It SUX to be This Iowa Airport?
BNaylor
10-26-2007, 05:45 PM
Here is an interesting off-beat story. I've never been there but I never knew the airport designator code for the Sioux City, Iowa airport was SUX. :eek:
"Fly SUX" :lol:
AP
9:06 p.m. MT Oct 22, 2007
SIOUX CITY, Iowa - City leaders have scrapped plans to do away with the Sioux Gateway Airport’s unflattering three-letter identifier — SUX — and instead have made it the centerpiece of the airport’s new marketing campaign.
The code, used by pilots and airports worldwide and printed on tickets and luggage tags, will be used on T-shirts and caps sporting the airport’s new slogan, “FLY SUX.” It also forms the address of the airport’s redesigned Web site — www.flysux.com.
Sioux City officials petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration to change the code in 1988 and 2002. At one point, the FAA offered the city five alternatives — GWU, GYO, GYT, SGV and GAY — but airport trustees turned them down.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21428411/
"Fly SUX" :lol:
AP
9:06 p.m. MT Oct 22, 2007
SIOUX CITY, Iowa - City leaders have scrapped plans to do away with the Sioux Gateway Airport’s unflattering three-letter identifier — SUX — and instead have made it the centerpiece of the airport’s new marketing campaign.
The code, used by pilots and airports worldwide and printed on tickets and luggage tags, will be used on T-shirts and caps sporting the airport’s new slogan, “FLY SUX.” It also forms the address of the airport’s redesigned Web site — www.flysux.com.
Sioux City officials petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration to change the code in 1988 and 2002. At one point, the FAA offered the city five alternatives — GWU, GYO, GYT, SGV and GAY — but airport trustees turned them down.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21428411/
fredjacksonsan
10-29-2007, 04:49 AM
:lol2:
Hey, good for them! If they can't get it changed (insert argument here about them being offered new city codes but turning them down) then they should go with it!!
Hey, good for them! If they can't get it changed (insert argument here about them being offered new city codes but turning them down) then they should go with it!!
BNaylor
10-29-2007, 10:02 AM
I agree. Make the best of it. The part I was trying to figure out is why would the FAA offer other designators that were questionable. No wonder the trustees turned them down. Especially the GAY one. It turns out the name of the airport is Sioux Gateway Airport but you'd figure the FAA would have some common sense about it. :screwy:
VR43000GT
10-29-2007, 02:03 PM
:lol:
fredjacksonsan
10-29-2007, 03:07 PM
I agree. Make the best of it. The part I was trying to figure out is why would the FAA offer other designators that were questionable. No wonder the trustees turned them down. Especially the GAY one. It turns out the name of the airport is Sioux Gateway Airport but you'd figure the FAA would have some common sense about it. :screwy:
At the basic level, the FAA is currently a government agency. They were simply slavishly obeying the format for creating airport codes when they put out the 3-letter identifiers.
I'm sure that when the airport was first named, "SUX" did not have a negative connotation like it does today.
At the basic level, the FAA is currently a government agency. They were simply slavishly obeying the format for creating airport codes when they put out the 3-letter identifiers.
I'm sure that when the airport was first named, "SUX" did not have a negative connotation like it does today.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025