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 ?.

How does ATC cope with two aircraft with the same callsign?

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.

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.

You must know the answer to that by now Bren!!

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.

<<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.

Whilst the 174 will have ADS-B it's highly highly unlikely to have HFDL....:oh:

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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 :sad: and other infrastructure up to A380 standards would require considerable investment and the business case probably falls in favour of the existing arrangement.

Shall I say it? Dear OP - you're welcome....:8

Looking at his/her posting history, the OP appears to specialize in asking questions but never acknowledging responses ...

Sorry Mr Reid but have been in the depths of the Saudi desert all week minus wifi in my tent ....