Masterthread Registration-Suche
- Starter*in bursche99
- Datum Start
ANZEIGE
für mich ganz klar RAE (ich halte mich da auch recht eng an F-HBXG airfleets)
und wenn man die Geschichte in Wikipedia liest
Wikipedia meinte:
Régional Compagnie Aérienne Européenne – Wikipedia
Wikipedia meinte:
Air France Hop – Wikipedia
Bis 2016 war es eine Vermarktungs-Hülle, ohne eigene Flotte, all op. by ...
(halt: ich hab tatsächlich eine CRJ gefunden die bereits 2013 auf HOP! registriert war, sonst konnten die vermutlich kein AOC bekommen.
alles andere war operated by RAE, Britair, Arlinair.)
2016 wurde dann der IATA Code A5 von Arlinair auf Hop! übertragen
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
Das in Wikipedia habe ich auch gelesen und widerspricht damit meiner eigentlichen Hauptquelle...
Naja, da ich die Régional als auch die Hop! bzw. Air France Hop (für mich kein "signifikanter Namenswechsel) eh im Log habe, hat es keine große Auswirkungen -
aber trotzdem irgendwie unzufriedenstellend.
Genauso wie ich jetzt noch so einen Kandidaten bei mir gefunden habe:
Sommer 2010 mit AB oder LTU A333 NUE-PMI-NUE [D-AERK/D-AERQ]
Planespotters: Air Berlin
Airfleets: LTU "in Air Berlin colours"
Die Flugzeuge selbst mit "operated by LTU" sticker
Ich habe es und lasse es als "LTU" im Excel - auch hier ohne Auswirkungen.
Letztlich muss wohl jeder es für sich selbst entscheiden.
Vielleicht hat ja einer ähnliche Konstruktionen und kann damit nun eine Airline mehr (oder weniger) für sich loggen.
Es gab ja auch einige Air Berlin B738, die als op. by TUIfly in voller AB Livery jahrelang unterwegs waren. Wenigstens sind sich da alle Quellen mal einig, inkl. "op. by TUIfly" Sticker am Flugzeug...
Die Problematik Régional-Brit Air oder HOP hat mich für mein Log auch länger beschäftigt. Ich hatte im Januar 2015 drei Flüge (SXB-NTE E170, NTE-LYS E145 & LYS-SXB CRJX), gebucht als HOP unter A5-Flugnummer. Alle Flugzeuge waren im HOP-Lack. Auf den Safety Cards war aber HOP by Régional und HOP by Brit Air aufgedruckt. Diese Tatsache, die Seite zur Unternehmenshistorie von HOP etwa aus dem Jahr 2018 und der Wikipedia-Artikel ergaben für mein Log dann zwei Flüge mit Régional und ein Flug mit Brit Air
ich glaub ich versteh Dein Problem / Deine Sorge nicht ganz:
Ist Dir der Sticker wichtig, oder die Livery?
Die Livery war viele Jahre kreuz und quer "falsch" bei den verschiedenen AB Operatoren. (same by dba noch früher.)
Und der Sticker (oder gemalte Hinweis) op. by. ist eine reine Design/Brand/Marketing-entscheidung, und sagt nix über den eigentlichen Operator / aircraft owner.
Mir geht es v.a. um den AOC (air operator's certificate) des Flugzeugs während des Fluges.
In Deinem Fall war es Sommer 2010 LTU International Airways für die D-AERK
| Registration | Delivery date | Airline | Remark | |
| D-AERK | 04/03/1996 | LTU International Airways | Air Berlin colors 02/2008 | Correct |
| D-AERK | 01/04/2011 | Air Berlin | Stored 01/2013 | Correct |
Das sagt die Quelle airfleets.net die fast immer sehr gut und akkurat ist.
Andere Quelle - Planespotters sagt D-AERK "AirBerlin" mit der Zeitangabe "Feb 2008" https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/airbus-a330-300-ei-fbu-i-fly/r1mg1r
Nur -> das ist nicht widersprüchlich, sondern komplementär richtig. Airfleets sagt "ab Feb 2008 AB colors"
und RAE für die F-HBXG
| Registration | Delivery date | Airline | Remark | |
| F-HBXG | 15/12/2009 | Regional CAE | Correct | |
| F-HBXG | 01/04/2016 | Hop! | Correct |
Das sagt die Quelle airfleets.net
und Planespotters https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/embraer-erj-170-f-hbxg-air-france-hop/e24qwd
sagt "Air France" op by Regional (zeitgleich) -> das ist ein Zeichen auf die Livery, und zeigt auch hier dass die AOC von RAE / unter RAE durchgeführt wurde
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
Ich dachte bislang, dass es gerade damit dem Fluggast rechtlich aufgezeigt wird, wer den Flug ausführt.
Wenn dem aber nicht so ist, dann hat es keinen wirklichen Wert.
Nicht ganz, denn Planespotters sagt ab 31.3.2013 eben nichts mehr von Régional, sondern einfach nur Hop!
Dann würde einfach der Hinweis fehlen: bis 2016 op. by Régional.
Die Safety Card "HOP op. by. Régional" trifft es wohl am besten.
@fakepcy source FKB
found 2010-10-05 FR9211 GRO FKB 1035 1220 fakepcy_nolist EI-EMO
found 2010-10-10 FR9212 FKB GRO 1245 1425 fakepcy_nolist EI-EGB
found 2010-10-05 FR9211 GRO FKB 1035 1220 fakepcy_nolist EI-EMO
found 2010-10-10 FR9212 FKB GRO 1245 1425 fakepcy_nolist EI-EGB
2005-12-29 QF0077 PER SIN 0950 1520 A333 stockerz
2006-12-26 QF1924 AYQ CNS 1455 1755 B712 stockerz
2007-01-22 QF0767 BNE PER 1925 2335 B763 stockerz
2008-12-27 QF0071 PER SIN 1630 2050 A333 stockerz
2010-07-11 NZ0176 PER AKL 1920 0550 B763 stockerz
2010-07-19 NZ0175 AKL PER 1425 1810 B763 stockerz
2014-12-02 VJ0107 DAD SGN 0910 1025 A320 stockerz
2014-12-02 AK0523 SGN KUL 1610 1900 A320 stockerz
Appreciate any help, thanks!
2006-12-26 QF1924 AYQ CNS 1455 1755 B712 stockerz
2007-01-22 QF0767 BNE PER 1925 2335 B763 stockerz
2008-12-27 QF0071 PER SIN 1630 2050 A333 stockerz
2010-07-11 NZ0176 PER AKL 1920 0550 B763 stockerz
2010-07-19 NZ0175 AKL PER 1425 1810 B763 stockerz
2014-12-02 VJ0107 DAD SGN 0910 1025 A320 stockerz
2014-12-02 AK0523 SGN KUL 1610 1900 A320 stockerz
Appreciate any help, thanks!
found 2014-12-02 AK0523 SGN KUL 1610 1900 A320 stockerz 9M-AQH #8462
2014/12/02 10:35;AXM523;AXM523;-;9M-AQH;750287;Air Asia;A320
Subject to edits once I find more
found 2010-07-11 NZ0176 PER AKL 1920 0550 stockerz ZK-NCJ #8463
found 2010-07-19 NZ0175 AKL PER 1425 1810 stockerz ZK-NCK #8463
Okay, I've got a weird one here. This doesn't necessarily need to be added to the list, but here's the info in the usual format.
2003-08-01 UA7635 MDT ORD 1425 1529 CRJ Adam Smith (op by DH)
BTS gives me N688BR as the registration. It shows the flight departing at 15:29, with runway time of 15:39 (that's a bit late, but the inbound was late as well, so it tracks). But it shows the flight as having diverted. My friend who was on this flight, though, has no recollection of a diversion, even though he remembers all sorts of other minutiae from that time period.
BTS doesn't record where a flight diverted to. It does have a flag for whether a flight eventually made it to the destination airport, which suggests UA7635 never made it to ORD that day. However, that aircraft did operate an ORD-BNA flight that departed at 21:39, which means it must have made it to ORD, even if it might have picked up some additional delay. So BTS is wrong in some way. Either it's wrong that the flight diverted at all, and it was merely delayed (which caused that aircraft's scheduled 16:20 flight ORD-GSO to be cancelled), or it did divert somewhere but BTS is wrong that it didn't eventually complete the flight. Or I suppose it could be wrong about the registration of the aircraft that flew the BNA turn, but that seems highly unlikely.
BTS doesn't seem to record data for flights that weren't scheduled, so if it did divert to somewhere like CLE (which was a UA hub and right on the way from MDT to ORD), I don't think that would be recorded. Unless I'm missing something? Does anyone have experience with BTS having incorrect info like this?
This second one is more straightforward, although my hopes are low. It was operated by Air Wisconsin, which apparently has never been a BTS reporting airline, so with a flight that old, probably not a lot of good sources.
2003-02-09 UA5566 STL ORD 1538 1653 CRJ Adam Smith (op by ZW) (UA5565 was the inbound)
2003-08-01 UA7635 MDT ORD 1425 1529 CRJ Adam Smith (op by DH)
BTS gives me N688BR as the registration. It shows the flight departing at 15:29, with runway time of 15:39 (that's a bit late, but the inbound was late as well, so it tracks). But it shows the flight as having diverted. My friend who was on this flight, though, has no recollection of a diversion, even though he remembers all sorts of other minutiae from that time period.
BTS doesn't record where a flight diverted to. It does have a flag for whether a flight eventually made it to the destination airport, which suggests UA7635 never made it to ORD that day. However, that aircraft did operate an ORD-BNA flight that departed at 21:39, which means it must have made it to ORD, even if it might have picked up some additional delay. So BTS is wrong in some way. Either it's wrong that the flight diverted at all, and it was merely delayed (which caused that aircraft's scheduled 16:20 flight ORD-GSO to be cancelled), or it did divert somewhere but BTS is wrong that it didn't eventually complete the flight. Or I suppose it could be wrong about the registration of the aircraft that flew the BNA turn, but that seems highly unlikely.
BTS doesn't seem to record data for flights that weren't scheduled, so if it did divert to somewhere like CLE (which was a UA hub and right on the way from MDT to ORD), I don't think that would be recorded. Unless I'm missing something? Does anyone have experience with BTS having incorrect info like this?
This second one is more straightforward, although my hopes are low. It was operated by Air Wisconsin, which apparently has never been a BTS reporting airline, so with a flight that old, probably not a lot of good sources.
2003-02-09 UA5566 STL ORD 1538 1653 CRJ Adam Smith (op by ZW) (UA5565 was the inbound)
No, had, fortunately, never this experience. But when I see all cancelations at ORD on this day it seems something went really bad at ORD.
@Adam Smith I might have a similar one.
2006-12-23 US0057 OAK PHX 0600 0851 Chronictraveller
Similar--it shows as diverted, but I have no recollection of being diverted. Shows the same reg, N637AW, flying US0012 PHX JFK later in the day, but much delayed--departing 1431 instead of scheduled time of 1004. As this is in the date range of Flightstats, I will say US0057 agrees with their record of the flight, too, although I didn't check on the PHX-JFK segment.
What I recall is being delayed in OAK airport for most of the morning, and most of the OAK-PHX flights being messed up that day. Unfortunately I have no confirmation (boarding pass, itinerary) that I was booked on US0057. It's a guess, but during that time period I would often fly OAK-PHX and always tried to get the first flight of the day. When I saw the diversion, I assumed I must have seen some delay at OAK and changed my flight to US0273 (which itself was delayed 3 hours leaving OAK). Now I am wondering if I was on US0057 and we didn't divert, but some data issue with BTS or the airline is misreporting the data.
Separately I have experience with an actual diversion in 2025. Here BTS didn't show the diversion (on their web interface page). Showed the normal departure, and delayed arrival into the original airport. Alas, Mesa Air didn't appear at all on their data download with extended info on diversions!
Interesting. Did you look at all the details for US57 on FlightStats? There's a lot of stuff that lines up to support the diversion.
FlightStats shows an extra sector, TUS-PHX, on that flight number. The original OAK-PHX shows "arrived" at 10:18 local. At 09:55, there's an entry in the log with the flight status changing to "Redirected" (diverted). That does sometimes happen in error, or get reversed, but seems consistent with a diversion arriving at TUS at 10:18.
The extra HP57 TUS-PHX shows departed TUS at 12:51 (runway time 12:52), arrived at PHX 13:26 (runway time 13:19). The record of that segment was first created at 11:46. That's all pretty logical if it did divert to TUS.
I haven't gone through BTS so will take your word on the aircraft's movements. Assuming you're correct, HP12 PHX-JFK's delayed departure of 14:31 lines up pretty well with that OAK-TUS-PHX timeline.
If your memory is sitting around OAK that morning, that seems a good fit with the HP273, since it departed OAK at 11:31 after being scheduled for 08:50.
Maybe you had already looked all of that up and this doesn't help, but maybe there's some additional info that helps resolve it for you!
Details
2004-07-08 OS0088 JFK VIE 1840 0910 SaschaX99
Routing: JFK-VIE
STD: 08.07.2004 22:40 UTC
STD: 08.07.2004 18:40 LT
Offblock: 09.07.2004 01:11 UTC
Offblock: 08.07.2004 21:11 LT
Takeoff: 09.07.2004 01:36 UTC
Takeoff: 08.07.2004 21:36 LT
STA: 09.07.2004 07:10 UTC
STA: 09.07.2004 09:10 LT
Touchdown: 09.07.2004 09:04 UTC
Touchdown: 09.07.2004 11:04 LT
Onblock: 09.07.2004 09:18 UTC
Onblock: 09.07.2004 11:18 LT
Registration: OELAG
Subfleet: 342
Owner: OS
Departure Gate: 008
-------------
Lines
found 2004-07-08 OS0088 JFK VIE 1840 0910 SaschaX99 OELAG #8471
hi @fakepcy
Details
2011-03-25 LH1492 FRA KBP 2205 0130 A320 fakepcy
Routing: FRA-KBP
STD: 25.03.2011 21:05 UTC
STD: 25.03.2011 22:05 LT
Offblock: 25.03.2011 20:58 UTC
Offblock: 25.03.2011 21:58 LT
Takeoff: 25.03.2011 21:15 UTC
Takeoff: 25.03.2011 22:15 LT
STA: 25.03.2011 23:30 UTC
STA: 26.03.2011 01:30 LT
Touchdown: 25.03.2011 23:09 UTC
Touchdown: 26.03.2011 01:09 LT
Onblock: 25.03.2011 23:15 UTC
Onblock: 26.03.2011 01:15 LT
Registration: DAIQN
Subfleet: 32J
Owner: LH
Departure Gate: B56
Departure Position: V113
Departure Runway: 18W
-------------
Lines
found 2011-03-25 LH1492 FRA KBP 2205 0130 A320 fakepcy DAIQN #8472
found 2010-09-07 FB0437 SOF FRA 1600 1730 B463 fakepcy LZHBG #8472
Arrival Position: V106
Arrival Gate: B54
2011-08-21 FB0438 FRA SOF 1830 2200 B463 fakepcy LZHBF #8472
Departure Position: V108
Departure Gate: B31
Well there's your diversion!
AWE57 Flight Tracking and History 23-Dec-2006 (KOAK-KPHX) - FlightAware
Track AWE57 flight from Oakland Intl to Tucson Intl
www.flightaware.com
The altitude is a bit messy there around the holding pattern, but that plane very clearly went to TUS.
There's some really screwy ADS-B on the TUS-PHX leg, but I think this still supports the existence of that flight.
AWE57 Flight Tracking and History 23-Dec-2006 (KTUS-KPHX) - FlightAware
Track AWE57 flight from Tucson Intl to Phoenix Sky Harbor Intl
www.flightaware.com
So while I think you've pointed out some fallibility in the BTS data, I'm pretty confident it's correct that this plane did divert. If you don't think you did that diversion to TUS, I'm guessing you took that later flight - maybe you decided to sleep in a bit that morning and not catch the early flight for a change?