...have you looked at terminal map? It denotes where the gates are.

It’s so you know what terminal to go to. Before the new security, each of the halls was its own terminal with its own security.

Easier for people to find where they’re going by just looking for the d concourse vs specific gates

Ohhhhh with separate security I could see that helping people out

Yeah, but so does the number. Because that's how a map labeled with numbers/names works. Especially since they're in numerical order down the line.

Absolutely no pilot wants to deal with 'oh...so gate 58 is somewhere in this airport'

Right, and maybe it's just me, but seeing a map that is a line where the numbers go up in order makes it pretty simple to find where 58 is.

It is just you.

🤣🤣🤣🤣I'm sorry I'm bragging about my ability to count in that case

I can't recall ever having been to an airport where the letter/number system is not in place, except for very small airports. Maybe I'm just not remembering

I mean same, but most places I've seen use it as intended, the letter is upper classification, then the number is specific, so both a and b have 1 through 10 or whatever

I know what you’re saying - if there isn’t an A1, B1, and C1, then having the letter isn’t strictly necessary. But the letter is a convenience to get you in the right area to look for the number.

So if you were looking for gate 29, having it be a ten minute walk from gate 28 wouldn’t make a lot of sense. People will understand instinctively that A28 is over here, and B29 is way over there.

Right, but with how simple reagan is, I feel like either the numbers can repeat easily enough, or the map does a pretty good job, as it's just counting upwards basically from one side of the airport to the other

Really I would just prefer the numbers repeating hahaha

Agree with this. I've done plenty of travel in and out of DCA since moving to the area a decade ago. Old system you had to go through security for each terminal, so it was straightforward then and now to remember quickly which part of airport to get to. Particularly with terminal A having a separate entrance from B and C.

With the new security system in place the old system is moot, but having done travel knowing both guides (terminal and gate numbers) is still useful.

DCA is such a small airport… it’s pretty difficult to not be able to find your way around.

They don’t repeat numbers to avoid confusion (Don’t want someone saying ”B1“ and someone hearing D1 or E1).

The letter indicates where you need to go as each arm of the terminal has its own set of letters. If you’re familiar with the airport it helps you know whether you want to enter on the north or south security entrance (which is now more a convenience thing but used to be more of a requirement).

This is common practice at many airports. (Source: I have been on over 50 flights in the past year so I see a lot of airports).

If you're familiar with the airport the number does the exact same thing, and everything is written out and also why we have a phonetic alphabet. I understand those basic "reasons" but each of them is a problem in name only or which has already been fixed capably by maps and Aviation writ large in general. This is why most airports I go to use the basic letter number system, as though it were a file system (a1, A2, b1, b2, etc)

So basically I was asking if there was a greater reason than redundancy for the sake of redundancy itself, someone else brought up the former gate specific security, which would greatly increase the cost of any error

Designating gates with alpha-numeric designations is best practice at airports worldwide.

The previous gate numbering system (only giving gates a number) was confusing to most travelers as it didn't designate which individual pier of the terminal the gate was located in. Adding a letter to the gate number (that corresponds to the concourse where the gate is located) makes much more sense from a wayfinding perspective.

Other airports in the US recently made similar changes within the last few years...SFO comes to mind.

No, I get all that, my question is really about the redundancy, alpha numeric designations are partially very good because they allow for repeated usage of the numbers. So doing both seems unnecessary and I was wondering if there was a specific reason behind that

Probably because it's easier for everyone just to slap on letters to the existing gate numbers.

Keep in mind airport wayfinding isn't just about passengers, but ground/OPS staff and flight crews. Keeping the original numbers intact preserves a degree of familiarity.

I disagree with you. I fly a lot. I can know where 5 different letters are I will not know for certain if 36 is in row C or D unless I know exactly which gate of 60+ gates is in each gate house. 5 letters are much easier to memorize the locations of than 50-80 gates. I don’t look at the map at DCA at all. If they had numbers I’d probably need to, but this system helps it so I can get from the metro to my gate in less than 10 minutes.

It speeds things up and I do not see how it harms anyone beyond trigging OCD aversion in some people.

That's fine, I feel like I said that wrong and implied I was advocating specifically that, I don't get the redundancy, not that I dislike alphanumeric systems