International airports all have 4 letter ICAO identifiers, the US beginning with K, Canada C, and Australia Y. The IATA uses 3 letter codes that are not always 1:1(with an ICAO letter added), perhaps to maximise confusion?
Airline handlers backs, necks and shoulders! Seems reasonable to me
A single piece, class and destination dependent can be up to 32kg and too bad about the poor backs 
I understand that to keep baggage handlers from doing their back in a limit of 32 kg for each of two bags was and remains in place with many US carriers. Some have recently moved to a limit of 23 kg for each of two bags. I doubt that move was based on heath grounds. More likely on profit grounds as carrying in excess of 23 kg incurs an extra fee, up to 32 kg.
I have not looked 8th the situation in great detail but given the bag situation as well as legislated compensation to be paid by airlines to pax for certain delays, not to mention a transparent listing of all ancillary charge and taxes in addition to the airline sticker price indicates to me that consumers in the US are better protected than Australian consumers of travel products.
Case in point: in last weekend’s SMH mention was made of a woman waiting for a refund for over two years from THAI Airways. Yes two long years.It would seem that airlines in Australia can drag out the refund process for as long as they like.
Yes I just read that. Insane. Can’t imagine lugging anything like that.
I know travel to the US always allowed us 2 bags if we so desired. I as great for bringing back stuff
It’s a bit chicken and the egg argument as IATA codes are used in CRS/GDS systems and on SITA’s luggage and handling.
Of course pilots use navigation points with 3 letter codes like YSSY - Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport (SYD) and waypoints along the pacific where there may or may not be a geographical marker. The recent online viral video of the Air New Zealand captain with tablet at JFK (KJFK) plotted the nonstop route to AKL (NZAA) via these fictitious points. The video is on the intrepid AU/HK passport holder living in DXB, Sam Chui:
With the improvement in satellite navigation and communications now most airlines operating across the Pacific (and possibly other regions) now use User Preferred Routes (UPR) to generate a flightplan that is usually designed to minimise fuel burn, but may also take into account overflight charges and other charges to minimise cost. Waypoints on these UPR’s are often just a Latitude and Longitude rather than the random 5 letter names given to waypoints on the old route structure. So an aircraft may depart or arrive via a designated waypoint (usually just within radar coverage) but then follow a UPR until they get to their destination where they again fly to a designated inbound fixed waypoint. Here’s an example of a UPR flight plan - in this case a Sydney to Honolulu flight:
DIPSO G595 GUTIV ABARB 3201S/15543E 2758S/15901E 2309S/16220E 2215S/16300E 2133S/16331E 1748S/16650E 1617S/16823E 1303S/17130E 0634S/17722E 0317S/17956E 0128N/17627W 0746N/17124W 1150N/16745W 1415N/16515W 1714N/16156W 1816N/16036W CARRP.
ABARB and CARPP are the designated Exit and Entry waypoints.
1 Like
Thanks, that’s really interesting, (especially for someone like me who spent their career flying with my fingers with 3 letter codes on IPARS and USAS mainframes!)
