![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Would it make sense to include "Special Designators" and "Unmanned Aircraft (UA)" designators listed at https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC8643/Pages/SpecialDesignators.aspx? e.g. "GLID" -> Glider — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A10:D200:1:21:149F:96F1:5D4F:5A6C ( talk) 11:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Before we start adding too many deprecated codes, can we perhaps actually try to achieve some consensus here?
Although this sort of list doesn't quite seem to fall under any of the categories in WP:NOT, it does seem to me that trying to add what must be quite literally thousands of deprecated designators would be awfully close to WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Also, it would be very difficult for such a list ever to be exhaustive. Lastly, if adding deprecated codes does gain consensus, might I suggest that they should be placed in a separate list. Rosbif73 ( talk) 14:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
I would certainly support such a move to keep deprecated codes separate from current ones. Pending a consensus I won't add any more for the time being. DaveReidUK ( talk) 15:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
> there is a lot of current codes missing never mind old ones
Well we don't seem any nearer a consensus about whether, why and how we should include deprecated codes in the list. Are there any strong objections if I edit the list for the time being to include only current ones? And does anyone have any views on how to decide which of the 2,000+ current codes to include/exclude? The current selection seems a bit arbitrary in some respects. DaveReidUK ( talk) 09:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I will go ahead and !vote No deprecated codes. As for the active ones, if anyone can find a good source for number of commercial flights per month(day? year?), I would recommend focusing the article on the top 300-500 models. This entire article is borderline WP:INDISCRIMINATE in my opinion, and the list could use some clear boundaries. Sario528 ( talk) 17:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, filtering by number and type of engines could make sense. Excluding single-engined aircraft reduces the number of designators to 763; excluding piston engines as well brings it down to 572; further excluding helicopters and tiltrotors results in 486 designators. A further option could be to exclude Wake Category L (light) and/or military aircraft as most of those don't have corresponding IATA designators. Incidentally, does anyone have an up-to-date list of IATA generic/specific codes? DaveReidUK ( talk) 16:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
In the absence of any dissenting views, I plan to do a rationalisation of the content of the page. My planned approach to whittling down the 2,695 current ICAO codes will be to filter out the following: single-engined aircraft, non-turbine types, one-offs/prototypes, rotary-winged types, bizjets and types predominantly in military use. My estimate is that around 200 types will be left as a representative range to satisfy the somewhat woolly aims of the page. Almost all of those 200 or so types should have valid corresponding IATA codes, and I've found an accessible industry source for the latter (since IATA won't share them other than to their paid customers). Before I start, views welcomed on (a) the suggested filter criteria, and (b) whether the 200 or so entries that would result are too few/enough/too many. DaveReidUK ( talk) 12:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Would it make sense to include "Special Designators" and "Unmanned Aircraft (UA)" designators listed at https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC8643/Pages/SpecialDesignators.aspx? e.g. "GLID" -> Glider — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A10:D200:1:21:149F:96F1:5D4F:5A6C ( talk) 11:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Before we start adding too many deprecated codes, can we perhaps actually try to achieve some consensus here?
Although this sort of list doesn't quite seem to fall under any of the categories in WP:NOT, it does seem to me that trying to add what must be quite literally thousands of deprecated designators would be awfully close to WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Also, it would be very difficult for such a list ever to be exhaustive. Lastly, if adding deprecated codes does gain consensus, might I suggest that they should be placed in a separate list. Rosbif73 ( talk) 14:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
I would certainly support such a move to keep deprecated codes separate from current ones. Pending a consensus I won't add any more for the time being. DaveReidUK ( talk) 15:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
> there is a lot of current codes missing never mind old ones
Well we don't seem any nearer a consensus about whether, why and how we should include deprecated codes in the list. Are there any strong objections if I edit the list for the time being to include only current ones? And does anyone have any views on how to decide which of the 2,000+ current codes to include/exclude? The current selection seems a bit arbitrary in some respects. DaveReidUK ( talk) 09:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I will go ahead and !vote No deprecated codes. As for the active ones, if anyone can find a good source for number of commercial flights per month(day? year?), I would recommend focusing the article on the top 300-500 models. This entire article is borderline WP:INDISCRIMINATE in my opinion, and the list could use some clear boundaries. Sario528 ( talk) 17:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, filtering by number and type of engines could make sense. Excluding single-engined aircraft reduces the number of designators to 763; excluding piston engines as well brings it down to 572; further excluding helicopters and tiltrotors results in 486 designators. A further option could be to exclude Wake Category L (light) and/or military aircraft as most of those don't have corresponding IATA designators. Incidentally, does anyone have an up-to-date list of IATA generic/specific codes? DaveReidUK ( talk) 16:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
In the absence of any dissenting views, I plan to do a rationalisation of the content of the page. My planned approach to whittling down the 2,695 current ICAO codes will be to filter out the following: single-engined aircraft, non-turbine types, one-offs/prototypes, rotary-winged types, bizjets and types predominantly in military use. My estimate is that around 200 types will be left as a representative range to satisfy the somewhat woolly aims of the page. Almost all of those 200 or so types should have valid corresponding IATA codes, and I've found an accessible industry source for the latter (since IATA won't share them other than to their paid customers). Before I start, views welcomed on (a) the suggested filter criteria, and (b) whether the 200 or so entries that would result are too few/enough/too many. DaveReidUK ( talk) 12:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)