DB Tidy up in prep for V3

[GreekSpy2001]

Assuming that v3 will update my current db of aircraft recorded thought it might be prudent to clear out some of the errors.  The most obvious is the three dots instead of the short aircraft type.  I would like just to delete those records in the assumption that they will populate correctly in v3. Has anyone a script that can do this quickly?

Maybe someone may have other suggestions for tidying up the db?

Thanks

Graham

[dumpty]

Good question Graham.

Does anybody know?

[RodBearden]

On tip I can give is that we'll be making use of the Airlines table to give us logos for aircraft using IATA codes as flight ID's.

So it will help to check which airlines are using IATA codes, and make sure that the Airlines table contains the correct ICAO code for them.

Rod

[DaveReid]

On tip I can give is that we'll be making use of the Airlines table to give us logos for aircraft using IATA codes as flight ID's.

So it will help to check which airlines are using IATA codes, and make sure that the Airlines table contains the correct ICAO code for them.

That's a wise move, you would be surprised how many airlines are still guilty of this.

In the last couple of weeks at Heathrow alone I've logged the following examples, amongst others:

9W122
AA79
AI111
AZ204
BA124
BD5WC
EI176
ET710
GF007
IB3168
IT007
JL401
ME201
RJ111
UN353
WY911
XM5248

Note that XM is used by CAI First (Alitalia codeshare, ICAO SMX) whereas the database has Australian Air Express for XM.

[malc41]

Some of this is down to crew laziness, though more often that not the planners try to hit too many keys at the wrong time

[RodBearden]

BTW, it will also help to delete old defunct airlines from the table, as their IATA codes may confuse things.

There are some duplicate IATA codes there too - it appears that IATA tolerates duplicates - you get a few current duplicates in airframes.org, anyway. I suggest that you remove unwanted duplicates, but you may want to wait until you get V3 before you decide which duplicate to delete!

Rod

[tarbat]

There are some duplicate IATA codes there too

Airnav, might be worth changing the primary key on the table.  When I originally created the primary keys, I made C3 the primary key, and prevented duplicates.  Suggest we make C2 the primary key, and prevent duplicates, if that's going to be the main use for this table now.

[RodBearden]

I vote for that too - excellent idea, Tarbat.

Rod

[DaveReid]

Airnav, might be worth changing the primary key on the table.  When I originally created the primary keys, I made C3 the primary key, and prevented duplicates.  Suggest we make C2 the primary key, and prevent duplicates, if that's going to be the main use for this table now.

Beware.

Because of the relatively small number of combinations available, IATA have made provision for what they refer to as "controlled duplication" of codes, so you could in theory see the same code used by two small, local airlines on opposite sides of the world or, in some cases, a code used by one passenger carrier and another all-cargo airline.

Having said that, I can't think of any current examples off the top of my head, apart from the aforementioned XM.

It's also true, of course, that many operators have ICAO codes but no IATA code, which might affect the ability to create a PK on C2.

[RodBearden]

Dave - in the case of valid duplicate IATA codes, users are going to have to decide for themselves which logo to show, so forcing them to be unique won't do any harm, unless the logic gets more complex and compares the airline name with the one retrieved from GAS, and that won't always work (chartered aircraft, etc).

Rod

[CoastGuardJon]

more often that not the planners try to hit too many keys at the wrong time

I suffer from the same syndrome - my mate calls it "sausage fingers" - I have to use a stylus (usually a biro) to set my Tom Tom and use the work's mobile.