Originally Posted by
jrl767
from the perspective of a longtime airline geek, it’s an unnecessary change that’s being made for its own sake (yes, I expect there’s some efficiency metric associated with not having an assigned-equipment-to-flight-number check in the schedule development process, but that doesn’t mean it’s really a value-added metric)
So here are the reasons why its beneficial to the company to start mixing flight numbers that maybe you didn't know before -
*In some slot controlled stations, slots are tied to flight numbers. If they change a flight from an Airbus to a Boeing plane it could mean additional paperwork associated with the slot used for that flight
*The number of available 3 digit flight numbers is decreasing while there are plenty of 4 digit flight numbers still available as Alaska grows.
*It gives the company more flexibility between the two fleets to swap from an Airbus to a Boeing aircraft on any route on any given day without having to change the flight number. In other words, you could swap a Boeing aircraft with an Airbus aircraft on any given JFK-SFO flight without having to be concerned with flight numbers. Maybe Mondays the flight is operated by an Airbus 319 and every other day it's on a Boeing 737-800.
*Alaska is the only major airline to distinguish aircraft type by flight numbers. It's not an industry preferred practice as it also raises the possibility of call-sign conflicts with other companies, within Alaska and between Alaska and ATC.