Melburnian1
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2013
- Posts
- 25,255
I like airlines to have flight numbers that are as simple as possible, and preferably (with gaps for expansion) numbered sequentially.
For instance, it's good that QF tends to number its MEL-SYD flights as QF400...and so on, rather than a seemingly random collection of all over the ship numbers.
ZL breaks this rule, with complex four digit flight numbers for smaller town and rural city flights: hard to remember if one is an occasional user.
With the recent commencement of QF3/QF4 SYD-AKL-JFK and return, QFi has flight numbers QF1 to QF12 inclusive in active use.
When was the last year (and month!) this was so?
I am not superstitious, so don't regard '8' as 'lucky' or '13' as not, but does QF shy away from using 'QF13' (and hence 'QF14') given some people are worried about anything associated with '13'? (QF did have QF'130' from Shanghai though, but perhaps '130' isn't thought to bring bad luck in the alleged manner of a '13').
For instance, it's good that QF tends to number its MEL-SYD flights as QF400...and so on, rather than a seemingly random collection of all over the ship numbers.
ZL breaks this rule, with complex four digit flight numbers for smaller town and rural city flights: hard to remember if one is an occasional user.
With the recent commencement of QF3/QF4 SYD-AKL-JFK and return, QFi has flight numbers QF1 to QF12 inclusive in active use.
When was the last year (and month!) this was so?
I am not superstitious, so don't regard '8' as 'lucky' or '13' as not, but does QF shy away from using 'QF13' (and hence 'QF14') given some people are worried about anything associated with '13'? (QF did have QF'130' from Shanghai though, but perhaps '130' isn't thought to bring bad luck in the alleged manner of a '13').