PDA

View Full Version : YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139

Gordon
Nov 7, 2011, 4:20 AM
it will be interesting to see how long Transport Canada takes to act on this, seeing that the government wants to develop the Chinese market and Air Canada is porbably interested in his route. Hopefully we will see a quick approval.

deasine
Nov 7, 2011, 5:48 AM
Additional interest from China *New China-to-Vancouver flights to bring visitors and jobs*
*
*Guangdong- China:***Representatives from China's Sichuan Airlines and the Vancouver Airport Authority have signed a letter of intent with the goal of starting a new three flights a week service to Vancouver in 2012, bringing with it a boost in tourism and new jobs, announced Premier Christy Clark.
*
The Premier met with Zhang Huiyu, Vice General Manager for Sichuan Airlines, and Tony Gugliotta, Senior Vice President Marketing and Business Development for Vancouver Airport Authority in Guangzhou, China as part of her Jobs Trade Mission.*The new service would be the company's first foray into North America.
*
"Expanding markets for B.C. products and services, particularly in Asia, is a*key*pillar of Canada Starts Here: The BC Jobs Plan," said Premier Clark. "Sichuan Airlines' plans to start this new service will provide another way for British Columbian and Chinese businesses and individuals to expand trade, and will create jobs, new personal connections and $50 million in additional tourism-related revenue annually between Canada and China."
*
Before flights can begin, Sichuan Airlines must receive approval from Transport Canada.* Just this year China Southern Airlines started flying passengers and cargo from Guangzhou to YVR.**The new Chengdu - Shenyang - YVR service would generate substantial direct economic benefits to British Columbia, including 31,000 additional visitors to BC annually, and $3.5 million to BC's GDP every year.
*
"Sichuan Airlines, along with its partners, looks forward to increasing the existing trade, business and personal ties between China and Canada by specifically helping to move passengers and cargo between Chengdu, Shenyang and Vancouver," said Zhang Huiyu of Sichuan Airlines.
*
In 2009, China granted Canada Approved Destination Status (ADS) following the visit of Prime Minister Harper to China which allowed tourism operators in both countries to market their destinations to the other country. Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan Province, has a population of over 14 million and is a business, trade and technology centre in southwest China.* Shenyang, the capital of Liaoning Province, has a population of nine million and is an industrial hub in northeast China.* Both cities would be new and important markets for B.C.*
*
"Strengthening our infrastructure to get our goods and services to market is a key pillar of* the BC Jobs Plan and a new service*from China would do that, " said Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Blair Lekstrom. "Adding additional air services from China would enrich our air connection to Asia and increase business possibilities."
*
"Under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the federal government's investments and partnerships in building the Asia-Pacific Gateway continue to strategically position Canada as the corridor of choice between high-growth Asian markets and North America," said the Honourable Ed Fast, Canada's Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia Pacific Gateway who recently returned from a trade mission to China where he promoted Canada's competitive advantages directly to China's political and business leaders.* "We welcome further indications of private sector interest in strengthening Canada's competitive advantages by facilitating the movement of goods, services and people between Canada and China.* Deepening Canada's trading relationship with China creates jobs and prosperity for hardworking British Columbians and all Canadians."
*
"This would be an exciting development for YVR and the province," said Vancouver Airport Authority's Tony Gugliotta. "It demonstrates that B.C. is an attractive destination for Chinese tourists and a favoured partner for new business. It also highlights the importance of Vancouver International Airport as an economic generator for B.C."
*
As part of the BC Jobs Plan, Premier Christy Clark is leading the largest trade mission in the province's history to promote BC as a safe harbour for investment. The Jobs and Trade Mission is focused on strengthening existing relationships between B.C. and Asian markets, opening doors for new relationships and setting the stage for future opportunities in China and India. Delegates from more than 130 companies and organizations are accompanying the Premier as part of the effort to defend and create jobs here at home. Health Minister Mike de Jong will also be accompanying the Premier during her time in India. *
Japan and Hong Kong are also on the jobs and trade mission itinerary. Forests Minister Steve Thomson will travel to Japan and Minister Pat Bell, Jobs, Tourism and Innovation, ends his part of the mission in Hong Kong.
*Quick Facts:*
·*********Chinese visitors spend an average of $1,600 per person when they visit Canada.
·*********Sichuan Airlines operates a fleet of 62 aircraft (including 3 A330-200)*from its main hub in Chengdu.* It has an extensive domestic network and began operating internationally in 2007.* It now operates routes to Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Indonesia, Maldives, Vietnam and the island of Saipan.* This service will be Sichuan's first route to North America.*
·*********The BC Jobs Plan commits the Province to aggressively seek out partnerships with aviation companies to increase flights to the province.
** (Government of British Columbia (http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2009-2013/2011PREM0138-001430.htm) 2011)

Hot Rod
Nov 7, 2011, 9:02 AM
wonderful news on the Chengdu-YVR potential route. Chengdu and Chongqing is exactly where I go when I go to China, and it will be nice to fly non-stop.

I figured this might happen, as Chengdu's Sichuan Airlines is majorly owned by Guangzhou's China Southern - which recently started service and must be doing well.

hollywoodnorth
Nov 8, 2011, 8:26 PM
any idea what aircraft Virgin Atlantic will use to service Vancouver with?

I take it a A340?

Bigtime
Nov 8, 2011, 8:44 PM
any idea what aircraft Virgin Atlantic will use to service Vancouver with?

I take it a A340?

Yup, it will be a A343.

incognism
Nov 8, 2011, 9:58 PM
:previous:

Thank you for the acknowlegment and reinforcement on that point. (A YVR Marketing person gave me those ratings.)

I can only muster an ambiguous response to your question; first, AC could profitably pick up this route, it seems, but will not. Air France is doing well with Seattle and has lost interest in the less business/more tourist YVR market (at least, that's how they perceive it)
Toronto has among the highest landing fees anywhere to help pay for that spanking new airport. They need planes to land and take off from YYZ. This a way of helping pay for the new YYZ.
YUL - Paris is self-sustaining due to the common language and economic link factors and don't seem to funnel off as much western traffic.
Is there a factor here, or it just my imagination?
Anyway, a potential YVR - CDG daily sched is expected to be a market biggie, (say YVR sources) so why is someone not taking it up?
It's overdue, and it doesn't make sense. Paris itself is not only a major destination in itself, but CDG is the most "connected" airport in Europe - an ideal connection point to just about anywhere.

'but 'nobody wan'd it, an' it jist don' make no sense' ...:shrug:

Anyone else ever wondered the same thing, or is it still only me? :koko:

Air Canada flying YVR-CDG doesn't make sense at the moment because there is a dearth of Star Alliance options to connect ex-CDG.

It's the same reason why AC only runs 1x daily YVR-LHR while BA runs 2x daily YVR-LHR during the summer. BA has a lot more connection options for people who are planning to continue into Europe.

FRA is the *A hub for Western Europe and I can't imagine AC adding much more capacity to other European cities ex-YVR.

twoNeurons
Nov 8, 2011, 10:21 PM
Air Canada flying YVR-CDG doesn't make sense at the moment because there is a dearth of Star Alliance options to connect ex-CDG.

It's the same reason why AC only runs 1x daily YVR-LHR while BA runs 2x daily YVR-LHR during the summer. BA has a lot more connection options for people who are planning to continue into Europe.

FRA is the *A hub for Western Europe and I can't imagine AC adding much more capacity to other European cities ex-YVR.

Paris is honestly a market that I see WestJet fitting nicely into. They already have arrangements with Air France and KLM. To be honest, it would be nice to see WestJet expand beyond its 737 roots into more transatlantic flights. I personally think the 787 would have offered WestJet the opportunity to increase both its market share and international presence, but I think there's a definite conservative feel in WestJet, perhaps due to the previous collapse of Canadian Airlines, I don't know.

I know they model their business after SouthWest, but the US is different with multiple flag carriers. Canada has one and I think there's room for two... especially on a country that relies so heavily on air travel for domestic transport.

deasine
Nov 8, 2011, 11:03 PM
Paris is honestly a market that I see WestJet fitting nicely into. They already have arrangements with Air France and KLM. To be honest, it would be nice to see WestJet expand beyond its 737 roots into more transatlantic flights. I personally think the 787 would have offered WestJet the opportunity to increase both its market share and international presence, but I think there's a definite conservative feel in WestJet, perhaps due to the previous collapse of Canadian Airlines, I don't know.

I know they model their business after SouthWest, but the US is different with multiple flag carriers. Canada has one and I think there's room for two... especially on a country that relies so heavily on air travel for domestic transport.

Agreed. Being the only other alternative carrier to the Air Canada Star Alliance founder, WestJet's lack of any alliance allows it to capture business from SkyTeam carriers, OneWorld carriers, and other carriers not already part of an alliance. I, too, would like to see WestJet expand its business, more similar to AirBerlin (more of a "budget" alternative to Lufthansa in Germany), AirAsia and AirAsiaX, or even Alaska Airlines.

Here's a list of current WestJet Partners:

Our code-share partners
American Airlines
Cathay Pacific
KLM

Our interline partners
Air France
Alitalia
British Airways
China Airlines
China Eastern
Delta
Dragonair
EL AL
Emirates
Japan Airlines
Korean Air
QANTAS


As for your idea of flying to CDG from YVR, add in their YYC hub as a stopover (allowing domestic service between YVR-YYC, similar to AC's HKG-YVR-YYZ and SYD-YVR-YYZ routes), and negotiating codeshares with AF, I think it can actually work out.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=YVR-YYC-CDG&MS=bm&MR=900&MX=720x360&PM
YVR-YYC-CDG = 5061 Miles

vanlaw
Nov 8, 2011, 11:36 PM
I, too, would like to see WestJet expand its business, more similar to AirBerlin (more of a "budget" alternative to Lufthansa in Germany), AirAsia and AirAsiaX, or even Alaska Airlines.

I've actaully heard very good things about Air Berlin's summer YVR-DUS flight. Price is decent, and apparleny service/comfort is good. Would be ncie to see WJ do that going the other way.

hollywoodnorth
Nov 9, 2011, 12:01 AM
Yup, it will be a A343.

interesting and thanks! this will be the only A34X operating to YVR correct?

Yume-sama
Nov 9, 2011, 12:11 AM
Lufthansa is currently A343 scheduled, and once in an odd while Cathay Pacific sends one instead of a 772/3 or 744. :)

Actually Cathay seems fairly inconsistent with what ends up in Vancouver lol

Bigtime
Nov 9, 2011, 2:09 AM
I believe Lufthansa goes A346 in the summer to YVR, and switches to the A343 over the winter.

hollywoodnorth
Nov 9, 2011, 2:57 AM
thanks guys!

Gordon
Nov 9, 2011, 5:11 AM
Cathay's 2:30am departure(jfk yvr hkg) is a 744

Cathay's afternoon dep uses what the schedule says is (Eq) equiivalent plane type)

Yume-sama
Nov 9, 2011, 5:25 AM
Cathay's 2:30am departure(jfk yvr hkg) is a 744

Cathay's afternoon dep uses what the schedule says is (Eq) equiivalent plane type)

I wonder how the service differs based on the plane type~ Assuming they don't have a fleetwide standard set of seats for Business on up.

Today's CX889 JFK/YVR/HKG is a 773, tomorrow's says it will be a 772.

CX839 YVR - HKG direct says it is 744 today.

Confusing! Call me crazy but I like to know what plane I'll be flying on before I book :haha: Even down to my type of 737 when flying WestJet. They're different I swear!

s211
Nov 9, 2011, 4:45 PM
As for your idea of flying to CDG from YVR, add in their YYC hub as a stopover (allowing domestic service between YVR-YYC, similar to AC's HKG-YVR-YYZ and SYD-YVR-YYZ routes), and negotiating codeshares with AF, I think it can actually work out.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=YVR-YYC-CDG&MS=bm&MR=900&MX=720x360&PM
YVR-YYC-CDG = 5061 Miles

I don't want to dismiss your idea, but using Calgary as a hub for that flight means that I won't take it. AC's use of Calgary as a hub has hobbled enough other airports already.

If Vancouver can't get a non-stop, then why support Calgary. Tell Calgarians to fly here and connect to Paris.

twoNeurons
Nov 9, 2011, 4:55 PM
I don't want to dismiss your idea, but using Calgary as a hub for that flight means that I won't take it. AC's use of Calgary as a hub has hobbled enough other airports already.

If Vancouver can't get a non-stop, then why support Calgary. Tell Calgarians to fly here and connect to Paris.

Agreed, I don't see the logic in a stopover in Calgary. YVR-YYC has lots of options as it is. Paris should have enough traffic to fill planes from Vancouver, is what I've been hearing here. Nothing against Calgary, I just see a direct flight being more in WestJet's interests as it would differentiate the product from the rest.

MalcolmTucker
Nov 9, 2011, 4:57 PM
Air France if they were smart could edge CargoLux out of the Calgary market with a flight like that. The group already serves Calgary with KLM however.

deasine
Nov 9, 2011, 10:51 PM
I don't want to dismiss your idea, but using Calgary as a hub for that flight means that I won't take it. AC's use of Calgary as a hub has hobbled enough other airports already.

If Vancouver can't get a non-stop, then why support Calgary. Tell Calgarians to fly here and connect to Paris.

Agreed, I don't see the logic in a stopover in Calgary. YVR-YYC has lots of options as it is. Paris should have enough traffic to fill planes from Vancouver, is what I've been hearing here. Nothing against Calgary, I just see a direct flight being more in WestJet's interests as it would differentiate the product from the rest.

To be honest, I don't think there really is enough demand to allow for direct a profitable route between YVR and CDG. If there was, I'm sure AC would have continued operating their YVR-YUL-CDG route but they haven't. Note, they axed the route despite the fact that it increases service between YUL and CDG, which is a very popular route (AF operates an A380 on this route to compete with AC).

The stopover in YYC is also because YYC does not have a direct route to CDG, and YYC is WestJet's homebase and hub. YVR is not considered a hub for WestJet, it's a focus city. For obvious reasons, I wish WestJet used YVR as a hub instead of YYC, but that's not the case.

Canadian carriers have the ability to take advantage of stoping over domestically on an international route and because our market and demand isn't as large as the United States, I think it's better to stop over domestically so that it can pick up additional passengers that otherwise could not have had a direct route.

Keep in mind, I believe one only needs to deplane at YYC on the return leg. So for onward passengers to CDG from YVR, passengers remain on the plane.

SpongeG
Nov 10, 2011, 6:52 AM
Lufthansa sees more flights to Vancouver in its future

Airline executive says German tourists love B.C., so expanded service makes sense

By BRIAN MORTON, Vancouver Sun November 9, 2011

One of the world’s largest airlines has Vancouver high in its expansion plans, but it’s all a matter of timing.

“We now have daily flights here with 350 seats [per aircraft] and Vancouver is always high on our list for more flights,” Don Bunkenburg, Lufthansa’s director of corporate sales and regions, said in an interview Wednesday. “It’s on the drawing board. We could expand in the summer months.

“There’s a lot of tourism demand from Europe to B.C. We bring in Germans, adding to the local economy. We also offer access to Europe and that’s an advantage for the [Vancouver] business traveller.”

Bunkenburg, who made the comment following an address to the Vancouver Board of Trade, said Lufthansa planned to add additional flights to Vancouver three years ago, but it had to be put on hold when an expansion opportunity arose in China.

In his address, Bunkenburg talked about the importance of airlines forming alliances to provide better service for travellers and better access for airlines.

He said Lufthansa, which moved 91 million passengers in 2010, formed the Star Alliance in 1997 with four other airlines including Air Canada. The alliance now has 27 airlines, and moves 604 million passengers a year to 181 countries.

Benefits include more customer benefits, the pooling of frequent flyer points, and more markets.

Bunkenburg noted that Lufthansa, which started flights to Vancouver in 1983, now connects B.C. to the entire world, with more than 80 per cent of the airline’s Canadian passengers connecting beyond Germany to more than 70 countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and South-East Asia.

He said Vancouver’s new Convention Centre is a magnet for conventions and meetings and that Lufthansa’s meetings and incentives program helps bring them to the city.

As well, he said, Lufthansa is the only airline that offers Canadians one-stop service to seven Indian destinations.

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Lufthansa+sees+more+flights+Vancouver+future/5683788/story.html#ixzz1dHbeFhwS

trofirhen
Nov 10, 2011, 9:56 AM
To be honest, I don't think there really is enough demand to allow for direct a profitable route between YVR and CDG. If there was, I'm sure AC would have continued operating their YVR-YUL-CDG route but they haven't. Note, they axed the route despite the fact that it increases service between YUL and CDG, which is a very popular route (AF operates an A380 on this route to compete with AC).

The stopover in YYC is also because YYC does not have a direct route to CDG, and YYC is WestJet's homebase and hub. YVR is not considered a hub for WestJet, it's a focus city. For obvious reasons, I wish WestJet used YVR as a hub instead of YYC, but that's not the case.

Canadian carriers have the ability to take advantage of stoping over domestically on an international route and because our market and demand isn't as large as the United States, I think it's better to stop over domestically so that it can pick up additional passengers that otherwise could not have had a direct route.

Keep in mind, I believe one only needs to deplane at YYC on the return leg. So for onward passengers to CDG from YVR, passengers remain on the plane.
:previous:

Pardon a contradiction to a moderator, but regarding your opening statement, speaking to a marketing official at YVR, I learned that CDG as a destination would probably overtake Amsterdam, possibly even Frankfurt.

I think one of the reasons there seems to be rather little direct traffic YVR - CDG is because people are forced to change; either in Europe at LHR, AMS, and FRA, or in Canada, usually at Toronto, ( a long flight).

Living in Paris, I have met a surprisingly high number of people here who travel to Vancouver on business, tourist, or family reasons - in both directions, and beleive that this market has been grossly underestimated.

In a confidential poll taken in 2010, there was a list of cities to which Vancouverites would like to see a non-stop. Paris came in the absolute leader at 18% followed by Melbourne, Dubai, and Rome, all hovering at around 9% give or take.

Düsseldorf, Zurich, and Osaka were much lower, coming in at about 4%, given a one % margin of error.

I know most people here are more interested in Asia than Europe, for family and econiomic reasons, but the absence of a Vancouver - Paris nonstop leaves "the biggest hole" in YVR's destination roster according to this marketing official.

Even a stopover in Calgary is better than changing planes in Toronto - much shorter.

Regarding Westjet to Paris; would a YVR passenger CHANGE PLANES in Calgary en route to Paris? This seems to be implied, since you mentioned they would stay on the same plane returning to YVR (as though it were different)

At any rate, it beats changing planes in Toronto, which is a musch long flight if you include change-of-plane time (something like 14 hours as opposed to about 9 over the pole)

ACT7
Nov 10, 2011, 7:24 PM
[
As well, he said, Lufthansa is the only airline that offers Canadians one-stop service to seven Indian destinations.

Except that it's not...Air India I'm sure offers one stop service to more than 7 Indian destinations. 9W offers two stop (via BRU). Whether you'd want to fly on Air India is another story though...

twoNeurons
Nov 10, 2011, 8:31 PM
:previous:
Regarding Westjet to Paris; would a YVR passenger CHANGE PLANES in Calgary en route to Paris? This seems to be implied, since you mentioned they would stay on the same plane returning to YVR (as though it were different)

At any rate, it beats changing planes in Toronto, which is a musch long flight if you include change-of-plane time (something like 14 hours as opposed to about 9 over the pole)

Passengers are required to disembark from the plane on the first entry into Canada to go through customs. They then transfer to a domestic flight. The flight changes from international to domestic... thus the change.

The other way, you're making a domestic stop on an international flight and since you obviously don't have to go through customs when flying domestically, the international portion of your flight really starts when you would (in this case) leave Calgary.

In this case, assuming you're on a larger plane for the domestic portion (737s wouldn't make it), WestJet would likely not force a plane change for the second segment as they're not required to.

Not sure how it's done elsewhere, but that's how it's usually done. Not sure about the EU Zone, though. Would a flight stopping in paris be able to continue to Berlin? Maybe.

Also, I'm not sure about YVR, when the destination is the US. I know that pax transitting through YVR don't go through Canada Customs and that flights to the US aren't considered international (you land at domestic terminals) so even if the stopover was in the US, you might not be required to disembark. I'm not sure.

Chikinlittle
Nov 10, 2011, 11:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG
[
As well, he said, Lufthansa is the only airline that offers Canadians one-stop service to seven Indian destinations.

Except that it's not...Air India I'm sure offers one stop service to more than 7 Indian destinations. 9W offers two stop (via BRU). Whether you'd want to fly on Air India is another story though...

Perhaps they meant from Vancouver. Obviously if we're talking about 'Canadians' there are many options from Canada one-stop to many destinations in India. From Toronto, for example, consider Emirates, who last time I counted, offer one-connection service to at least 9 Indian destinations. Or Etihad from Toronto, with service to at least 7 Indian destinations I believe.

deasine
Nov 11, 2011, 12:20 AM
Pardon a contradiction to a moderator, but regarding your opening statement, speaking to a marketing official at YVR, I learned that CDG as a destination would probably overtake Amsterdam, possibly even Frankfurt.

I think one of the reasons there seems to be rather little direct traffic YVR - CDG is because people are forced to change; either in Europe at LHR, AMS, and FRA, or in Canada, usually at Toronto, ( a long flight).

Living in Paris, I have met a surprisingly high number of people here who travel to Vancouver on business, tourist, or family reasons - in both directions, and beleive that this market has been grossly underestimated.

In a confidential poll taken in 2010, there was a list of cities to which Vancouverites would like to see a non-stop. Paris came in the absolute leader at 18% followed by Melbourne, Dubai, and Rome, all hovering at around 9% give or take.

Düsseldorf, Zurich, and Osaka were much lower, coming in at about 4%, given a one % margin of error.

I know most people here are more interested in Asia than Europe, for family and econiomic reasons, but the absence of a Vancouver - Paris nonstop leaves "the biggest hole" in YVR's destination roster according to this marketing official.


There's no problem with disagreeing with a moderator, so feel free to say what you have to say. Moderators are general contributors who just need to enforce the rules whenever it is needed.

I'm curious to see the source of the results. But of the cities you've mentioned, these aren't the top destinations of YVR without a direct flight. Directly from YVR, the airport authority recognizes that the Indian Market (this was found in one of the Vancouver Sun articles in the past) is the largest market without a direct flight. Currently, CI and CX are the main carriers going to India for the Pacific Route, BA being the large carrier for the Atlantic direction. I don't know about Lufthansa as per spongeg's article, but if they were to make a claim such as that, I would think they may be a big choice for some passengers bound for India.

Similar can be said for some areas in Southeast Asia: Philippines (PR runs direct daily route from MNL, using YVR as a stopover onwards to LAS) along with Vietnam. Keep in mind, there are still quite a lot of Filipino and Vietnamese using other carriers including CI, CX, and BR to travel to Canada. Actually, CI's entire existence in YVR is to serve as a transit carrier for passengers. If they only had Taiwanese passengers taking them, YVR would not be a large enough market.

So while I agree, most discussion focus tends to focus on Asia, the reason is because Asian destinations are the largest market for YVR and not Europe. So even if there is a bit of demand for a YVR-CDG route, it's definitely not the largest destination market.

trofirhen
Nov 11, 2011, 1:14 AM
..........................

So while I agree, most discussion focus tends to focus on Asia, the reason is because Asian destinations are the largest market for YVR and not Europe. So even if there is a bit of demand for a YVR-CDG route, it's definitely not the largest destination market.
:previous::previous::previous:

I never said it was THE largest destination market, but it would be (according to YVR) a major destination like SFO, LAX, AMS and such.

Put it another way; it's too big and potentially lucrative a destination to simply bush off. Just ask the marketing department at YVR.

deasine
Nov 11, 2011, 1:21 AM
:previous::previous::previous:

I never said it was THE largest destination market, but it would be (according to YVR) a major destination like SFO, LAX, AMS and such.

Put it another way; it's too big and potentially lucrative a destination to simply bush off. Just ask the marketing department at YVR.

Sorry, I should have not said the "large" market thing. But I still am hesitated to say it's a "large" market that will sustain weekly direct flights. Like I said before, it there was enough demand for CDG as a final destination, AC would have continued operating their YVR-YUL-CDG route, and this picks up passengers at YUL along the way. But obviously, AC felt it was best to feed passengers through YYZ and YUL instead, meaning they didn't have enough passengers to sustain such a route.

ACT7
Nov 11, 2011, 2:22 AM
:previous::previous::previous:

I never said it was THE largest destination market, but it would be (according to YVR) a major destination like SFO, LAX, AMS and such.

Put it another way; it's too big and potentially lucrative a destination to simply bush off. Just ask the marketing department at YVR.
But if that were the case, AC would have likely continued their summer season service to CDG. I don't know that the number of French tourists who visit Vancouver is overly large (approx. 23K in 2010). Besides, tourists are low yield and I don't believe the business traffic is there to support a regular service between YVR and CDG.

jsbertram
Nov 11, 2011, 4:01 AM
Sorry, I should have not said the "large" market thing. But I still am hesitated to say it's a "large" market that will sustain weekly direct flights. Like I said before, it there was enough demand for CDG as a final destination, AC would have continued operating their YVR-YUL-CDG route, and this picks up passengers at YUL along the way. But obviously, AC felt it was best to feed passengers through YYZ and YUL instead, meaning they didn't have enough passengers to sustain such a route.

When booking a flight from YVR to CDG, I'd be less than happy to be sent to Montreal first then on to Paris, when a polar flight from the west coast can be several hours quicker.

I would have thought a Toronto -Montreal -Paris flight would make more sense instead of moving passengers from the west to Montreal before heading to Paris.

Would a YVR-YYC-CDG flight work better for western passengers?

ACT7
Nov 11, 2011, 4:12 AM
I would have thought a Toronto -Montreal -Paris flight would make more sense instead of moving passengers from the west to Montreal before heading to Paris.

Would a YVR-YYC-CDG flight work better for western passengers?

There used to be a YYZ-YMX-CDG flight on AC years and years ago. But YYZ and YUL are large enough, high yeild markets for CDG so there is no need to do a stopover.

YVR and YYC are too low yield for CDG. That's why TS can make that run work reasonably well in the summer.

Hourglass
Nov 11, 2011, 11:13 AM
From what I can see, BA and Lufthansa benefit from strong local tourism demand, business connections and onward traffic from their main hubs (eg India). KLM may not have the tourism or business connections, but it does have Schiphol which is a great transit hub.

Air France lags in all of these things. The business connections and tourist demand to Vancouver don't seem that strong, and CDG is horrible as a transit hub. I'd rather go through Heathrow or Frankfurt (and that's saying something...).

Maybe if Tourism BC started doing more marketing in some of these countries, you might see an uptick in demand, which could in turn result in more non-stops (although tourist traffic is low-yield). As it stands, I'm not sure AF will be serving YVR anytime soon.

trofirhen
Nov 11, 2011, 3:20 PM
Sorry, I should have not said the "large" market thing. But I still am hesitated to say it's a "large" market that will sustain weekly direct flights. Like I said before, it there was enough demand for CDG as a final destination, AC would have continued operating their YVR-YUL-CDG route, and this picks up passengers at YUL along the way. But obviously, AC felt it was best to feed passengers through YYZ and YUL instead, meaning they didn't have enough passengers to sustain such a route.

But if that were the case, AC would have likely continued their summer season service to CDG. I don't know that the number of French tourists who visit Vancouver is overly large (approx. 23K in 2010). Besides, tourists are low yield and I don't believe the business traffic is there to support a regular service between YVR and CDG.

There used to be a YYZ-YMX-CDG flight on AC years and years ago. But YYZ and YUL are large enough, high yeild markets for CDG so there is no need to do a stopover.

YVR and YYC are too low yield for CDG. That's why TS can make that run work reasonably well in the summer.

From what I can see, BA and Lufthansa benefit from strong local tourism demand, business connections and onward traffic from their main hubs (eg India). KLM may not have the tourism or business connections, but it does have Schiphol which is a great transit hub.

Air France lags in all of these things. The business connections and tourist demand to Vancouver don't seem that strong, and CDG is horrible as a transit hub. I'd rather go through Heathrow or Frankfurt (and that's saying something...).

Maybe if Tourism BC started doing more marketing in some of these countries, you might see an uptick in demand, which could in turn result in more non-stops (although tourist traffic is low-yield). As it stands, I'm not sure AF will be serving YVR anytime soon.
:previous::previous::previous::previous::previous:

I'm not going to argue with anybody, but what I cannot understand is the seeming conflict with this group of statements, and with what the marketing department official at YVR told me. I mean ... wouldn't they (YVR) know? Wouldn't they have the stats? Either they got it all wrong, others have it wrong, or I'm imagining what he told me. In any case, it all seems totally out-of whack.

trofirhen
Nov 11, 2011, 3:22 PM
When booking a flight from YVR to CDG, I'd be less than happy to be sent to Montreal first then on to Paris, when a polar flight from the west coast can be several hours quicker.

I would have thought a Toronto -Montreal -Paris flight would make more sense instead of moving passengers from the west to Montreal before heading to Paris.

Would a YVR-YYC-CDG flight work better for western passengers?
:previous:

Sure would ;)

ACT7
Nov 11, 2011, 9:20 PM
Does anyone have any hard numbers on how China Southern's Guangzhou run is doing? Pax loads, etc?

deasine
Nov 11, 2011, 11:44 PM
Air France lags in all of these things. The business connections and tourist demand to Vancouver don't seem that strong, and CDG is horrible as a transit hub. I'd rather go through Heathrow or Frankfurt (and that's saying something...).

CDG is indeed a pretty bad airport. I was absolutely amazed of the lack of space in 2A for my AC flight to YYZ, and was even more amazed to see buses shuttling passengers to their flight for not only my AC flight which uses a 777 aircraft, but also the CX flight which uses a 747! Clearly shows they need more boarding gates.

But meanwhile, Terminal 2E and 2A are like night and day. 2E is wonderful, and while facility wise, it might not be able to compete with the best airports in Asia, it's still a wonderful terminal with great architecture.

I think if you happen to transfer within the same terminal at CDG, and preferably in 2E, it's really not bad at all, the problem of CDG is when you transfer between terminals.

trofirhen
Nov 12, 2011, 12:10 AM
CDG is indeed a pretty bad airport. I was absolutely amazed of the lack of space in 2A for my AC flight to YYZ, and was even more amazed to see buses shuttling passengers to their flight for not only my AC flight which uses a 777 aircraft, but also the CX flight which uses a 747! Clearly shows they need more boarding gates.

But meanwhile, Terminal 2E and 2A are like night and day. 2E is wonderful, and while facility wise, it might not be able to compete with the best airports in Asia, it's still a wonderful terminal with great architecture.

I think if you happen to transfer within the same terminal at CDG, and preferably in 2E, it's really not bad at all, the problem of CDG is when you transfer between terminals.
:previous::previous::previous:

Are you talking about termminal 1 (One), the circular terminal, versus terminal 2, the long terminal with the series of "halls," A,B,C,D,E,F ?

Terminal 2 is a largely contigous building broken into sections, whereas Terminal One, the original CDG oppened in the early 1970s, is a round thing with glass tubes.

Anyway, at CDG, there is now a shuttle train service "CDGval" connecting them, so it's a lot less hassle than when they were using busses. Now, that WAS a real hassle !!

p.s. What's so great about Heathrow, anyway, while we're on the subject. It's a gigantic hodge-podge of terminals all plunked down every which way; overwhelming and confusing; at least I find it so. (and much more expensive to get into central London than CDG is to central Paris)

deasine
Nov 12, 2011, 12:31 AM
:previous::previous::previous:

Are you talking about termminal 1 (One), the circular terminal, versus terminal 2, the long terminal with the series of "halls," A,B,C,D,E,F ?

Terminal 2 is a largely contigous building broken into sections, whereas Terminal One, the original CDG oppened in the early 1970s, is a round thing with glass tubes.

Anyway, at CDG, there is now a shuttle train service "CDGval" connecting them, so it's a lot less hassle than when they were using busses. Now, that WAS a real hassle !!

p.s. What's so great about Heathrow, anyway, while we're on the subject. It's a gigantic hodge-podge of terminals all plunked down every which way; overwhelming and confusing; at least I find it so. (and much more expensive to get into central London than CDG is to central Paris)

I wouldn't consider Terminal 2 as a longly continuous building... it's all separate terminal halls (A/B/C/D/E/F) with an enclosed elevated walkway connecting the terminals together. It takes at least 15 minutes to walk between the different terminals within Terminal 2. The CDGval only connects Terminal 1 and 2 and 3 together, and does not connect the different Terminals within Terminal 2. I haven't been in Terminal 1 before, but I know it has a very unusual and inefficient layout.

LHR isn't really a good airport either (with the exception of IAG's Terminal 5), but I think LHR was a bit better than CDG. Most of the transit activity at LHR occurs within the terminal, with some exceptions to a few passengers on OneWorld transferring onto BA/IB flights. In CDG, AF's flights are distributed across almost all the terminals of Terminal 2, so you are bound to be transferring between terminals.

In terms of handling transfers, honestly, I haven't been in an airport better than HKG to transfer. SIN might be better in terms of facilities, but in terms of logistics, it's much better to have everything under one roof (well HKG now has a satellite terminal for boarding gates, though transfers are still relatively easy).

Yume-sama
Nov 12, 2011, 1:10 AM
HKG might be easiest, but if you have time to kill SIN or NRT are both great for food and shopping. Though, HKG isn't too bad on that end either, I suppose.

My main problem with HKG are the lacklustre Star Alliance lounges lol

I've always heard horror stories about both LHR and CDG! I've not heard if FRA is much better...

Bigtime
Nov 12, 2011, 2:01 AM
I've always had an easy time transiting through FRA. It's just always under construction.

twoNeurons
Nov 12, 2011, 6:39 AM
While we're on the subject of CDG. How long does it take to walk from the CDG TGV Terminal to Terminal 2E? My train into the terminal arrives 2 hours before my flight.

They look like they're right beside each other on the airport map.

Hourglass
Nov 12, 2011, 6:55 AM
While we're on the subject of CDG. How long does it take to walk from the CDG TGV Terminal to Terminal 2E? My train into the terminal arrives 2 hours before my flight.

They look like they're right beside each other on the airport map.


Just did that walk last month, and I'd say roughly 10 minutes or so, depending on how fast you walk... ;)

vanlaw
Nov 12, 2011, 4:58 PM
I've always had an easy time transiting through FRA. It's just always under construction.

The T1 A pier at FRA is getting better w the upgrades but the B pier is quite the s*hole. Food services generally at FRA are brutal though. As mentioned on an earlier post T5 at LHR is great if you are flying BA but if you have to go throuhj T1 or T3 it can be a nightmare and those are nasty too.

incognism
Nov 14, 2011, 5:10 PM
HKG might be easiest, but if you have time to kill SIN or NRT are both great for food and shopping. Though, HKG isn't too bad on that end either, I suppose.

My main problem with HKG are the lacklustre Star Alliance lounges lol

I've always heard horror stories about both LHR and CDG! I've not heard if FRA is much better...

If you're Star Alliance Gold, I would suggest eating at the TG or SQ lounge at HKG and using the showers at the UA lounge. Best of both worlds.

FRA is okay as long as you don't question the layout of the airport. Just follow the signs and you'll end up where you need to be. What gets you in trouble is if you start wondering why the signs are taking you in circles and up and down unnecessary escalators and corridors. ;)

Bigtime
Nov 14, 2011, 5:22 PM
FRA is okay as long as you don't question the layout of the airport. Just follow the signs and you'll end up where you need to be. What gets you in trouble is if you start wondering why the signs are taking you in circles and up and down unnecessary escalators and corridors. ;)

This is very true, never question the Germans and their signage. It will always get you where you need to go! :tup:

Airboy
Nov 14, 2011, 5:51 PM
This is very true, never question the Germans and their signage. It will always get you where you need to go! :tup:

Agreed, with all the walking sometimes it feels like you've walked across the terminal just to get to the other side of the wall.

deasine
Nov 15, 2011, 9:24 PM
Going back to the post about expanding Lufthansa service, I found an article about BA/LH and how they have managed to capture transitting passengers from India to North America.

How Lufthansa and British Airways are competing with Emirates on Indian routes

http://www.airlinetrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Emirates_LH_BA_India_680x364.jpg

13 October 2011 | As the global economy dynamically changes, all major airlines are focusing on the rapidly growing middle class and business markets of the BRICs and the ‘Next 11’ as a new source of growth. According to Boeing’s latest outlook, these emerging economies will collectively occupy over 60 percent of passenger flows by the year 2030.

India

Last month we discussed how Emirates is capitalizing on new passenger flows, for example connecting Asia with Africa and with Latin America via its Dubai hub. A good showcase of the challenge that the rise of Emirates is posing to European legacy carriers is India, since the subcontinent is the second largest market for both British Airways (50 weekly flights to 5 destinations in India) and Lufthansa (52 weekly flights to 7 destinations), after the United States. India is also Emirates’ largest operational market with 185 flights a week to 10 destinations. Says Orhan Abbas, vice president India and Nepal at Emirates, “The Indian market is a very important one for us as Indians have overtaken the British as the single largest tourist group on Emirates.” In the 2010-2011 fiscal year, Emirates’ revenues from India grew 24 per cent to USD1.7 billion, while traffic grew with 10 per cent.

Emirates’ aggressive approach has resulted in significant market shares on international flight routes from India; the airline currently holds 35 per cent on routes from India to Britain, 40 per cent to France, 20 per cent to Germany, and 31 per cent to New York. The airline’s low prices and large network in India make it an attractive option, and on the popular route between India and North America, Gulf airlines such as Emirates are virtually the only practical option for travellers from second-tier Indian cities. A passenger from New York on the way to, for example, Thiruvananthapuram, has to connect twice when flying via Europe (e.g, at Frankfurt and at Delhi), compared to a single connection at Dubai. Besides the large number of Indians working in the Gulf states, “one of the reasons for Emirates’ success is that so many Indians love transiting via Dubai,’’ says Madhav Oza of Blue Star Travels, one of the biggest travel consolidators in Mumbai. “The shopping, easy visas and simply the familiarity with the city often makes them choose it over colder and more congested European hubs like Frankfurt, Paris or Brussels,” he says.

Localization

As part of its strategy to become a truly global-oriented airline, Emirates has built an extensive ‘soft’ infrastructure in-flight, catering to diverse passengers tastes with cabin crew from 130 different nationalities, local food and entertainment. In 2009, Emirates introduced a major revamp of its onboard product to meet regional preferences of India’s diverse populace. For example, on all routes the airline offers passengers the choice of two Indian and one Western dish in all classes. In-flight entertainment providess route-specific boarding music, reading material, and Emirates’ IFE system contains a large selection of programmes and music in varied Indian languages. The airline also introduced local cabin crew on its Indian flights, and as part of the program, over 10,000 crew members received a specially-produced DVD titled ‘Journey through India’ containing an introduction to the country, its diverse customs, and guidelines for interaction with passengers from different Indian states.

Lufthansa, British Airways

In order to retain traffic to and from India, European carriers such as Lufthansa and British Airways are emphasizing their direct routes to Europe, as well as their vast trans-atlantic network (many Indians travel between India and North America). “India is a strategic market for Lufthansa and we foresee tremendous growth coming from this region,” says Lufthansa’s Director South Asia, Axel Hilgers. Lufthansa and BA have also been introducing localized services onboard to cater to Indian passengers and compete on the ‘soft elements’ of the passenger experience as well. In-flight service
Lufthansa employs around 200 cabin crew members from India, who speak the language and are familiar with local customs. According to Werner Heesen, former director South Asia at Lufthansa, research showed that Germans and Indians have different behaviour patterns, be it gestures, vocabulary or softer skills. “We would like our non-Indian crew to know these mannerisms. For example, offering water is one of the basic norms of Indian hospitality. In the West, this doesn’t happen. Also, if the demand of a passenger can’t be met in the West, he’s simply told so. In the East, it would be first explained why the demand can’t be met; there’s a reluctance to say ‘no’ on the face.” British Airways’s international cabin crew from India wear a traditional uniform, designed by leading Indian designer Rohit Bal. Additionally, British Airways cabin crew can converse in more than three languages on India routes, i.e. a typical member from Delhi would be able to converse in Hindi, English and Punjabi.

In-flight dining

Lufthansa serves indian meals in Economy Class and has teamed with Indian chefs from The Leela, a chain of luxury hotels in India, to serve Indian dishes in its premium cabins. The german carrier also offers all passengers a choice of chai (spiced Indian tea) as well as Assam teas, and Asian vegetarian and Hindu meals can be booked preflight. Lufthansa says it also makes sure that cabin crew is aware of local customs. For example, whisky is always served with water, whiletea and coffee are served extra hot. British Airways in 2008 changed the standard two meal options in Economy – beef and pork – with fish pie and chicken to respond to religious restrictions from the Hindu and Muslim communities.

In-flight entertainment

While Bollywood cinema has become par-for-course on the India routes of many major airlines, Lufthansa and British Airways are unique among European airlines in their regional entertainment offerings. Both airlines provide the option of music and movies in both Hindi and Tamil, aimed at their North and South Indian routes, respectively.

Marketing

Lufthansa has also been particularly active in creating marketing initiatives aimed at Indian consumers, tapping into the three great passions in India, food, festivals and cricket. In 2010, the airline organized a fantasy cricket league, while its ‘Flavours of India’ contest asked online users to share their personal Indian food recipes. Another recent campaign is Lufthansa’s A380 Park & Fly game, a set up of large LED screens at malls in Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru that lets shoppers taxi an A380 into a hangar using their own cell phone. A specific target group for both Lufthansa and BA are Indian students that study overseas. BA allows Indian students travelling abroad to check an extra piece of luggage, while Lufthansa has created a microsite aimed at helping students wanting to go abroad. Competition
The growth of India’s middle class and businesses, the large Indian diaspora (over 30 million Indians live abroad), and the financial issues that Indian international carriers such as Air India and Kingfisher continue to face, make the subcontinent an attractive market for international airlines. However, with Emirates’ relentless growth and distinct competitive advantages (low cost structure, Dubai hub, flights to eight of India’s second tier cities), the challenges are mounting on all carriers targeting the Indian market. The competition between Emirates and established airlines such as Lufthansa and British Airways for Indian travellers is a good example of how airlines, besides their network, are wooing a new and much more diverse passenger base. Special thanks to Vivek Mayasandra for co-writing this article

(Airline Trends (http://www.airlinetrends.com/2011/10/13/lufthansa-britishairways-emirates-india/), 2011)

Yume-sama
Nov 15, 2011, 11:47 PM
lol Air Canada's default vegetarian meal on all International flights is some microwaved instant chickpea curry. In economy or executive first~

Maybe other airlines provide more edible Indian cuisine...

whatnext
Dec 5, 2011, 12:21 AM
My crappy mobile pic of the fist Jazz Dash-8 I've seen in Air Canada Express colours at YVR's C pier:

http://i789.photobucket.com/albums/yy177/Whatnext2010/Jazz.jpg

Denscity
Dec 5, 2011, 2:15 AM
:previous: We've had a couple of those newly painted dash 8's land here in Castlegar in the last couple of weeks.

Johnny Aussie
Dec 16, 2011, 2:17 AM
Slight increase effective 30 April 2012.

Daily service seeing a 777-200ER replacing the MD11.

Gives an additional ~ 25 seats per day.

Spikester
Dec 17, 2011, 9:14 AM
Slight increase effective 30 April 2012.

Daily service seeing a 777-200ER replacing the MD11.

Gives an additional ~ 25 seats per day.

Welcome news. I make that run a few times each year; I'm reading this at Schiphol awaiting my return flight this afternoon (on an A332 this time of year). I won't miss those Mad Dog rattletraps at all.

trofirhen
Dec 17, 2011, 11:38 AM
Slight increase effective 30 April 2012.

Daily service seeing a 777-200ER replacing the MD11.

Gives an additional ~ 25 seats per day.

Welcome news. I make that run a few times each year; I'm reading this at Schiphol awaiting my return flight this afternoon (on an A332 this time of year). I won't miss those Mad Dog rattletraps at all.
:previous::previous::previous:

Hey yeah. Weren't there several accidents a number of years back when an engine would tear loose, or such? I could never understand why KLM kept them for so long ($$$ like everthing else, no doubt)

SpongeG
Dec 17, 2011, 5:51 PM
i hear they are going to put an aLoft hotel near the templeton station

its like an offshoot of W hotel

deasine
Dec 18, 2011, 12:06 AM
i hear they are going to put an aLoft hotel near the templeton station

its like an offshoot of W hotel

Source? I find it a little bit bizarre given that they have a Westin across the river in Richmond. Then again, Starwood seems to have a big dominance in hotels in Vancouver, all we are missing are their high end offerings.

On a related but off-topic note, Starwood is planning to open Canada's first elements hotel in Vancouver.

Canada’s First Element Hotel Breaks Ground in Vancouver
October 3, 2011

On hand for Element’s groundbreaking were (left to right) developers Colin and Dale Bosa; Burnaby mayor Derek Corrigan; and Scott Duff, Starwood’s senior director, development.

Bosa Properties has broken ground, in Vancouver, on Canada’s first Element Hotel, Starwood Hotels & Resorts’s eco-conscious brand.

Set to open in 2014, Element Vancouver Metrotown will be managed by Atlific Hotels and will feature 169 guestrooms and suites.

In addition, the property will offer complimentary wellness programmes and healthy food options.

For instance, Rise, Element’s daily complimentary breakfast buffet, will include low-fat breakfast wraps and fruit smoothies. Guests will have access to a 28,000-sq.-ft. fitness facility right next door.

For business, Element Vancouver Metrotown will boast 5,500 sq. ft. of flexible meeting space, featuring modular furnishings and up-to-date technology, including a 50-inch flat-panel TV, easy-access power outlets and free WiFi.

Element was the first major hotel brand to mandate that all its properties pursue LEED certification. Nine Element hotels operate in North America.

Visit their site

(via Meetings + Incentive Travel (http://www.meetingscanada.com/content/canadas-first-element-hotel-breaks-ground-in-vancouver-23132))

SpongeG
Dec 18, 2011, 12:27 AM
source - my friend was telling me - he always stays at aLoft in portland and usually the w or westin in seattle when they go down which is every few weeks it seems

usog
Dec 21, 2011, 6:22 PM
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-21/all-nippon-to-begin-787-flights-to-seattle-san-jose-in-fy2012.html
Ahawow, any reason why ANA never flies to Vancouver?

Yume-sama
Dec 21, 2011, 6:51 PM
ANA has no service to Canada, because Air Canada funnels traffic to them for domestic / regional connections without ANA having to spend a yen :P

With the exception of the 787 (which AC will have soon, anyways) ANA isn't all that nice of an airline, to be honest.

I flew with them from KIX - HKG - HND last month and wasn't impressed with... anything. Only did it to make sure I'm still Star Alliance Gold next year~

trofirhen
Dec 21, 2011, 6:52 PM
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-21/all-nippon-to-begin-787-flights-to-seattle-san-jose-in-fy2012.html
Ahawow, any reason why ANA never flies to Vancouver?
:previous:

I suppose the powers that be think it unecessary. Despite howls to the contrary, Seattle is a bigger city than Vancouver with a larger, more important economy.

Maybe that's the reason why (according to the SEA-TAC website) Seattle now has ANA, plus AIR FRANCE, plus Soon EMIRATES, as well as ROYAL AIR MAROC to Casablanca via New York.

Puff, strut, fix its makeup as it does, YVR will be outstripped on overseas routes within ten years or less, I'll wager, and a number of Vancouver passengers will have to connect in Seattle to go overseas.

twoNeurons
Dec 21, 2011, 7:03 PM
ANA has no service to Canada, because Air Canada funnels traffic to them for domestic connections without ANA having to spend a yen :P

With the exception of the 787 (which AC will have soon, anyways) ANA isn't all that nice of an airline, to be honest.

I flew with them from KIX - HKG - HND last month and wasn't impressed with... anything. Only did it to make sure I'm still Star Alliance Gold next year~

Really? I've always had pretty good service with them. One time we were flying coach and the whole plane was setup as business class between KIX - HND.

Perhaps I've flown on them less than you have.

Yume-sama
Dec 21, 2011, 7:07 PM
Well, they are an OK airline. Very "basic" I would say compared to say, a Singapore Airlines. I only flew business class, and their lounge in KIX is atrocious. The interiors of the planes are a bit drab, even though they are relatively new. Actually, I've heard complaints (never seen it myself) that the 787 interior could have been a lot better. It's nothing like the Boeing mockups that looked so futuristic lol

As far as interiors / business or first class service go, I'd have to say JAL beats them. Of course, not on the old plane they send to YVR :P

But what good are OneWorld Alliance points in North America!

Bigtime
Dec 21, 2011, 7:21 PM
Well, they are an OK airline. Very "basic" I would say compared to say, a Singapore Airlines. I only flew business class, and their lounge in KIX is atrocious. The interiors of the planes are a bit drab, even though they are relatively new. Actually, I've heard complaints (never seen it myself) that the 787 interior could have been a lot better. It's nothing like the Boeing mockups that looked so futuristic lol

As far as interiors / business or first class service go, I'd have to say JAL beats them. Of course, not on the old plane they send to YVR :P

But what good are OneWorld Alliance points in North America!

That's a pretty common thing to happen, both Boeing and Airbus mockup the interiors of their new aircraft with these amazing designs but in the end it all comes down to making as much money as possible for the airlines. So you hardly ever see anything like it in reality.

usog
Dec 21, 2011, 7:53 PM
I only fly economy and ANA has been pretty good to me. Better than Air Canada and much better than United so far. JAL in economy is also pretty bad lol. Also is there no demand at all for KIX-YVR or what?

twoNeurons
Dec 21, 2011, 8:24 PM
Well, they are an OK airline. Very "basic" I would say compared to say, a Singapore Airlines. I only flew business class, and their lounge in KIX is atrocious. The interiors of the planes are a bit drab, even though they are relatively new. Actually, I've heard complaints (never seen it myself) that the 787 interior could have been a lot better. It's nothing like the Boeing mockups that looked so futuristic lol

As far as interiors / business or first class service go, I'd have to say JAL beats them. Of course, not on the old plane they send to YVR :P

But what good are OneWorld Alliance points in North America!

That makes, sense. You and I have totally different flyer profiles, ha! While I'm holed up in cattle class impressed by an extra 3cm of elbow room and working media systems, you're up in business class sipping champagne and noting that you don't like the hue of the curtain that separates sections. :D

Of course, I'm half kidding, but yea... you're definitely in a better position to evaluate the upper end of the market offerings.

usog, don't get me started on KIX - YVR. There used to be one. I can kind of understand why there's no connection, but it doesn't make me feel any better. The flights were always full, I heard. It's just about the distance and the costs of running a 767 there. There's problems in Japan with the economy. In the Osaka area, they are supposed to be consolidating Kobe, Itami and KIX under the same ownership. It's a bit of a mess there. It would be nice to see KIX actually used to its potential. It's a gorgeous airport, architecturally.

Delta started up direct SEA - KIX flights last year. ANA's flight to Seattle will be NAR - SEA.

Yume-sama
Dec 21, 2011, 8:29 PM
I only fly economy and ANA has been pretty good to me. Better than Air Canada and much better than United so far. JAL in economy is also pretty bad lol. Also is there no demand at all for KIX-YVR or what?

Ironically, it seems the bigger the plane the more uncomfortable their economy section is. The 747 & 777 tend to be uncomfortable, and people prefer the 767.

Similarly, I find AC's Embraer planes more comfortable than any of their smaller Airbus'

That makes, sense. You and I have totally different flyer profiles, ha! While I'm holed up in cattle class impressed by an extra 3cm of elbow room and working media systems, you're up in business class sipping champagne and noting that you don't like the hue of the curtain that separates sections. :D

Definitely chuckled at that. What an offensive shade! :haha:

ACT7
Dec 22, 2011, 6:29 PM
November pax numbers are in for YVR and overall it's been pretty anemic growth, coming in at just over 1% YoY.

http://www.yvr.ca/Libraries/Facts_and_Stats/November_2011_Passenger.sflb.ashx


What's troubling is that YVR hasn't fully recovered it's pax numbers from as far back as 2006 (although it will likely achieve that this year) and it's way off its peak of 17.8 MM in 2008.
Canada's remaining big 3 have all surpassed their 2008 peaks, although YYC is marginal. As of last year YYZ was also off from its 2008 peak but will surpass that this year. So any growth for YVR right now is mostly recovery of passengers from 5 years ago.

Maybe Sea-Tac really is funnelling passengers away from YVR.

twoNeurons
Dec 22, 2011, 6:30 PM
Ironically, it seems the bigger the plane the more uncomfortable their economy section is. The 747 & 777 tend to be uncomfortable, and people prefer the 767.


The only exception I have found for that rule is the 747s that JAL used to use from Vancouver. The whole plane (at least when I flew) was economy, including the upper deck.

The upper deck was like being in a small plane and having the front window seat meant you have a cavernous space in front and a shelf to the side where the fuselage curves.

Bigtime
Dec 22, 2011, 7:12 PM
The only exception I have found for that rule is the 747s that JAL used to use from Vancouver. The whole plane (at least when I flew) was economy, including the upper deck.

The upper deck was like being in a small plane and having the front window seat meant you have a cavernous space in front and a shelf to the side where the fuselage curves.

Interesting, that sounds a lot like the 747D models that only operated in Japan in the all economy class configuration. I think ANA still has a couple of them in service.

s211
Dec 22, 2011, 7:19 PM
Maybe Sea-Tac really is funnelling passengers away from YVR.

And/or Bellingham also?

I wonder about Abbotsford also, to a limited extent.

Bigtime
Dec 22, 2011, 7:27 PM
Abbotsford pax numbers have been dropping over the last few years.

ACT7
Dec 22, 2011, 7:47 PM
Abbotsford pax numbers have been dropping over the last few years.
Yah, I'd be surprised about YXX too.

Bigtime
Dec 22, 2011, 7:54 PM
Yah, I'd be surprised about YXX too.

I actually grabbed a copy of Airways magazine (the January 2012 issue) and they have a writeup on Abbotsford, they also show the last 4 years of pax numbers and you can see the drop from above 500,000 to mid 400,000 now. Someone from YXX was talking in the article about getting a direct flight to India, um yeah ok.

twoNeurons
Dec 22, 2011, 9:28 PM
Anyone know how much BLI's numbers are up?

ACT7
Dec 22, 2011, 9:33 PM
I actually grabbed a copy of Airways magazine (the January 2012 issue) and they have a writeup on Abbotsford, they also show the last 4 years of pax numbers and you can see the drop from above 500,000 to mid 400,000 now. Someone from YXX was talking in the article about getting a direct flight to India, um yeah ok.
I think I saw that article too. Amritsar was specifically the Indian city that was mentioned. Considering YYZ is the only city in NA with an Amritsar connection (with a stop in DEL), I would say I have a better chance of winning tonight's Lotto Max than YXX getting that flight. It may have come from a different article, but I think I read that either China or Korea was also on YXX's list of desired future destinations.

Bigtime
Dec 22, 2011, 9:34 PM
I think I saw that article too. Amritsar was specifically the Indian city that was mentioned. Considering YYZ is the only city in NA with an Amritsar connection (with a stop in DEL), I would say I have a better chance of winning tonight's Lotto Max than YXX getting that flight. It may have come from a different article, but I think I read that either China or Korea was also on YXX's list of desired future destinations.

You're right, they did specifically mention Amritsar and China. I guess if you shoot for that and get a flight to Edmonton or something you are winning right? ;)

ACT7
Dec 22, 2011, 9:44 PM
You're right, they did specifically mention Amritsar and China. I guess if you shoot for that and get a flight to Edmonton or something you are winning right? ;)
That's one way to look at it...

s211
Dec 22, 2011, 9:45 PM
Abbotsford pax numbers have been dropping over the last few years.

Interesting, as the airlines seem to be pushing it. I seem to recall being on the Westjet website to look at travel out of YVR, and there's typically a banner proclaiming "did you know you could also depart out of Abbotsford" or something along those lines.

Bigtime
Dec 22, 2011, 9:57 PM
Interesting, as the airlines seem to be pushing it. I seem to recall being on the Westjet website to look at travel out of YVR, and there's typically a banner proclaiming "did you know you could also depart out of Abbotsford" or something along those lines.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only scheduled major carrier is Westjet with flights to YYC and YEG. There appear to be smaller operators (Orca Airways, Island Express Air) and the tour operators to sun destinations (Transat, Canjet).

ACT7
Dec 22, 2011, 10:02 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the only scheduled major carrier is Westjet with flights to YYC and YEG. There appear to be smaller operators (Orca Airways, Island Express Air) and the tour operators to sun destinations (Transat, Canjet).
That sounds right. YXX is not a factor in YVR's pax numbers. The decline seems to either exclusively be choosing to fly out of Bellingham or Seattle, or simply just natural demand.

teriyaki
Dec 23, 2011, 4:53 AM
That sounds right. YXX is not a factor in YVR's pax numbers. The decline seems to either exclusively be choosing to fly out of Bellingham or Seattle, or simply just natural demand.

+1 Never heard anyone choosing abbotsford over YVR, but I have heard a lot of cases where people drive down to BLI or SEA for a flight.

In related news. ANA has just announced a new route from Tokyo (NRT) to Seattle (SEA).
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-21/all-nippon-to-begin-787-flights-to-seattle-san-jose-in-fy2012.html

With JAL flights downgrading from full 747 to 777 to 767, this is kind of sad news since ANA won't be flying to YVR anytime soon with their planned service to Seattle now.

usog
Dec 23, 2011, 7:30 AM
I honestly don't think I've ever seen flights from Abbotsford advertised anywhere.

trofirhen
Dec 23, 2011, 7:46 AM
Would it be a good idea or not to upgrade and expand YXX - on a moderate level - to act as a backup for Vancouver in case of any problems: security, thick fog (messes up radars) or such?

SpongeG
Dec 23, 2011, 7:55 AM
westjet advertisez them - mostly in the suburban newspapers and areas perhaps

SpongeG
Dec 23, 2011, 7:56 AM
Would it be a good idea or not to upgrade and expand YXX - on a moderate level - to act as a backup for Vancouver in case of any problems: security, thick fog (messes up radars) or such?

it has been expanded and upgraded in the recent years - they have a plan/goal they are following

Bigtime
Dec 23, 2011, 1:49 PM
Would it be a good idea or not to upgrade and expand YXX - on a moderate level - to act as a backup for Vancouver in case of any problems: security, thick fog (messes up radars) or such?

I remember back in the early 2000's YVR was fogged right in and YYC got a bulk of the diversions. Most of them being Asia flights that couldn't land. From a standpoint of facilities and security it would be hard to beat YYC as a relatively close backup for those rare occasions?

Gordon
Dec 23, 2011, 3:39 PM
I don't think fog is nearlly the problem that it used to be, because the North runway is a category 3 runway , this means that planes can land in close to 0 visibility.

trofirhen
Dec 23, 2011, 4:04 PM
ANA has no service to Canada, because Air Canada funnels traffic to them for domestic / regional connections without ANA having to spend a yen :P

With the exception of the 787 (which AC will have soon, anyways) ANA isn't all that nice of an airline, to be honest.

I flew with them from KIX - HKG - HND last month and wasn't impressed with... anything. Only did it to make sure I'm still Star Alliance Gold next year~

Well, they are an OK airline. Very "basic" I would say compared to say, a Singapore Airlines. I only flew business class, and their lounge in KIX is atrocious. The interiors of the planes are a bit drab, even though they are relatively new. Actually, I've heard complaints (never seen it myself) that the 787 interior could have been a lot better. It's nothing like the Boeing mockups that looked so futuristic lol

As far as interiors / business or first class service go, I'd have to say JAL beats them. Of course, not on the old plane they send to YVR :P

But what good are OneWorld Alliance points in North America!
:previous::previous::previous:

Be that as it may, ANA will soon start flying Boeing 787s into both Seattle and San Jose in 2012 ..... as the sun slowly sets on YVR (heck, even Brisbane and Oslo have higher pax ## than we do. (Ha, they might start flying 787s from Toronto to Japan pretty soon ... wouldn't surprise me if some Asian airline did, anyway .....)

PaperTiger
Dec 23, 2011, 5:24 PM
JeeZus you guys,

The sky is not falling on YVR. We are still posting growth, 1.3% year on year, even if it is modest. Have you forgotten the addition of China Southern and Virgin Atlantic? Air Sichuan has announced, and we all know that the 787's will eventually lead to some kind of direct India connection.

Incidentally, does anyone know how much Sea-Tac grew year on year. ... 1%same as us.

trofirhen
Dec 23, 2011, 6:40 PM
JeeZus you guys,

The sky is not falling on YVR. We are still posting growth, 1.3% year on year, even if it is modest. Have you forgotten the addition of China Southern and Virgin Atlantic? Air Sichuan has announced, and we all know that the 787's will eventually lead to some kind of direct India connection.

Incidentally, does anyone know how much Sea-Tac grew year on year. ... 1%same as us.
:previous:
I won't contradict in any way, but it seems to me that they are overtaking YVR on International (non-transborder) destinations. Perhaps more of their growth is dometic; I don't know. But you can now (or will soon be able to) get to important places from SEA-TAC that you can't from Vancouver.
Then again, in all fairness, Seattle has 1m more people metro, and is a larger business market, with its major corporations anchored there.

PaperTiger
Dec 23, 2011, 9:31 PM
International Destinations that Seattle has that we don’t:
Osaka, Paris, Reykjavik, Dubai.

International Destinations that Vancouver has that Seattle doesn’t:
Hong Kong, Manila, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Mexico City.

I still say we are doing fine.

trofirhen
Dec 23, 2011, 11:24 PM
International Destinations that Seattle has that we don’t:
Osaka, Paris, Reykjavik, Dubai.

International Destinations that Vancouver has that Seattle doesn’t:
Hong Kong, Manila, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Mexico City.

I still say we are doing fine.
:previous::previous::previous:
OK ... but Mexico City? Seattle has that and Guadalajara, too, according
to the SEA-TAC website.

incognism
Dec 23, 2011, 11:58 PM
:previous::previous::previous:
OK ... but Mexico City? Seattle has that and Guadalajara, too, according
to the SEA-TAC website.

Aeromexico used to operate Seattle-Mexico City nonstop but that's been pulled from schedule for a while now.

Not sure about GDL but AS operates one stop service to GDL from SEA (via SJC and SMF). No current non-stops loaded into schedule.

trofirhen
Dec 24, 2011, 5:27 AM
Aeromexico used to operate Seattle-Mexico City nonstop but that's been pulled from schedule for a while now.

Not sure about GDL but AS operates one stop service to GDL from SEA (via SJC and SMF). No current non-stops loaded into schedule.
:previous:

Thanks for that info. Nevertheless, I'd like to see a couple more major desinations from Vancouver. Somehing to make us ito a true air hub. That may or may never happen; only time - and a less tight-assed federal transport commission, will tell.

The USA is signing numerous bilaterals, while timid, protectionist (it's in their DNA, it seems) Canadian authorities hobble this country - except Toronto, of course.

Rusty Gull
Dec 24, 2011, 7:17 AM
International Destinations that Seattle has that we don’t:
Osaka, Paris, Reykjavik, Dubai.

International Destinations that Vancouver has that Seattle doesn’t:
Hong Kong, Manila, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Mexico City.

I still say we are doing fine.

Don't get me started on Osaka OR Dubai. Don't get others on this forum started on Paris.

I say Seattle IS a threat to YVR - especially if Bellingham's airport gets more carriers connecting to Seattle's long-haul flights. Of course, much of this is due to AC's obsession with bolstering YYZ. :koko:

trofirhen
Dec 24, 2011, 3:29 PM
Don't get me started on Osaka OR Dubai. Don't get others on this forum started on Paris.

I say Seattle IS a threat to YVR - especially if Bellingham's airport gets more carriers connecting to Seattle's long-haul flights. Of course, much of this is due to AC's obsession with bolstering YYZ. :koko:
:previous::previous::previous:

Thank you again, Rusty! My interpretation of the situation exactly !

ACT7
Dec 24, 2011, 5:44 PM
JeeZus you guys,

The sky is not falling on YVR. We are still posting growth, 1.3% year on year, even if it is modest. Have you forgotten the addition of China Southern and Virgin Atlantic? Air Sichuan has announced, and we all know that the 787's will eventually lead to some kind of direct India connection.

Incidentally, does anyone know how much Sea-Tac grew year on year. ... 1%same as us.
True, but as I mentioned before, YVR's growth in for the past 5 years has been recovery of pax, whereas nearby airports have actually grown. Over the years, even AC has scaled back its Asian operations from YVR. AC 007 to HKG begins and ends in YYZ some days of the week now.

trofirhen
Dec 29, 2011, 12:44 AM
Now that Evil Emirates is flying to Seattle, that the Vancouver - India runs should start as soon as the Boeing 787s arrive, that still leaves a question, or perhaps opportunity open for destinations in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and many in Africa.

What about - laugh or scorn this out as you may - Istanbul as a destination? It makes a perfect transit point for the places mentioned, and Turkish Airlines is expanding fast.

I guess it comes back to the Vancouver market being too small, without the large % of business class tickets needed to make such a route viable.

twoNeurons
Dec 29, 2011, 7:15 AM
+1 Never heard anyone choosing abbotsford over YVR, but I have heard a lot of cases where people drive down to BLI or SEA for a flight.


Yes, YXX loses a considerable amount of US traffic to BLI. However, many in the Fraser Valley, especially Langley to Hope, choose YXX over YVR for domestic flights to Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto etc.

It's much more convenient for them not to have to go into the city and parking is cheaper.

That's also a big PLUS BLI has. Parking is cheap, convenient and relatively painless... even for Vancouverites. It may siphon off some of the low end of the market for US flights from YVR.

Istanbul would be a GREAT destination to have. I see it more of a vacation/charter place at first, though.

I can't wait to see how the 787 shakes up the industry... and how much of an effect it will have. I wonder if it (and other planes to follow) will have the similar effect that long range jets had on the market, opening up more destinations, without the need for multiple transfers.

Time will tell.

trofirhen
Dec 29, 2011, 8:36 AM
+1 Never heard anyone choosing abbotsford over YVR, but I have heard a lot of cases where people drive down to BLI or SEA for a flight.

In related news. ANA has just announced a new route from Tokyo (NRT) to Seattle (SEA).
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-21/all-nippon-to-begin-787-flights-to-seattle-san-jose-in-fy2012.html

With JAL flights downgrading from full 747 to 777 to 767, this is kind of sad news since ANA won't be flying to YVR anytime soon with their planned service to Seattle now.

Don't get me started on Osaka OR Dubai. Don't get others on this forum started on Paris.

I say Seattle IS a threat to YVR - especially if Bellingham's airport gets more carriers connecting to Seattle's long-haul flights. Of course, much of this is due to AC's obsession with bolstering YYZ. :koko:

True, but as I mentioned before, YVR's growth in for the past 5 years has been recovery of pax, whereas nearby airports have actually grown. Over the years, even AC has scaled back its Asian operations from YVR. AC 007 to HKG begins and ends in YYZ some days of the week now.

Yes, YXX loses a considerable amount of US traffic to BLI. However, many in the Fraser Valley, especially Langley to Hope, choose YXX over YVR for domestic flights to Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto etc.

It's much more convenient for them not to have to go into the city and parking is cheaper.

That's also a big PLUS BLI has. Parking is cheap, convenient and relatively painless... even for Vancouverites. It may siphon off some of the low end of the market for US flights from YVR.

Istanbul would be a GREAT destination to have. I see it more of a vacation/charter place at first, though.

I can't wait to see how the 787 shakes up the industry... and how much of an effect it will have. I wonder if it (and other planes to follow) will have the similar effect that long range jets had on the market, opening up more destinations, without the need for multiple transfers.

Time will tell.
:previous::previous::previous:

Sorry to sound alarmist, but it would seem YVR needs several new strategic overseas destinations FAST!

Too bad we have neither the business class market (yet) to attain a profitable yield factor, and that despite all the talk, the Federal Transport Ministry still coddles AC and forces changing planes at YYZ, whenever possible.

incognism
Dec 29, 2011, 9:33 PM
:previous::previous::previous:

Sorry to sound alarmist, but it would seem YVR needs several new strategic overseas destinations FAST!

Too bad we have neither the business class market (yet) to attain a profitable yield factor, and that despite all the talk, the Federal Transport Ministry still coddles AC and forces changing planes at YYZ, whenever possible.

While I do agree that the government has been quite protectionist with AC (the whole Emirates debacle), AC in the end is still a business that (tries) to make money.

If the load factors were there to justify direct flights from YVR, I assume they would position themselves to take advantage of that. Right now, everything goes through YYZ because it is necessary.

SpongeG
Dec 29, 2011, 10:23 PM
i wonder if people in kansas city sit around and bitch about how new york gets all the flights and they get shafted