- Aug 25, 2005
- 1,171
- 5
Does anyone know if we have duplicate tail numbers between US East and US West? For example...say there are two aircraft 649s....this could cause some confusion when refering to aircraft 649.
Registry Numbers
- Thread starter EricLv2Fish
- Start date
Not going to happen, 649us & 649Aw just as an example. No two US registered A/C will be the same!
OP
- Aug 25, 2005
- 1,171
- 5
- Thread Starter
- #3
I realize that 649US and 649AW are not exactly the same due to the "US" and "AW" designations, but they way our customized IPC works (Airbus Only) the effectivity is based on the numeric value (649)...and if US East IPCs (Airbus) are based on numeric values also and the two manuals are merged...well this could cause issues. They may have to end up going to MSN values...or some other value. If the value is changed from the registry number to a different number such as MSN then more issues will be raised as far as tech-data is concerned.
Breath_of_Fresh_USAirways
Advanced
- Aug 27, 2005
- 233
- 0
Let's see, Eric.
US A330's are "600" tail numbers -- the same as HP A320's. But since those would be separate manuals, that shouldn't be a problem...
US 319's "700"s -- HP 319's "800"s
US 320's "100"s -- HP 320's "600"s
US 757's "600"s -- HP 757's "900"s (dyslexics will have to be careful!)
US 737's are mostly "900" tail numbers with some odd-balls, and HP's are "100"s & "300"s
Doesn't appear to be anything to worry about here, as long as the tech knows the difference between a 737 and an A320, or a 737 and a 757, or an A330 and an A320. And if the person working on the plane doesn't know what model he/she is working on, well then maybe they should pursue another interest...
All this information is available publicly. Try http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/US%20Airways-fleet.htm for info on the US fleet, for example. Don't assume this job of intergration is going to be harder than it really is -- do a little homework before you get all worked up over MSN #'s! Merging tech data is going to be relatively simple compared to a lot of other areas. It's going to be a big job, but not difficult. Unless you make it difficult. There's really a lot more, tougher issues out there to resolve! And even if it were a big deal, since it would have to be dealt with, period, why did you bring it up on a public forum? Not like anyone here could magically change the tail numbers or whatever...
You sound like you're in tech data and have a "poor me" "look at all the work I'll have to do" attitude if we would've had to switch to MSN #'s. I don't think that was your intent -- but that's what you sound like. And if you had to convert all the Airbus manuals to MSN #'s -- c'mon -- in this day and age, how hard could that be? We use tail numbers because the MECHANIC can easily LOOK at the airplane and know which one it is! If we painted the MSN number on the side, we'd use that instead. And if it were an issue, I hope you'd be working on a way to solve it and not just "wondering" about it...
Let's stay on track and not make mountains out of molehills. Ok? We need to focus on positive attitudes and use all our strength to work together to resolve real problems and not waste it on non-issues.
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but we ALL need to think more about what we say and what we post and do a little homework or research before we invent a bunch of problems where they don't exist. Same thing goes for on the job. Be resourceful (if you've got time to be here you've got time to GOOGLE or ask Jeeves, etc), solve what you can for yourself, and then if you need hellp or can't find the answer -- ASK!
Ok, I'll get off my soapbox now.
While I do not dissagree with anything in your post Fresh Breath, the US tail numbers must be incorrect on that site. For example US's 737 tail numbers are made up of 300's, 400's, 500's and some high 700's. Just as one example. The 320 family are aslo wrong. I didn't post them all, because you probably get the point.
Tha fact is your post and opinion are both true and we will succeed with the integration.
I like your positive outlook. I have been trying to influence the board with some myself.
Tha fact is your post and opinion are both true and we will succeed with the integration.
I like your positive outlook. I have been trying to influence the board with some myself.
Breath_of_Fresh_USAirways
Advanced
- Aug 27, 2005
- 233
- 0
Thanks, PIT! I like your attitude and style, too!
That website reference I used is good for most info - sorry, you're correct, it ain't right this time. But this one is probably the BEST for N-numbers: http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/nameSQL.as...s&sort_option=5
Looks like both sides will have some "3XX" tail numbers for 737s...but not many. I'd have to look more closely to see if any really are the same 3 digits. I'm too tired to do that tonight. It's not a complete list, either, cause some aircraft are registered to the bank (or other entity) that owns them.
Looks like this website also shows the numbers that have also been pre-reserved for future aircraft. (or were pre-reserved at one time, maybe?)
After looking over the FAA list, the old DC-9s number 97XVJ -- were those the old ValuJet DC-9s? Would you happen to know? They must be parked in the desert somewhere, now, huh? Weird.
As far as the DC-9 tail numbers go, no. We had those tail numbers before ValueJet was even started. They used old Eastern DC-9s at start-up the first time around. My hard drive is all used up, so I can not retain all the unecessary information. I belive the VJ stood for Victory Jet. And our DC-9's and engines were bought by some outfit. I believe I read it on this board somewhere a while back. I'm sure someone will fill in the missing information. Yeah, it's too late for me as well, and this Vampire wine is really relaxing me.
Breath_of_Fresh_USAirways
Advanced
- Aug 27, 2005
- 233
- 0
I put in "america west" on the FAA n-number website and a bunch of reserved numbers came up but no airplanes! I checked a few of the numbers and they were all re-reserved over this summer, June & July, so looks like fleet expansion plans are still in the works!
Thanks for the "VJ" info -- I was living in ATL when Critter 592 went down in the 'glades and have always had a soft-spot for them...
Yes, the wine is doing it's thing for me, too. A very good, inexpensive "Haut Medoc" or Bordeaux. Yes, French. Similar to a really good Merlot. Vampire wine - hmm - an Anne Rice fan, by chance? Or just getting into the Halloween spirit? B)
Thanks for the "VJ" info -- I was living in ATL when Critter 592 went down in the 'glades and have always had a soft-spot for them...
Yes, the wine is doing it's thing for me, too. A very good, inexpensive "Haut Medoc" or Bordeaux. Yes, French. Similar to a really good Merlot. Vampire wine - hmm - an Anne Rice fan, by chance? Or just getting into the Halloween spirit? B)
I did some contract maintenance work for them right through the time of the crash. It was a very stressfull time.
And oh, no. It's all in the spirit of Halloween.
And oh, no. It's all in the spirit of Halloween.
Actually....the VJ / Vista Jet name was something that Allegheny the forunner for USAir coined...not McDonnell Douglas.
The years of catchy names were rampant in the 50's , 60's and early 70's
Eastern.....Golden Flacons , Whisper Jets , Silver Falcons ( L-188's)
Pan Am ...Clippers
UAL .... Mainliner (with either a person of a cities name involved)
AA.... Astro Jets
AL.... Vista Jets
TWA Super Jets ( for the 707's) Star Streams ( for the CV-880's)
NA.... Sun Kings
PSA.... Smile Liners
PI... Pacemaker ( with a cities name involved)
Fresh Breath -
I am not sure why what Eric posted caused such a ruffle in your feathers. He didn't complain about having to do additional work because of possible tail number duplications. He was just wondering out loud if there were any known issues.
During the previous mergers, the fleets were re-numbered to offer consistency in the numbering of airplanes. This way you always knew that an aircraft numbered between 800-849 were an MD80, 850-899 were the F100's. They even changed numbers in sub fleets. 300 series airplanes were short range 733's, 400 series airplanes were 734's, the 500 series airplanes were long range 733's (with aux tanks and video systems), the airplanes numbered 775-790 were the overwater equipped 734's, etc.
There are other systems in the company the depend on using a 3 number system as well and will not be able to be programed to recognize the US, UW, AW letter designators.
My guess is there will be a renumbering of portions of the fleet prior to full integration.
I am not sure why what Eric posted caused such a ruffle in your feathers. He didn't complain about having to do additional work because of possible tail number duplications. He was just wondering out loud if there were any known issues.
During the previous mergers, the fleets were re-numbered to offer consistency in the numbering of airplanes. This way you always knew that an aircraft numbered between 800-849 were an MD80, 850-899 were the F100's. They even changed numbers in sub fleets. 300 series airplanes were short range 733's, 400 series airplanes were 734's, the 500 series airplanes were long range 733's (with aux tanks and video systems), the airplanes numbered 775-790 were the overwater equipped 734's, etc.
There are other systems in the company the depend on using a 3 number system as well and will not be able to be programed to recognize the US, UW, AW letter designators.
My guess is there will be a renumbering of portions of the fleet prior to full integration.
