Does anyone know if there is a GOOD reason
 

Yesterday I flew on United into KDCA and listened on ch9 (the ride report channel) and was struck by the overwhelming number of four digit call signs.

With mergers and flight cutbacks, I do not understand why 2 and 3 digit call signs have all but disappeared. If we are slave to puters, could it still not be possible to input 00 at the beginning of a 2 digit flight number?

It would seem to be far easier on controllers (not to mention old people taking three flights in a single day).

So are you suggesting that some callsigns could start with several zeros? Inputting leading zeros used to be possible but served little use. Often nowadays aircraft callsigns have a mix of numbers and letters, primarily to avoid callsign confusion when two flights occur at the same time with similar callsigns. Having used R/T for most of my working life I don't recall too much difficulty with callsigns whether they had one number or several, e.g. Clipper One through to Air Force 48913..

Actually, the majority of United's own flights are 1-3 digit flight numbers, with the low ones being mainly used on high-profile routes (e.g. UAL5 LHR-IAD). However 4-digit flight numbers are invariably used by commuter carriers operating UAL flights, with each partner having its own range of numbers.

For example on DCA-ORD, UAL's Airbuses fly as UAL207, 265, 287, etc, but on the same route UAL3461, 3463 and so on are United Express (Shuttle America) Embraer 170s.

Just as an example, Air Canada has 1-3 digit flight numbers however their feeder airline, Jazz, has 4 digit flight numbers. In my experience, the 4 digit ones of US carries tend to typically be the feeders, not the mother ship.

To aid in reducing callsign confusion with Jazz flights, a couple of years ago, the 8 at the start of the flight number (and if the 8 were followed by a 0, the 0) was removed from the ATC callsign but not the flight number. JZA8029 became JZA29 and JZA8666 became JZA666.

Just have to get to grips with those starting with 7 now:

JZA 7779, 7797, 7739, 7793, 7939 etc.:ugh:

HD

The mention of Clipper One brings back such great memories of times gone.

In Europe Eurocontrol from an ATC perspective have a project running to reduce callsign confusion.

The aim is where say an airline with callsigns AIRLINE-113 AIRLINE-123 and AIRLINE-133 all opereate in the same airspace then 2 will be changed.

Also they are looking at situations where AIRLINE1-333 and AIRLINE2-333 are also operating.

they are using a mix of alpha numeric callsigns and 3 or 4 digit to assist decluttering.

regards

obwan... indeed. I would love to be able to turn the clock back...

Then there was Sagittair zero zero one.

Raffles 1 springs to mind also....but back in those days 4 digit callsigns weren't exactly unknown....a lot of the BEA numbers had 4 IIRC.

Speedbird 1, 2, 3 and 4 doesn't have quite the same thrill as it used to, and similarly Air France 001 and 002.

Did once suggest that 4 figure callsigns should be pronounced as two numbers - eg "fifty one, fifty three" or "forty four, forty four" but the idea fell on fallow ground.

Clipper One
The one that got stuck in the mud one evening while taxying to the runway for take off at EGLL!!
:eek:

Flight Number callsigns in Oz use this format. For 3 numbers e.g. 412, we say four twelve.

There was some work done in the UK - a good few years ago now - but I think a lot of it is probably still relevant. I think it was published as CAP704.

I say that instead of numbers, use names ;)

...

Clipper One memories!