Sticking with codes for cities which have changed name is common, there being no easy way to change them without all sorts of errors arising, hence St Petersburg in Russia remains LED for example.
Very true, I wasn't aware of the previous name for Bishkek, hence starting the thread. However, in the case of PEK we have both an additional airport (NAY), and substantial expansion at the original airport - the largest terminal in the world (when it opened), not to mention the Olympics, all reasons why there might have been a move towards using the BJS code, which has at least been created, unlike LED etc.
In the professional aviation world separate 4-character codes devised by ICAO are used instead. Thus London Heathrow LHR is EGLL in that sequence, which most of the posters here would be more familiar with. There is logic there as well, but to a geographical pattern, not based on a mnemonic of the city name.
I am well aware of the usage of these codes, but as a regular ppruner, but commentator from the 'outside', I don't use them. I think your point about LAX is very true - people say they are going to 'LAX', and there's even a song about it! But JFK DID become JFK after IDW, cue 'Angel of Harlem'
I think there is a reasonable understanding of the IATA codes in 'general' speak - if I picked someone randomly in the street and said I was going to 'NCL, EDI and GLA' tomorrow, there is a reasonable chance they could work out where I was going. I'm afraid to admit, I couldn't give you the ICAO codes to any of those cities without looking them up, SLF have no reason to use them, and as fewere people check bags these days, I wonder if the usage of IATA codes will diminish too.
As it happens, my journey tomorrow is by train, and my final destination is STR - but the only people I ever find using station codes are rail employees. Clue: It isn't somewhere they make nice cars, and you can't even catch a ferry from there either
