"They don't know what to do about it" seems patently false based on the article. They already know what to do, and based on a quote there are already doing it (reusing flight numbers for return...
"They don't know what to do about it" seems patently false based on the article. They already know what to do, and based on a quote there are already doing it (reusing flight numbers for return flights, for example).
On top of that, the CEO states clearly that this is only a problem for about 3 of the largest carriers. Future expansion will require them to come up with other solutions, which is also stated in the article.
I found this fascinating as numbering for flights isn't something I've personally thought much about, but this is not some kind of dire scenario where flights are about to be grounded worldwide or something.
It's a global system. One airline can't change, every airline and airport and air traffic control system and travel agency has to change at once. It doesn't matter that your airline only flies in...
It's a global system. One airline can't change, every airline and airport and air traffic control system and travel agency has to change at once. It doesn't matter that your airline only flies in the US: a UK or JP airline still has to be able to sell tickets on the same itinerary, and maybe you fly over the ATC of France on a trip. Your online travel agency you're booking a flight and hotel package through has to deal with the number as well. And then you land in an airport that has flip-tab departure boards and it has to be displayed on there.
Data interchange on that level is like a contract: it's a standardized promise of the form the information is in. Changing that on a massive system that demands high levels of stability is a massive effort, no matter how small the change.
An example of a previous change of this scale is the ISBN system used to identify books. The transition from ISBN-10 to ISBN-13 basically took a decade, during which both barcodes were often printed on books.
It may also seem simple from a human perspective of "it's just another digit," but it's a significant change. Many aviation systems are very old (think COBOL applications running on mainframes—which are still made, of course) and may represent the identifier in different ways with logic that may do things based on the expected format of it...there are a lot of landmines in codebases like that, and we're talking many completely different applications needing updates.
Coordination between all systems in place that handle flight numbers, I suspect. This is an old standard and there are going to be layers and layers of software that is expecting numeric values....
Coordination between all systems in place that handle flight numbers, I suspect.
This is an old standard and there are going to be layers and layers of software that is expecting numeric values. It is also not just one company, it is an industry wide thing as they mention in the article with shared numbers in certain scenarios.
That's also ANCIENT depending on where in the system you're looking. Aviation is up there with banking on just an outdated rats nest of outdated code, concepts, and systems.
This is an old standard and there are going to be layers and layers of software....
That's also ANCIENT depending on where in the system you're looking. Aviation is up there with banking on just an outdated rats nest of outdated code, concepts, and systems.
They mentioned using special flight numbers at the end, but buried the lede with the throwaway line about sending flight 1989 to KC for the super bowl. Somebody is a Swiftly :)
They mentioned using special flight numbers at the end, but buried the lede with the throwaway line about sending flight 1989 to KC for the super bowl. Somebody is a Swiftly :)
"They don't know what to do about it" seems patently false based on the article. They already know what to do, and based on a quote there are already doing it (reusing flight numbers for return flights, for example).
On top of that, the CEO states clearly that this is only a problem for about 3 of the largest carriers. Future expansion will require them to come up with other solutions, which is also stated in the article.
I found this fascinating as numbering for flights isn't something I've personally thought much about, but this is not some kind of dire scenario where flights are about to be grounded worldwide or something.
What issue they have using 0-9, and A-Z? That'll surely increase the overall number
It's a global system. One airline can't change, every airline and airport and air traffic control system and travel agency has to change at once. It doesn't matter that your airline only flies in the US: a UK or JP airline still has to be able to sell tickets on the same itinerary, and maybe you fly over the ATC of France on a trip. Your online travel agency you're booking a flight and hotel package through has to deal with the number as well. And then you land in an airport that has flip-tab departure boards and it has to be displayed on there.
Data interchange on that level is like a contract: it's a standardized promise of the form the information is in. Changing that on a massive system that demands high levels of stability is a massive effort, no matter how small the change.
An example of a previous change of this scale is the ISBN system used to identify books. The transition from ISBN-10 to ISBN-13 basically took a decade, during which both barcodes were often printed on books.
It may also seem simple from a human perspective of "it's just another digit," but it's a significant change. Many aviation systems are very old (think COBOL applications running on mainframes—which are still made, of course) and may represent the identifier in different ways with logic that may do things based on the expected format of it...there are a lot of landmines in codebases like that, and we're talking many completely different applications needing updates.
Coordination between all systems in place that handle flight numbers, I suspect.
This is an old standard and there are going to be layers and layers of software that is expecting numeric values. It is also not just one company, it is an industry wide thing as they mention in the article with shared numbers in certain scenarios.
That's also ANCIENT depending on where in the system you're looking. Aviation is up there with banking on just an outdated rats nest of outdated code, concepts, and systems.
They mentioned using special flight numbers at the end, but buried the lede with the throwaway line about sending flight 1989 to KC for the super bowl. Somebody is a Swiftly :)