4 ms·

>Whenever I hear that any IDs could be "recycled", I make a mental note to replace the person making such a proposal from all teams that I am involved in. I un

by tyingq 2y ago

>Whenever I hear that any IDs could be "recycled", I make a mental note to replace the person making such a proposal from all teams that I am involved in. I understand the sentiment, but in this case, someone is trying to solve for constraints they didn't invent. Flight number was fixed to 4 digits long ago and propagates out to a lot of different systems, many not in the same company as the airline, also many being government entities. So they don't have a lot of great choices.

whizzter 2y ago
Seems to me like an ego issue honestly since the article points out that a large part of the bloat is from codesharing, using the actual operators code feels like an obvious solution unless egos are too fragile.
- kelnos 2y ago
  It's not ego, it's marketing, loyalty, and customer comfort. Passengers don't want to see "multiple airlines" in their itinerary. They wonder if the baggage allowances are the same, and if those bags will make it all the way to the final destination. They wonder if they'll get miles on their "main" airline for the whole trip, or if it will be broken up between different loyalty programs. They wonder if the connection is actually doable time-wise, and if there's a delay, will the airlines work together to either hold the next leg for some amount of time, or rebook without hassles and fuss and each airline pointing at the other, claiming it's not their responsibility. Codeshares solve all these problems.
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    Codeshares would solve those problems just as well without a separate flight identifier for every airline. Honestly codeshares suck regardless. If I chose an airline it’s because I did not want to deal with their annoying competitors.
    - tyingq 2y ago
      Part of what marks it as a code share is those marketing carrier/flight and operating carrier/flight fields that get propagated out lots of places internally and externally. If you just up and change those, then your flight listings would look wonky on, say Expedia. Or your reconciliation process to get the revenue in the right place might break, etc. Two examples of which there are many more. So the ego thing is somewhat true, but that decision happened long ago, and already created tendrils that are hard to unwind.
  - whizzter 2y ago
    That sounds a lot like party-line arguments honestly, maybe rooted in 1960s issues 1: If I've paid on a non budget airlines _site_ (like Lufthansa,Air France,SAS,etc) and then see another livery on the plane I'm boarding that I'm not expecting I'd be slightly disappointed and lose trust in the selling airline regardless of any codeshare. If I see when ordering on the SAS site that the second leg on a route is handled by Lufthansa I'm not gonna worry. 2: Baggage allowance is clearly stated when ordering tickets online from a serious airline (because they love to show low prices for no checked in baggage and scrounge you for any extras). 3: I was actually wondering about that on a recent flight so I kept an eye on details and the baggage tag receipt I got clearly stated the route I was flying so I knew the baggage would end up where needed. 4: Bonus program points are usually stated when ordering. 5: The US should just follow the EU lead and harmonize rules a bit (maybe there's already some basic rules in place?), EC 261 has codified some basic rules to alleviate traveler worries in terms of responsibilities when it comes to delays and cancellations. (1) It's 2024 and we really don't need to pile on bad cludges upon 1960s solutions to keep things working. And yes, yesterday or today might've been the time to start a process to extent the flight code system within a 20 year horizon, but to extend it in a hurry because of airlines duplicating crap with codeshares is just silly. 1: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-right...
    - tyingq 2y ago
      > Baggage allowance is clearly stated when ordering tickets online from a serious airline Sure, though, those fields (marketing carrier/flight + operating carrier/flight) drive things like what the kiosk or agent charges you. Say you booked on AA, but part of your travel was a codeshare on BA. That integration is how all those terms and conditions get followed. Why you pay the AA $50 overweight charge for your big bag rather than the BA $65 charge. Similar for refunds and loyalty programs. Take loyalty...the points aren't awarded until you fly, via a "lift" message. And if it doesn't have the right marketing carrier + flight number, that "lift" message doesn't get processed. Yes, it's old and rooted in the 60's. And yes, it's got issues. Nobody is selling it as elegant. Just that it serves useful functions now, and that it's ensnared in enough separate internal and external systems that replacing it with something better is not trivial.
ungamedplayer 2y ago
Sounds like they are artificial constraints. I'm sure it sucks that it's "four digits only" but the air travel industry isn't immune from changing specifications. I believe ancient cultures called this software maintenance.
- tyingq 2y ago
  Yes, they've changed specifications before. Y2K being one example. Artificial seems strong though. I was trying to explain that a single airline can't fix this solely in-house. It would have to be an industry change across airlines, government agencies, third party vendors, etc. So it's not artificial, but it's not trivial either.

by tyingq 2y ago

whizzter 2y ago

Seems to me like an ego issue honestly since the article points out that a large part of the bloat is from codesharing, using the actual operators code feels like an obvious solution unless egos are too fragile.

kelnos 2y ago
It's not ego, it's marketing, loyalty, and customer comfort. Passengers don't want to see "multiple airlines" in their itinerary. They wonder if the baggage allowances are the same, and if those bags will make it all the way to the final destination. They wonder if they'll get miles on their "main" airline for the whole trip, or if it will be broken up between different loyalty programs. They wonder if the connection is actually doable time-wise, and if there's a delay, will the airlines work together to either hold the next leg for some amount of time, or rebook without hassles and fuss and each airline pointing at the other, claiming it's not their responsibility. Codeshares solve all these problems.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  Codeshares would solve those problems just as well without a separate flight identifier for every airline. Honestly codeshares suck regardless. If I chose an airline it’s because I did not want to deal with their annoying competitors.
  - tyingq 2y ago
    Part of what marks it as a code share is those marketing carrier/flight and operating carrier/flight fields that get propagated out lots of places internally and externally. If you just up and change those, then your flight listings would look wonky on, say Expedia. Or your reconciliation process to get the revenue in the right place might break, etc. Two examples of which there are many more. So the ego thing is somewhat true, but that decision happened long ago, and already created tendrils that are hard to unwind.
- whizzter 2y ago
  That sounds a lot like party-line arguments honestly, maybe rooted in 1960s issues 1: If I've paid on a non budget airlines _site_ (like Lufthansa,Air France,SAS,etc) and then see another livery on the plane I'm boarding that I'm not expecting I'd be slightly disappointed and lose trust in the selling airline regardless of any codeshare. If I see when ordering on the SAS site that the second leg on a route is handled by Lufthansa I'm not gonna worry. 2: Baggage allowance is clearly stated when ordering tickets online from a serious airline (because they love to show low prices for no checked in baggage and scrounge you for any extras). 3: I was actually wondering about that on a recent flight so I kept an eye on details and the baggage tag receipt I got clearly stated the route I was flying so I knew the baggage would end up where needed. 4: Bonus program points are usually stated when ordering. 5: The US should just follow the EU lead and harmonize rules a bit (maybe there's already some basic rules in place?), EC 261 has codified some basic rules to alleviate traveler worries in terms of responsibilities when it comes to delays and cancellations. (1) It's 2024 and we really don't need to pile on bad cludges upon 1960s solutions to keep things working. And yes, yesterday or today might've been the time to start a process to extent the flight code system within a 20 year horizon, but to extend it in a hurry because of airlines duplicating crap with codeshares is just silly. 1: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-right...
  - tyingq 2y ago
    > Baggage allowance is clearly stated when ordering tickets online from a serious airline Sure, though, those fields (marketing carrier/flight + operating carrier/flight) drive things like what the kiosk or agent charges you. Say you booked on AA, but part of your travel was a codeshare on BA. That integration is how all those terms and conditions get followed. Why you pay the AA $50 overweight charge for your big bag rather than the BA $65 charge. Similar for refunds and loyalty programs. Take loyalty...the points aren't awarded until you fly, via a "lift" message. And if it doesn't have the right marketing carrier + flight number, that "lift" message doesn't get processed. Yes, it's old and rooted in the 60's. And yes, it's got issues. Nobody is selling it as elegant. Just that it serves useful functions now, and that it's ensnared in enough separate internal and external systems that replacing it with something better is not trivial.

ungamedplayer 2y ago

Sounds like they are artificial constraints. I'm sure it sucks that it's "four digits only" but the air travel industry isn't immune from changing specifications. I believe ancient cultures called this software maintenance.

tyingq 2y ago
Yes, they've changed specifications before. Y2K being one example. Artificial seems strong though. I was trying to explain that a single airline can't fix this solely in-house. It would have to be an industry change across airlines, government agencies, third party vendors, etc. So it's not artificial, but it's not trivial either.