on the same day with the same flight number, for obvious reasons. Very occasionally you will see two arrivals at an airport on the same day, but invariably that's because one is the delayed flight from the previous day (for example there were two BA232 arrivals from Moscow last Sunday, one being the Saturday flight). When this happens, the delayed flight will typically be given a different ATC callsign, usually involving either a suffix (in Sunday's case BAW232X) or an ad-hoc flight number in the BAW960_ range.

BA174 has operated more or less on schedule every day this month so far. The last time there were two BA174 arrivals on the same day was 4 years ago.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2016, 16:51
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
I have noticed that on certain days there are two BA174 flights into LHR from JFK usually following each other.
Nope, there's only one scheduled BA174 per day so I suspect your tracking software is at fault.

Using the same flight numbers on the same day could potentially cause chaos with crew rosters, pax check-in and baggage handling, flight planning, engineering, fuelling etc.....

To avoid any such confusion in the rare event that you do end up with a major delay and a flight delayed by say 24 hours then as DR has said the usual solution is to stick a suffix to the flight number or change it completely.
wiggy is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 04:50
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Age: 70
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
How does ATC cope with two aircraft with the same callsign?
You must know the answer to that by now Bren!!
ex-EGLL is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 04:53
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Age: 70
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sandy Boots
I have noticed that on certain days there are two BA174 flights into LHR from JFK usually following each other.

At first I thought it was a misprint on Planefinder but saw them again yesterday.

Any reason for 2 BA flights with the same flight number ?.
At a guess Planefinder is getting two (or more) data sources for BA174, ADSB and ACARS or HFDL for instance. Depending on how Flightradar handles this data it could be displaying 2 separate returns.
ex-EGLL is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 06:41
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<You must know the answer to that by now Bren!!>>

Indeed Barry. Do you remember the early morning clipper from Frankfurt - part of PanAm's round the world service? All the flights had the same callsign and weren't supposed to overlap. One day the inbound was quite late and the outbound started without him. I recall we kept them on different frequencies while they were taxying together.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 09:12
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Whilst the 174 will have ADS-B it's highly highly unlikely to have HFDL....

I wonder if by any chance the OP's observations are anything at all to do with this (from Planefinders website):

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA Feed)

Not all aircraft are fully ADS-B equipped. In locations such as Europe and Australia the implementation of ADS-B is well advanced and the majority of aircraft use ADS-B. North America is behind currently but is catch up as the US NextGen ADS-B equipage project continues to develop up to, and beyond the 2020 mandate.

Where we do not have ADS-B or MLAT coverage for an aircraft in North America we will supplement this using a 5 minute delayed feed from the FAA. These are the orange planes in Plane Finder (My emphasis).

The FAA feed covers US and Canadian airspace including bordering areas of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Wonder when/where the OP is seeing the two "returns"?

Is it possible that when the 174 is on the edge of Planefinders own ADS-B coverage the OP is seeing displayed at times both the real time ADS-B position and the FAA 5 minute delayed position - I wonder if there's 40 miles'ish separation when two returns are displayed?

Before anybody asks, yes, if it happens to the 174 I'd assume it would happen with other similarly equipped flights in similar geographic positions.

Last edited by wiggy; 30th Apr 2016 at 15:09. Reason: spelling.
wiggy is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 15:49
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Age: 70
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wiggy, you are probably correct about HFDL! We're on day 4 of a 3,000 mile drive from Ontario to California and the mind is a little numbed! MLAT would have been a better choice!!

Bren, ah the joys of Clipper 1
ex-EGLL is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 19:30
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The problem seems to be with Planefinder's database. Looking at 28th April, G-BYGA departed JFK as BA 112 but Planefinder shows it as BA174.
The "real" BA174 shows up on the ground at JFK 5 minutes later and was a B777 G-ZZZB.
If you run Planefinder's replay facility, go to JFK, set time and date to 28 April 23:55 and you can see the B777 on the ground and the B747 a few miles due South of Jones Beach Island at 11,500ft.
Incidentally, from this, I see that the 2 flights (174 & 112) are scheduled to depart JFK within 25 minutes of each other. About time they used an A380 on this route, perhaps?
The source for each aircraft is shown as ADS-B.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2016, 20:48
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,812
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Originally Posted by KelvinD
Incidentally, from this, I see that the 2 flights (174 & 112) are scheduled to depart JFK within 25 minutes of each other. About time they used an A380 on this route, perhaps?
Frequency is a key competitive tool on routes like JFK/LHR, so one fewer departure would hurt BA's market share, particularly as the B744+B772 combination provides around 100 more seats than a single A388 to offset the higher DOCs.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 07:19
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
I see that the 2 flights (174 & 112) are scheduled to depart JFK within 25 minutes of each other. About time they used an A380 on this route, perhaps?
Aside from frequency and the limited number of 380s BA have available there's also the minor issue of the infrastructure of JFK Terminal 7 (the one BA usually uses). FWIW from an airframe drivers POV many of the gates there are physically an extremely tight fit for a 744 or a 772/773, and the last time I was there it was one single level air bridge per gate.

I think to get JFK T7 (at least the side BA use - the low numbered gates) and the surrounding concrete, blastwall and other infrastructure up to A380 standards would require considerable investment and the business case probably falls in favour of the existing arrangement.

Last edited by wiggy; 1st May 2016 at 09:25.
wiggy is offline  
Old 4th May 2016, 05:31
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Shall I say it? Dear OP - you're welcome....
wiggy is offline  
Old 4th May 2016, 06:30
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,812
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Looking at his/her posting history, the OP appears to specialize in asking questions but never acknowledging responses ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 6th May 2016, 08:43
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry Mr Reid but have been in the depths of the Saudi desert all week minus wifi in my tent ....
Sandy Boots is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.