PAA wrote:. ..., and SNBA's brand name recognition and international footprint is far from what SN's used to be..
a few examples:
in Madrid's brand new terminal, the screens at the gate for BRU show an IB flightnumber followed by a "DAT" flightnumber ??????
on AZ flights between BRU and Italy cabin crew inform pax about a codeshare with "air bruxelles"
The S-tail might work for Africa, but it will certainly not work for America.
So it wouldn't be such a bad idea if AA would take a possible evening flight for their account as even in Europe (read "outside Belgium") SNBA seems to struggle with its identity
For one reason or the other, the airport authorities in MAD list the flights using the 3 letter ICAO code, iso the much more common 2 letter IATA code.
You will thus see eg: DAT3731 iso SN3731 on the screens, just as you will see IBE2177, BAW627, SAS878 etc.
Most airlines have a 3 letter code very similar to their 2 letter code and resembling their name, but SN's 3 letter code happens to be DAT (which was their old name) and changing code is almost impossible to do, since ICAO does not want to become the 'victim' of administrative changes due to continuous commercial rebrandings of airlines.
tolipanebas wrote:Most airlines have a 3 letter code very similar to their 2 letter code and resembling their name, but SN's 3 letter code happens to be DAT (which was their old name) and changing code is almost impossible to do, since ICAO does not want to become the 'victim' of administrative changes due to continuous commercial rebrandings of airlines.
But then why, for God's sake, did the DAT management at that time not ask ICAO to get both the two-letter code (SN) and the three-letter code (SAB) of defunct Sabena? Another management mistake?
tolipanebas wrote:Most airlines have a 3 letter code very similar to their 2 letter code and resembling their name, but SN's 3 letter code happens to be DAT (which was their old name) and changing code is almost impossible to do, since ICAO does not want to become the 'victim' of administrative changes due to continuous commercial rebrandings of airlines.
But then why, for God's sake, did the DAT management at that time not ask ICAO to get both the two-letter code (SN) and the three-letter code (SAB) of defunct Sabena? Another management mistake?
SAB was Sabena and..... if they wanted to have SAB from Sabena .... Mr Van Buggenhout..... should have ask some money for the SAB code.
DAT recupered the slots....
Airbus330lover wrote:SAB was Sabena and..... if they wanted to have SAB from Sabena .... Mr Van Buggenhout..... should have ask some money for the SAB code.
Contrary to the IATA 2 letter code (which goes with the slots) the 3 letter code is not an asset Mr. Van Buggenhout (the receiver of Sabena) could offer SN Brussels Airlines for sale, as it is an ICAO asset.
Can SN have the OO-registration of their planes changed to SN- just because it would suit them better commercially? NO! Well, the same goes for their 3 letter code.
At the time when ICAO gave the 'DAT' code to the airline, it made sense and it's not their fault the airline changed name afterwards. IATA - a private company set up by and for the commercial airlines- is rather flexible in all this and let the 2 letter code change quite easily from QG (the old DAT 2 letter code) to SN (which previously belonged to Sabena) on condition SN Brussels Airlines took over all ticketing liabilities from Sabena with IATA, but ICAO (an international government institution) is not so eager to let airlines trade their 3 letter code.
Besides, would it really make any more sense for SN BRUSSELS AIRLINES to have 'SAB' as 3 letter code than it does to have 'DAT'?
