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] 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143

lubicon
Sep 9, 2016, 8:44 PM
the fares on the new Air Canada yvr DFW service is $657 canadian #200 more thatn flying out of seattle

Is that base fare only or after adding in all taxes and fees?

LeftCoaster
Sep 9, 2016, 9:15 PM
That's all in, taxes and fees.

Still cheaper than flying AA though, their flights seem to be consistently around $800.

casper
Sep 9, 2016, 9:18 PM
the fares on the new Air Canada yvr DFW service is $657 canadian #200 more thatn flying out of seattle

US Immigration fees, US Agriculture Inspection Fees, 9-11 fees, etc. Will all be lower or non-existent on a domestic flight. I would be surprised if SEA were not cheaper.

That said, these comparison are hard to make, because all these seats go up in price on a give flight as the aircraft fills up. Yield management makes it hard to compare other than of a specific day at a specific time.

LeftCoaster
Sep 9, 2016, 9:47 PM
Vancitybuzz or the Hive or whatever we're calling it these days had a good write-up on the upcomming YVR expansion:

Some key points are:

they are recommending the centre option (no surprise)
the N/S taxiway is still in the plans but not needed yet
3rd runway likely required by 2037
Canada Line station is having crowding issues so a 'Spanish Solution' platform may be needed
Templeton-Grant McConachie Way intersection will likely become an interchange
replacement of the two-lane Dinsmore Bridge between Sea Island and Richmond


Mainly stuff we already know from the engagement materials but synthesized in a more concise article.


http://images.dailyhive.com/20160908155637/YVR-Airport-Recommended-Terminal-Configuration-copy.jpg
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-international-airport-expansion-masterplan

Johnny Aussie
Sep 9, 2016, 10:09 PM
Vancitybuzz or the Hive or whatever we're calling it these days had a good write-up on the upcomming YVR expansion:

Some key points are:

they are recommending the centre option (no surprise)


Sounds like this is THE option that has been selected. And forward we go!

trofirhen
Sep 9, 2016, 10:24 PM
At a speech earlier in the year, given, I believe at the V.Board of Trade, Craig Richmond outlined the three options, and already at that time, this seemed the 'already decided-upon' option

mezzanine
Sep 9, 2016, 10:58 PM
the fares on the new Air Canada yvr DFW service is $657 canadian #200 more thatn flying out of seattle

ITA matrix shows that in march, the non-stop AA return flight from YVR costs ~ $80 more than the AC flight.

mezzanine
Sep 9, 2016, 11:05 PM
Vancitybuzz or the Hive or whatever we're calling it these days had a good write-up on the upcomming YVR expansion:

Some key points are:

they are recommending the centre option (no surprise)
the N/S taxiway is still in the plans but not needed yet
3rd runway likely required by 2037
Canada Line station is having crowding issues so a 'Spanish Solution' platform may be needed
Templeton-Grant McConachie Way intersection will likely become an interchange
replacement of the two-lane Dinsmore Bridge between Sea Island and Richmond


Mainly stuff we already know from the engagement materials but synthesized in a more concise article.


http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-international-airport-expansion-masterplan

Good scoop from Daily hive/kenneth chan! i think they changed some of the proposal details AFAIK from last year, though - is that a bridge/tunnel connecting the centre and east terminals? And across the parking lot? Regardless the official word will be arriving soon.

http://images.dailyhive.com/20160908155735/YVR-Airport-Expansion-Configurations.jpg

Cage
Sep 9, 2016, 11:53 PM
But if this isn't really the case with YYC, and given the limited market size (as you point out), then I can't help but think the new international terminal seems like overkill: 2 million square feet of terminal space (doubling the size of the airport) and the addition of 24 international gates. I mean, I believe YVR only has around 34 international gates at present.

Maybe they're simply future proofing against long-term growth, but one can't help but wonder if YYC is also angling to try to grab some international transfer traffic?

In evaluating whether the new YYC terminal is overkill there is a cautionary tale for YVR as they expand into the details of central option expansion.

Arguably YYC gate utilization for the whole terminal is very impressive. I would compare YYC current gate utilization to that of YVR in the mid 90s. At YYC this summer there are no spare gates and some flights are negatively impacted by the gate capacity issues. For example; WestJet flagship flight YYC-LGW routinely has to arrive at the B concourse because Hainan, KLM, and Air Transat, and Condor are using the widebody gates over on A concourse. WS must then tow the 763 over to A concourse where it takes up to 737 size gates at the hammerhead. All summer long there have been various ground holds due to the arrival gate being occupied by the previous flight.

Looking at the current gate plan for YYC there are 18 international capable gates, however all but four gates have the capability for swing gate operations. Gates 11/12/13/14 swing between domestic and international. Gates 21/22/23/24 swing between domestic and transborder. Gates 31/33/35/37/39/40 swing between domestic/transborder/international. The high level of flexibility is utilized extensively by WS and to a lesser extent AC.

The new YYC international terminal obliterates this flexibility for the airlines as the only swing gate capability is between International and Transborder (the least likely combination). Consequently, YYC airport is going from 18 international/transborder gates to 24.

I would argue the new YYC international gate capacity should be set at 20-22 gates. In order to get to 24 gates, there has to be no widebody aircraft and significant use of small regional jet aircraft (even the new C-Series and E-Jets will have too big of a wing span for full capacity utilization). This situation is similar to EWR Terminal C, the international concourse has 18 gates but an effective capacity of 12-14 aircraft.

The big reason for YYC new terminal is to provide increased capacity on central processor functions like Checkin, Security, USCBP, retail, CBSA, Bag claim. I have gone through the current terminal about 4 times this summer, and everywhere passengers are tripping over each other and there is insufficient queue space. Just this last week LHR, FRA, and LGW arrived at nearly the same time only to have the last passengers off LGW queue for CBSA primary inspection line on the third floor corridor well over 50 meters to the CBSA hall. This level of congestion is usually reserved for SEA South terminal inhabited by DL.

Bringing this all back to YVR and the Airport's decision to expand using the central option; there are a number of lessons learned for YVR.

(1) Back over 10 years ago, YYC's initial "International Facilities Project" was an extension of the B concourse (similar to the extension of JFK Terminal 4 Concourse A whereby 20 gates were added onto the 10 gate concourse). Once YYC Airport identified the central processor functions as a capacity limiter, the first plan had to be scrapped and the current plan developed from scratch. Hopefully YVR does not have the same situation with their central expansion project.

(2) Similar to YYC (although not as bad) the central processor functions do face capacity constraints at peak times. Further, YVR is all ready at the forefront of automation and processing enhancements through APC machines at primary inspection, Nexus kiosks, Known Traveller lanes at security. Is there another great efficiency enhancement to alleviate the peak period capacity constraints at YVR International Terminal? IF the answer is no, then how will adding new gates not result in additional overcapacity situations?

(3) The YYC International terminal is the first Canadian terminal designed for high density configured aircraft. Back when YVR International Terminal was designed the 763 had 210 seats and the 747 had about 400-450. Airlines routinely filled their 744s to 60-70% capacity. Today the expectation is 270 seat 763 and triple the number of 77W with similar capacity to yesterday's 744. With high density seating becoming the norm, this will put YVR's central processor operations under further strain.

(4) One operational advantage of YVR is moderate success operating a second Asian departure bank in the night. This will further increase the YVR terminal efficiency. YYC has been unable to get a second profitable departure bank in any international market.

SFUVancouver
Sep 10, 2016, 12:48 AM
^ Great post! Thanks for the thoughtful and detailed post.

mezzanine
Sep 10, 2016, 12:56 AM
Good analysis. WRT #1 was YYC's initial plan developed before 9/11? If so, central processing WRT CATSA/security would have been altered significantly, in YYC's defense.

#4 a late bank of intl departures from calgary? i haven't been to YYC for a long time, but how are noise issues for the surrounding neighbourhoods, esp with the new runway? A YVR-like late bank of intl departures may be a hard sell if it is.

casper
Sep 10, 2016, 1:49 AM
Good analysis. WRT #1 was YYC's initial plan developed before 9/11? If so, central processing WRT CATSA/security would have been altered significantly, in YYC's defense.

#4 a late bank of intl departures from calgary? i haven't been to YYC for a long time, but how are noise issues for the surrounding neighbourhoods, esp with the new runway? A YVR-like late bank of intl departures may be a hard sell if it is.

Cage - Great analysis.

Traveling in and out of YXE quite a bit, on more than one occasion I have been on the midnight AC-Jazz departure out of YYC. They use a remote runway (never tried to figure it out on a map). But to get out their sometime it almost fells like your going to taxi all the way to YXE. Announcement is usually along the lines of "Sorry about the long taxi, it is to reduce noise." The early morning flight can be similar.

Vancouver also have the advantage that there are three international banks. The morning-noon bank to Asia. An afternoon bank to Europe and south pacific and then the late night to Asia. With some flights overlapping. That spreads things out quite a bit.

My one wish for YYC once the new expansion is done is they get rid of the silly limits on when your allowed to go through security. It makes it an annoying airport to use. Coming in from YYJ or YXE and connecting in to the US, you are not allowed to go through US customs any sooner that n minutes before departure. The same thing for getting in to the domestic departures. If you get to the airport early or have a long connection and want to go wait in the lounge you are told sorry sir for security reasons your not allowed to, you can go wait in the food court upstairs and come back 90 minutes before your flight departure. Hopefully they fix that.

casper
Sep 10, 2016, 2:07 AM
I would also second Cage comment about the other airport terminals not being designed for large capacity aircraft. Locking forward to trying YYC.

I frequently do the Air Canada A330 from YVR to Montreal. When they run that flight out of gate 47 or 48 at YVR there simply is no room. There is a restaurant in the middle of the waiting area and people wrapped around it. Do zoned boarding and it an ever bigger mess since there is not enough space to sit down. There is limited place to stand. At the zone boarding signage makes it worse.

The YVR international terminal is much better. I recently did the Lufthansa Frankfurt 747 and the waiting are was crowded but not that bad.

Orcair
Sep 10, 2016, 2:27 AM
I frequently do the Air Canada A330 from YVR to Montreal. When they run that flight out of gate 47 or 48 at YVR there simply is no room. There is a restaurant in the middle of the waiting area and people wrapped around it. Do zoned boarding and it an ever bigger mess since there is not enough space to sit down. There is limited place to stand. At the zone boarding signage makes it worse.


This! Same with the 777s to YYZ!

whatnext
Sep 10, 2016, 7:47 PM
Seizures of undeclared cash spike at Vancouver International Airport

As Vancouver’s housing market began sizzling, border guards at the nearby international airport were seizing millions of dollars in undeclared cash from Chinese citizens, with total amounts jumping 50 per cent in each of the past three calendar years, government data show.

According to the information, released to The Globe and Mail by a New Democrat MLA, during that period, border guards confiscated more than $13-million in hidden currency from 792 Chinese people passing through Vancouver International Airport, which is Canada’s second-busiest after Toronto. The average person had $17,000 in hidden bills, bank notes or drafts.

That is in addition to the $323-million declared at the airport by 20,000 Chinese citizens or passengers on flights to and from that country, during roughly the same period, according to data released to The Globe through a freedom of information request....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/seizures-of-undeclared-cash-spike-at-vancouver-international-airport/article31787802/

Cage
Sep 10, 2016, 10:54 PM
Cage - Great analysis.

......

My one wish for YYC once the new expansion is done is they get rid of the silly limits on when your allowed to go through security. It makes it an annoying airport to use. Coming in from YYJ or YXE and connecting in to the US, you are not allowed to go through US customs any sooner that n minutes before departure. The same thing for getting in to the domestic departures. If you get to the airport early or have a long connection and want to go wait in the lounge you are told sorry sir for security reasons your not allowed to, you can go wait in the food court upstairs and come back 90 minutes before your flight departure. Hopefully they fix that.

Thanks.

Likmits going through US pre-clearance are set by USCBP. Prior to the current 2 hour before departure limit there was a 7:30 am cut off. All departures between 6am and 7:30am had to line up in the left side and departures between 7:30 and 9am had to line up at the Right side.

The current 2 hour limit does not apply to Nexus holders or those seeking a work permit. The reason for the two hrs time limit is to provide USCBP with the ability to schedule their staff. One problem is that infrequent vacation travellers (eg families) arrive at the airport well in advance of their boarding time. So the 10am departures to LAX (Disney) and San Diego have pax arriving at 7am and interfering with the 8:30am departure o IAH.

The future has yet to be determined for new terminal operations, however the two hour time limit is in place for both YVR and YYZ T1. The one hope is that Calgary Aiport has worked out a solution with USCBP. Calgary Airport wants passengers through as early as possible so that they have a captive audience to spend at the food and retail outlets.

WRT domestic security time limits, I am not aware of any time limit that is before 4-6 hours prior to departure. Now YYC CATSA may be trying to invent a rule or two, but there is no blanket prohibition. If it happens again, ask for a supervisor, the BP scanning station at the start of the lineup is the lowest paid position on the totem pole, consequently most screeners cannot distinguish between the customer service features and the security requirements.

Personally I have gone through preboard security checkpoint C well before 90 minutes before departure in order to use the MLL and I have never been stopped (last time was in late December 2015). I have been stopped for instances where my flight was cancelled two minutes prio to me entering security, however a quick chat with a screening manager and I was let through.

casper
Sep 10, 2016, 11:40 PM
....

The current 2 hour limit does not apply to Nexus holders or those seeking a work permit. The reason for the two hrs time limit is to provide USCBP with the ability to schedule their staff. One problem is that infrequent vacation travellers (eg families) arrive at the airport well in advance of their boarding time. So the 10am departures to LAX (Disney) and San Diego have pax arriving at 7am and interfering with the 8:30am departure o IAH.

The future has yet to be determined for new terminal operations, however the two hour time limit is in place for both YVR and YYZ T1. The one hope is that Calgary Aiport has worked out a solution with USCBP. Calgary Airport wants passengers through as early as possible so that they have a captive audience to spend at the food and retail outlets.

WRT domestic security time limits, I am not aware of any time limit that is before 4-6 hours prior to departure. Now YYC CATSA may be trying to invent a rule or two, but there is no blanket prohibition. If it happens again, ask for a supervisor, the BP scanning station at the start of the lineup is the lowest paid position on the totem pole, consequently most screeners cannot distinguish between the customer service features and the security requirements.
....


The difference with trans-boarder at YVR and YYZ is for connecting passengers you use a different lineup. YYC has connecting passengers in the same line as local passengers.

That was a good suggestion. Next time I am stuck in that situation departing YYC I will try escalating.

Jdawgboy
Sep 12, 2016, 9:08 PM
I'd love to see a direct route between Austin and Vancouver!

trofirhen
Sep 12, 2016, 9:21 PM
I'd love to see a direct route between Austin and Vancouver!
Agreed!! You live in Austin,your avatar reads. Why Vancouver in particular, if I may ask your opinion on that. Do you fly to Asia frequently, or is it more just to visit Vancouver itself?

LeftCoaster
Sep 12, 2016, 10:12 PM
Looks like Garuda Indonesia is looking to launch SEA flights next year.

https://news.google.com/news/url?sr=1&sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_0_0_t&usg=AFQjCNHdFt_8wEejHeEE_qo-9BYhS4S11Q&did=38df01d185c5476f&cid=52779206363184&ei=dCfXV_DRHs3C3gGsuLTwDQ&rt=STORY&vm=STANDARD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbuyingbusinesstravel.com%2Fnews%2F1226213-garuda-indonesia-resume-flights-us

Would have been a good win for YVR, but I'd rather SIN so keeping fingers crossed for that route.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 13, 2016, 3:21 AM
Looks like Garuda Indonesia is looking to launch SEA flights next year.

Would have been a good win for YVR, but I'd rather SIN so keeping fingers crossed for that route.

If you read the article they mention USA and then further down mentions in 2014 a code share with Delta via Tokyo to LAX and SEA. I'm not doubting their intention but the article really is vague as to Garuda's intentions.

As for Transborder I'm still holding out for a direct flight to Des Moines or Louisville.

nname
Sep 13, 2016, 5:53 AM
Hainan plans to reduce Beijing-Calgary from 3x to 2x weekly... this now leaves 3x weekly unused frequency... Tianjin is coming? :D

zahav
Sep 13, 2016, 6:14 PM
Hainan plans to reduce Beijing-Calgary from 3x to 2x weekly... this now leaves 3x weekly unused frequency... Tianjin is coming? :D

This is what I was thinking too... Over on the Calgary forum someone mentioned they thought it was to free up aircraft for the new Las Vegas-Beijing route, but I don't think that's it. That is a 3-weekly service and they would have already allocated aircraft for it. Considering the bilaterial had two open slots, and this now frees one more, makes me think Hainain wants to launch a new route like Tianjin which has been rumoured for a while

trofirhen
Sep 13, 2016, 6:25 PM
..............
As for Transborder I'm still holding out for a direct flight to Des Moines or Louisville.
Enough, already!!:hell:

SFUVancouver
Sep 13, 2016, 9:41 PM
We already have a direct Louisville flight, it's just operated by UPS.

trofirhen
Sep 13, 2016, 9:57 PM
We already have a direct Louisville flight, it's just operated by UPS.
And Yvr already has cargo flights to Cincinnati, Memphis, and Guadalajara (Korean Air Cargo). and until fairly recently to Kiev Borispyl on Antonov Airlines. (Hmm, Kiev: rather unsure market)

Johnny Aussie
Sep 13, 2016, 10:44 PM
This is what I was thinking too... Over on the Calgary forum someone mentioned they thought it was to free up aircraft for the new Las Vegas-Beijing route, but I don't think that's it. That is a 3-weekly service and they would have already allocated aircraft for it. Considering the bilaterial had two open slots, and this now frees one more, makes me think Hainain wants to launch a new route like Tianjin which has been rumoured for a while

Hainan plans to reduce Beijing-Calgary from 3x to 2x weekly... this now leaves 3x weekly unused frequency... Tianjin is coming? :D

Looking further down the road, this reduction only appears to be until the end of March. Schedules show YYC-PEK returning to thrice weekly first week of April. There still is something in play with Hainan but nothing confirmed yet.

We already have a direct Louisville flight, it's just operated by UPS.

Clever fellow! Perhaps I could catch a ride in the jump seat!

SFUVancouver
Sep 14, 2016, 1:05 AM
Clever fellow! Perhaps I could catch a ride in the jump seat!

Perhaps, or in a big mailing tube? People trying to mail themselves is a thing, and an Australian guy famously succeeded at mailing himself home from England in the 1960s: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31700049

Johnny Aussie
Sep 14, 2016, 3:40 AM
Perhaps, or in a big mailing tube? People trying to mail themselves is a thing, and an Australian guy famously succeeded at mailing himself home from England in the 1960s: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31700049

I think with today's shipping charges it would be cheaper to fly as a passenger and perhaps get a small glass of fresh orange juice and a complimentary browse of The Daily Mail included.

LeftCoaster
Sep 14, 2016, 9:44 PM
A little follow-up on the AeroMexico increases, they are much larger than we originally thought.

The frequency is being bumped from 7x PW to 10x PW but the frequencies are also ALL going to 737-800 from the 700.

The seats per week will go from 868 to 1,600, so nearly double!

Combine that with the China Southern route 2x PW and we have YVR-MEX go from 840 seats per week a year and a half ago to 3,058 seats per week this spring! :worship:

Hopefully all this YVR-MEX doesn't remove the possibility of any other Mexican routes like GDL or MTY. I still likes me some route diversity!

If you read the article they mention USA and then further down mentions in 2014 a code share with Delta via Tokyo to LAX and SEA. I'm not doubting their intention but the article really is vague as to Garuda's intentions.

As for Transborder I'm still holding out for a direct flight to Des Moines or Louisville.

Ya you're right. For some reason I remember reading in one of the articles they planned to put their own metal on it in March 17' but I can't find it now. Maybe the article got it wrong too so they redacted it.

SFUVancouver
Sep 14, 2016, 9:50 PM
The frequency is being bumped from 7x PW to 10x PW but the frequencies are also ALL going to 787-800 from the 700.


I think that you meant 737-800, and not 787-800.

That's a nice substantial increase, both in upgauging of metal and frequency!

LeftCoaster
Sep 14, 2016, 9:57 PM
Yep I sure did, not used to getting excited about a lil 737! :D

LeftCoaster
Sep 14, 2016, 10:30 PM
Oh and I forgot to post this, looks like WestJet is furthering its partnership with skyteam and really helping feed the Aeromexico flights. Looks like this will draw from all of Western Canada.

AeroMexico in the first quarter of 2017 plans to expand codeshare partnership with WestJet, mainly covering service to/from Vancouver. Planned new codeshare routes, currently scheduled to commence from 10JAN17, as follow.

AeroMexico operated by WestJet
Vancouver – Calgary
Vancouver – Edmonton
Vancouver – Kelowna
Vancouver – Prince George
Vancouver – Winnipeg
http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/268835/aeromexico-westjet-plans-codeshare-expansion-in-1q17/

Johnny Aussie
Sep 15, 2016, 12:18 AM
Oh and I forgot to post this, looks like WestJet is furthering its partnership with skyteam and really helping feed the Aeromexico flights. Looks like this will draw from all of Western Canada.


http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/268835/aeromexico-westjet-plans-codeshare-expansion-in-1q17/

Just need some connections from the two Saskabeast metropolises!

And... he he... I had posted all flights were going to 738s in my earlier post... ;)

SFUVancouver
Sep 15, 2016, 1:06 AM
On my way back from Charlotte NC yesterday I saw some rare metal: a new Korean Air 748.

http://i.imgur.com/wVYsPqk.jpg?1
Source: me

Interestingly, a Lufthansa 744 was taxiing just ahead of it so I could kind of compare the two side by side. Truthfully, beyond the lack of winglets on the 748 and the larger chevroned engines, I couldn't really notice that much of a difference. I realize that there's been a fuselage stretch, including the upper deck, and the wing has been re-done, but it was the wingtips and larger engines that stood out. Beautiful airplane, though.

I wish the 748 were getting more traction in the market so that we can regularly see 747s for years to come. I am, however, a huge fan of the 777 and stoked for the 779, plus I'm pretty keen on all of the modern twins, so I'll be pretty content as the 747 glides into a well-deserved retirement.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 15, 2016, 2:02 AM
On my way back from Charlotte NC yesterday

I wish the 748 were getting more traction in the market so that we can regularly see 747s for years to come. I am, however, a huge fan of the 777 and stoked for the 779, plus I'm pretty keen on all of the modern twins, so I'll be pretty content as the 747 glides into a well-deserved retirement.

Hope u enjoyed your trip to CLT!

Honestly, KE is confirmed for 748i again for next summer (subject to change of course) there is also a strong likelihood of CA joining the YVR 748i fray. And of course LH will need to replace their 744s to YVR. So until then we will see CX cargo, KE pax and cargo... BR and CI until they get replaced... BA in winter... QF too of course

Gordon
Sep 15, 2016, 5:20 PM
It looks like Air Canada has has started using jet bridges for some of their Seattle & Portland flights from yvr. I didn't think AC,s Q400s had the proper front doors

MalcolmTucker
Sep 15, 2016, 5:48 PM
It looks like Air Canada has has started using jet bridges for some of their Seattle & Portland flights from yvr. I didn't think AC,s Q400s had the proper front doors

They use little canoes like CR7s

Edit: these things:

http://www.kcigse.com/kci-products/mba-adapter/

SFUVancouver
Sep 15, 2016, 6:02 PM
Hope u enjoyed your trip to CLT!

Honestly, KE is confirmed for 748i again for next summer (subject to change of course) there is also a strong likelihood of CA joining the YVR 748i fray. And of course LH will need to replace their 744s to YVR. So until then we will see CX cargo, KE pax and cargo... BR and CI until they get replaced... BA in winter... QF too of course

I always do. It was a successful trip and a painless series of connections through Houston (outbound) and Chicago (return).

Thanks for the info on the 744 and 748 carriers.

Gordon
Sep 15, 2016, 6:25 PM
Little Canoes?

Johnny Aussie
Sep 15, 2016, 7:16 PM
According to this article TS will increase YVR-YYZ and introduce new YVR-YUL flights next summer. Mainly to connect to their European flights from YYZ and YUL.

YVR-YYZ increases to daily and YVR-YUL will have 2 flights pw.

http://www.stockhouse.com/news/press-releases/2016/09/15/air-transat-presents-its-2017-transatlantic-flight-program

Next summer TS will have at least 30 flights per week out of YVR... subject to confirmation of the domestic flight scheds as not sure if all YYZ flights are non-stop, some may be via YYC.

casper
Sep 16, 2016, 2:00 AM
It looks like Air Canada has has started using jet bridges for some of their Seattle & Portland flights from yvr. I didn't think AC,s Q400s had the proper front doors

In other markets they normally use bridges. Saskatoon is a market where Jazz almost always uses a bridge for the Q400. Last few times in Calgary it was also on a bridge.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 16, 2016, 4:37 AM
Sounds like YVR set to land yet another Asian carrier by next summer.

Yeah I know.... another Asian carrier... Cue the whiners and whingers!

Another colourful livery to add to the mix.

It was discussed just a couple of weeks ago but sounds like coming to fruition.

nname
Sep 16, 2016, 4:57 AM
Hmm.. let me guess... Thai? :D

Gordon
Sep 16, 2016, 5:02 AM
Hainan?

Does gate A12 have an adapter that allows the brige to used by A Q400

jmt18325
Sep 16, 2016, 5:04 AM
You heard it here first - Hainan using the adapter at A12 for their TPAC Q400 flights.

Hourglass
Sep 16, 2016, 9:55 AM
Sounds like YVR set to land yet another Asian carrier by next summer.

Yeah I know.... another Asian carrier... Cue the whiners and whingers!

Another colourful livery to add to the mix.

It was discussed just a couple of weeks ago but sounds like coming to fruition.

Thai Airways? They've started taking deliveries of their A350s so possible...

trofirhen
Sep 16, 2016, 9:58 AM
Thai Airways? They've started taking deliveries of their A350s so possible...
..... quite possible, it seems, as they've already announced BKK > SEA and BKK > YVR as planned destinations.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 16, 2016, 8:57 PM
Well whatever it is... We should know more by late October...

Also, Hainan still undecided what to do with its remaining 2 allotted frequencies. Not the ideal number it wants/needs for YVR-TSN. And with YYC's reduction on YYC-PEK only temporary.... who knows..

Sooooo with any luck, YVR should have at least 23 overseas foreign carriers by next summer.... probably 24 and possibly even 25 or maybe even 26.... depending on what falls out in the next few months.

I honestly think the chances of Hainan launching only twice weekly to TSN is becoming less likely. I know somebody mentioned that Chinese carriers are happy to have fewer frequencies on a route, but that still has to be looked at on a route-by-route basis. If Hainan doesn't see the commercial viability to operate only two flights per week, they may just abandon those plans. Their hands are tied due to the cap. Clearly the demand for Chinese carriers wanting to add more Canadian routes and also develop current routes with more frequencies outstrips the supply for now.

Edit: I suppose my comments rule out Hainan being the carrier I am talking about.... :runaway:

Gordon
Sep 17, 2016, 2:08 AM
Gate A12 is strictly Encore's gate & has no boarding bridge?

Speedbird1
Sep 17, 2016, 7:53 PM
Sounds like YVR set to land yet another Asian carrier by next summer.

Yeah I know.... another Asian carrier... Cue the whiners and whingers!

Another colourful livery to add to the mix.

It was discussed just a couple of weeks ago but sounds like coming to fruition.

From the ones talked about recently:

HK Air (who appear to be getting their first A350 in May or June next year), Thai, Tianjin/Hainan, and Vietnam..?

jmt18325
Sep 18, 2016, 8:44 PM
Re posting from the YWG discussion:

Has anyone ever done travel through China under the TWOV rules?

I was thinking in the spring I'd like to do YWG-YVR-PEK (spend 3 days there) and then fly direct to HKG (as the rules state) and spend 3 days there. I'd then fly back HKG-YVR-YWG.

CareerShow
Sep 19, 2016, 4:08 AM
I was recently on a BA a380 and have to say that the aircraft is by far the most comfortable with regards to economy seating. It really is too bad not more airlines chose to purchase the aircraft. When you compare the number of seats on the aircraft (469 for a BA a380 with the AC 777 450 seats) its easy to see why the journey is so much more comfortable. I have to say that the AC 763 are also a very comfortable aircraft with the 2 3 2 seating and quite a lot of space in economy. For the crew however it appears much less comfortable.

jmt18325
Sep 19, 2016, 5:19 AM
More airlines don't fly it for exactly that reason. Most people flying want the lowest price they can get. That means more seats on the same plane.

teriyaki
Sep 19, 2016, 5:04 PM
Re posting from the YWG discussion:

Has anyone ever done travel through China under the TWOV rules?

I was thinking in the spring I'd like to do YWG-YVR-PEK (spend 3 days there) and then fly direct to HGK (as the rules state) and spend 3 days there. I'd then fly back HGK-YVR-YWG.

Assuming you are flying to HKG (never heard of HGK. Hope it isn't some obscure chinese airport because that would not work). Your 72 hour TWOV would work just fine. I've done this for trips to Beijing and Shanghai, both did not require a visa because of this rule. My advice is to make sure you have printed copies of everything available for them to review. Your arrival flight, departure flight, hotel stay, etc. I once had it on my phone, but of course wifi wasn't readily available upon arrival into PEK and had quite the ordeal trying to explain...

jmt18325
Sep 19, 2016, 6:05 PM
Yeah, thanks - forgot the order of the code letters, and didn't check when I copied it over.

CareerShow
Sep 19, 2016, 10:38 PM
More airlines don't fly it for exactly that reason. Most people flying want the lowest price they can get. That means more seats on the same plane.

Very true. However too bad many people are semi blinded by these cheap fares, as many travel with baggage, book seats, buy a drink and food etc. which works out to a similar price to the legacy carriers in most cases

Johnny Aussie
Sep 19, 2016, 10:56 PM
So with all the capacity Air Canada is adding in the YVR market, I did a fairly comprehensive summary of all the additions to International markets including transborder. I would have to say this is probably the most significant increase AC has ever had at YVR on just a YOY basis. Of course, the more additions, the greater the chance of error, but I am fairly confident this is it!

Comparisons to Winter 2015/2016. New services in bold.

As you can see very few routes have no changes, but they are not listed (LHR, HKG for eg)

I'll work on non-Air Canada changes - and there are A LOT of them as well some other time!!

BNE: *new* daily 789
DEL: *new* 3x weekly 789
ICN: 789 replacing 788 daily
NRT: 789 replacing 788 daily
PVG: 789 replacing 788 daily
PEK: 77WHD replacing 77W daily
SYD: 77LHD replacing 77L daily
CUN: increase from 1 weekly to 2 weekly rouge 763
PVR: increase from 1 weekly rouge 319 to 2 weekly rouge 763
SJD: rouge 763 replacing mainline E90 one weekly
ZIH: rouge 763 replacing mainline 319 one weekly
ORD: *new* daily E90
SAN: *new* daily Jazz CRA
SJC: *new* twice daily Jazz CRA
DFW: *new* daily Jazz CRA
EWR: 789 replacing 319 daily
PHX: 4 weekly rouge 763 replacing daily rouge 319
PSP: 3 weekly rouge 763 replacing 6 weekly rouge 319
SEA: 4 daily Jazz DH4 replacing 4 daily Jazz DH3
PDX: 4 daily Jazz DH4 replacing 4 daily Jazz DH3
LAX: 2 daily 321, 1 daily 320, 1 daily 319 replacing 1 daily rouge 763, 2 daily rouge 319
SFO: 3 daily 319 replacing 3 daily rouge 319
LAS: increase from 5 weekly rouge 763, daily rouge 319 to daily rouge 763, daily 319
HNL: decrease from rouge daily 763 to 6 weekly rouge 763.
Note about Hawaii: they did add an extra couple of flights per week to both HNL and OGG and an additional flight per week to KOA from about mid Feb to the end of March last winter. This doesn’t appear to be on the cards for this winter.

SFUVancouver
Sep 19, 2016, 11:44 PM
^ Fantastic summary of Air Canada year over year service changes. Thank you.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 12:20 AM
^ Fantastic summary of Air Canada year over year service changes. Thank you.

Vielen vielen dank!

Hopefully this FINALLY puts to rest those who think YVR is lacking service or is getting screwed by AC.

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 3:08 AM
Vielen vielen dank!

Hopefully this FINALLY puts to rest those who think YVR is lacking service or is getting screwed by AC.

I think YVR was getting screwed by AC, however unintentionally. I think they were still trying to develop conservatively post bankruptcy and the safest routes were those out of Toronto. Now that things have stabilized it seems they view Vancouver as the next best market to grow from. This can probably be attributed to the improvement in their fleet the last few years as well.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 3:23 AM
I think YVR was getting screwed by AC, however unintentionally.

Completely disagree. Based on that one could argue any city not receiving any additional services from an airline is screwed. Look at the history of AC and YVR together and you will find based on YVR's population, geographical location, demographic mix and business market size, AC has allocated resources to YVR based on perceived economic performance. Clearly in better times, such as now, it wouldn't be surprising that AC is adding a lot of seats to the YVR market. An airline would be stupid to add capacity to a declining or slow growth market. Vancouver was never in decline of course but certainly the city's economic growth not that long ago was rather sluggish. Nothing to do with being screwed.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 3:48 AM
So here are the changes to non-Air Canada International routes (NOT including tranborder or sun destinations). Transborder and Sun Destination flights seem to still be adjusting so I will leave them for now.

Comparisons to Winter 2015/2016. New services in bold.

Xiamen Air: *new* 3 weekly to XMN on 788

Beijing Capital Airlines: *new* 3 weekly to TAO and HGH on 332

China Eastern: overall increasing from 10 weekly to 14 weekly with 3 weekly going to be on a new route YVR-NKG-KMG 3x weekly and then 11x weekly YVR-PVG standalone. All scheduled to be on 332 aircraft.

Philippine Airlines: MNL increases from 7 weekly to 10 weekly with the re-introduction of twice weekly standalone YVR-MNL flights and an additional weekly YYZ-YVR-MNL flight. All services continue to be on 77Ws.

All Nippon Airways: 789 replacing 788 daily to HND

China Southern: 77W replacing 788 daily to CAN

Sichuan Airlines: change in routing where twice weekly will now go YVR-CGO-CTU and one weekly will remain YVR-SHE-CTU. No change in overall frequencies or equipment.

Aeromexico: increases from daily to 10 weekly to MEX. All services now on 73H aircraft versus a mix of 73W/73H last winter.

Qantas: maintaining 3 weekly to SYD but for a longer period this winter. Approximately 2-3 weeks longer. All services scheduled to be on 744s still.

Air New Zealand: daily flights to AKL will be for a longer period this winter as well. All services scheduled to be on 772s still.

KLM: reduces from 5 weekly to 4 weekly on 332s.

Air Transat: twice weekly to LGW for the entire winter season this year compared to the twice weekly comencing in mid February last winter.

Cathay Pacific: effective 28th March (so technically spring) an additonal three weekly flights per week to HKG on A359s. Total YVR-HKG on CX increases to 17 weekly.

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 3:55 AM
Completely disagree. Based on that one could argue any city not receiving any additional services from an airline is screwed. Look at the history of AC and YVR together and you will find based on YVR's population, geographical location, demographic mix and business market size, AC has allocated resources to YVR based on perceived economic performance. Clearly in better times, such as now, it wouldn't be surprising that AC is adding a lot of seats to the YVR market. An airline would be stupid to add capacity to a declining or slow growth market. Vancouver was never in decline of course but certainly the city's economic growth not that long ago was rather sluggish. Nothing to do with being screwed.
Vancouver's economic outlook has been largely positive for the last 5 years, and even during the recessionary period, was not hit as hard as other places. Just 2 years ago AC was running E90's to LA and San Fran, no routes to San Diego, Palm Springs, Phoenix, Cancun, San Jose, Delhi, Chicago, Osaka, Dublin, and was running 763 to the majority of Asians destinations minus Hong Kong. So i do deem this as AC neglecting YVR however I believe it wasn't because they wanted to neglect the west coast, but because of Aircraft shortcomings and their own economics. With rouge freeing up mainline aircraft for new routes, as well as allowing numerous lower yielding routes to flourish, YVR has been able to attain many new routes. I believe AC would have implemented these long ago had they had the right stuff.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 4:19 AM
Classic case of Economics 100/101 the allocation of scarce resources. Since the economy of Vancouver has done well and really well in the last two years plus the decline in the economy to the neighbour to the East as the shift in resources has occurred. So during the period of economic ramp up AC has been allocating more to YVR. I wouldn't have expected this 5 years ago. Takes a couple of years to recover before throwing too much into a hot fire. Also, of course the economics of the new equipment has been a big game changer. If these planes had been available five years ago, maybe some of these routes would have been added then, but since that wasn't the case, we will never know. In any event AC is just a business like any other that will put its resources where it thinks will make the best return.

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 4:25 AM
Classic case of Economics 100/101 the allocation of scarce resources. Since the economy of Vancouver has done well and really well in the last two years plus the decline in the economy to the neighbour to the East as the shift in resources has occurred. So during the period of economic ramp up AC has been allocating more to YVR. I wouldn't have expected this 5 years ago. Takes a couple of years to recover before throwing too much into a hot fire. Also, of course the economics of the new equipment has been a big game changer. If these planes had been available five years ago, maybe some of these routes would have been added then, but since that wasn't the case, we will never know. In any event AC is just a business like any other that will put its resources where it thinks will make the best return.
Yes i completely agree with all of that. However I don't see how this stance conflicts with the fact YVR was widely neglected by AC for about a decade before the last two years. It seems apparent YVR could support more routes then it was supporting for years. I don't think the demand for travel to the aforementioned 10 cities happens overnight, which means whether or not it is AC, the Federal government, or other carriers, YVR was certainly under utilized for years. It also appeared AC and the Federal government blocked numerous airlines inroads into western Canada in order to protect AC from competition. Don't know the full fact pattern on this one.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 4:36 AM
Yes i completely agree with all of that. However I don't see how this stance conflicts with the fact YVR was widely neglected by AC for about a decade before the last two years. It seems apparent YVR could support more routes then it was supporting for years. I don't think the demand for travel to the aforementioned 10 cities happens overnight, which means whether or not it is AC, the Federal government, or other carriers, YVR was certainly under utilized for years. It also appeared AC and the Federal government blocked numerous airlines inroads into western Canada in order to protect AC from competition. Don't know the full fact pattern on this one.

I don't think AC and/or the Federal Government's blocking of various airlines was necessarily targeted at Western Canada. In fact, one can argue a lot of what they have blocked has helped them in the East. Examples of course are the ME3 by restricting the number of frequencies into Canada as a whole. I don't want to drag this up too much again as it has been discussed ad nauseum (like many topics on here!). But AC and/or the Federal Gov't were "protecting" their hub at YYZ mainly as allowing more access into YYZ would have a big impact on some of AC's routes to Europe. The statements made by Emirates (in particular) about YVR and YYC was most likely just a political game to encourage lobbying out west when their main intention was more access to YYZ. That is just my opinion but absolutely if AC has the power to lobby the government to protect its business? Of course it would but in as private a way as possible so it doesn't appear it is favouring one region over the other. It is more of favouring the protection of a global hub that is still developing.
The most recent alleged blocking is of course the latest round of China-Canada bilaterals. China wanted more access but allegedly AC lobbied against the increase as clearly the increase in Chinese airlines access to Canada would have a big impact on AC services. This affects every airport in Canada and not just YVR. Clearly most of the new services by Chinese airlines have targeted YVR but that is certainly not to say there were other routes being pursued. Now, due to the cap not being raised, growth will be at a standstill for at least two to three years unless talks somehow schedule earlier.
As for the current 10 cities where the demand appeared to have occurred overnight... each route would be analysed on a constant basis and with ever changing market conditions and forces the NPV of running the numbers may have been very close to being positive for many routes. Then all of a sudden with the conditions right, many routes may tip into positive territory with just a change in one or two factors. So I still stand by my opinion that based on the allocation of resources model, that's why we have seen so much so quickly. The conditions are NOW strong enough for these increases to occur.

This is what is happening now with YVR-SIN and YVR-BKK (among others :)) AC is apparently still pursuing these routes with their forecasting models. There must be some credence to the numbers for them to be looking so closely. However, if the conditions keep coming back with a negative NPV, they won't be launching. There will be a minimum benchmark they would have... if this is met and the aircraft is available, then it's a go.

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 5:01 AM
Very well said. Couldn't agree more. Do you think AC will maintain double daily next summer or will BA recommence more than one daily to LHR?

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 6:28 AM
Very well said. Couldn't agree more. Do you think AC will maintain double daily next summer or will BA recommence more than one daily to LHR?

One thing we know so far is BA will be bringing back the A380 but will start it a bit later next year. The equipment switches from 744 to 388 on 1st of June. This year the 388 kicked off on 1st of May. Another indication of just how seasonal YVR-Europe is.

Right now the second daily AC to LHR is on the books and is scheduled to re-commence 31st May 2017. This is a whole day earlier than this year! Ha! However, that is more likely because of AC's summer schedule start date next year. It's also showing as a daily 787-9 instead of the current 787-8. If you recall when the second flight was announced it was originally planned to be a 787-9 only to be downgauged fairly quickly. AC is notorious (like most carriers really though) for keeping the status quo schedules for the next year until finalised. However, if the flight was a complete disaster I think AC would just remove it anyway so there is the possibility it will return.

casper
Sep 20, 2016, 6:37 AM
Yes i completely agree with all of that. However I don't see how this stance conflicts with the fact YVR was widely neglected by AC for about a decade before the last two years. It seems apparent YVR could support more routes then it was supporting for years. I don't think the demand for travel to the aforementioned 10 cities happens overnight, which means whether or not it is AC, the Federal government, or other carriers, YVR was certainly under utilized for years. It also appeared AC and the Federal government blocked numerous airlines inroads into western Canada in order to protect AC from competition. Don't know the full fact pattern on this one.

You have to go back to when AC and Canadian merged. They were both flying half empty aircraft in many cases on the same route at the same time. Back then I was a regular on the Vancouver to Ottawa flight. Usually a A320 or 737 depending on airline. You had a good chance of having the middle seat empty on most flights. Soon after the merge there was a drop in flights as Air Canada right sized. Many of the historical long-haul Canadian routes out of Vancouver (that likely were not money makers) were also dropped around that time.

AC up-gaging the aircraft to Asia has been a slow process over many years. Even Australia several years ago was a 767 with a stop in Hawaii.

Canada has open skies with Europe and the US. Nothing has been stopping ANA or JAL from increasing service to Canada. Nothing was stopping a host of Australian, New Zealand and south pacific airlines from serving Vancouver.

Where Canada has had some protection has been the middle east airlines and Singapore. However the louses with those are more likely to be Korean Airlines or British Airways than AC.

mezzanine
Sep 20, 2016, 7:08 AM
Completely disagree. Based on that one could argue any city not receiving any additional services from an airline is screwed. Look at the history of AC and YVR together and you will find based on YVR's population, geographical location, demographic mix and business market size, AC has allocated resources to YVR based on perceived economic performance. Clearly in better times, such as now, it wouldn't be surprising that AC is adding a lot of seats to the YVR market. An airline would be stupid to add capacity to a declining or slow growth market. Vancouver was never in decline of course but certainly the city's economic growth not that long ago was rather sluggish. Nothing to do with being screwed.

I kinda agree with CareerShow, the YVR neglect was not out of spite but market driven, and all relative to YVR's previous status as the dominant hub of CP Air/ Canadian airlines.

Look at Westjet and oil-downturn-YYC. YYC passenger numbers are slightly positive despite a bad economy and i suspect that is due to WJ's (and to a lesser extent AC's) efforts to support its YYC hub. WJ will continue its problematic LGW service in winter out of YYC and much of that traffic will come from WJ transit passengers from western canada. WJ did add capacity to a (currently) slow-growth market and in the short-term may not make economic sense, but because YYC is WJ's most important hub it may make sense strategically. Prior to Canadian folding, YVR was its primary hub.

mezzanine
Sep 20, 2016, 7:21 AM
Notes from a recent intl trip:

-not to sound ungrateful, but if AC is finally considering making YVR a bigger hub, it really needs to make the MLL larger (domestic, transborder, intl - all of them), perhaps even with shower facilities.

- no WC at intl arrivals until just before passport control? those washrooms are small compared to the people it receives and it doesn't present well - worn out carpet around the WCs and, well, a heavily used WC vibe. I hope they rectify this with future terminal expansion.

-new ads leaving baggage claim! T&T and Westbank.

YYCguys
Sep 20, 2016, 3:00 PM
So here are the changes to non-Air Canada International routes (NOT including tranborder or sun destinations). Transborder and Sun Destination flights seem to still be adjusting so I will leave them for now.

Comparisons to Winter 2015/2016. New services in bold.

Xiamen Air: *new* 3 weekly to XMN on 788

Beijing Capital Airlines: *new* 3 weekly to TAO and HGH on 332

China Eastern: overall increasing from 10 weekly to 14 weekly with 3 weekly going to be on a new route YVR-NKG-KMG 3x weekly and then 11x weekly YVR-PVG standalone. All scheduled to be on 332 aircraft.

Philippine Airlines: MNL increases from 7 weekly to 10 weekly with the re-introduction of twice weekly standalone YVR-MNL flights and an additional weekly YYZ-YVR-MNL flight. All services continue to be on 77Ws.

All Nippon Airways: 789 replacing 788 daily to HND

China Southern: 77W replacing 788 daily to CAN

Sichuan Airlines: change in routing where twice weekly will now go YVR-CGO-CTU and one weekly will remain YVR-SHE-CTU. No change in overall frequencies or equipment.

Aeromexico: increases from daily to 10 weekly to MEX. All services now on 73H aircraft versus a mix of 73W/73H last winter.

Qantas: maintaining 3 weekly to SYD but for a longer period this winter. Approximately 2-3 weeks longer. All services scheduled to be on 744s still.

Air New Zealand: daily flights to AKL will be for a longer period this winter as well. All services scheduled to be on 772s still.

KLM: reduces from 5 weekly to 4 weekly on 332s.

Air Transat: twice weekly to LGW for the entire winter season this year compared to the twice weekly comencing in mid February last winter.

Cathay Pacific: effective 28th March (so technically spring) an additonal three weekly flights per week to HKG on A359s. Total YVR-HKG on CX increases to 17 weekly.

Is anyone serving Singapore out of YVR, or anywhere in Canada, for that matter? Is there the market for it? Would be nice to see someone, perhaps WS (when they get their wide body fleet properly improved/expanded), service SIN out of YVR/YYC, if the traffic demand is there.

jmt18325
Sep 20, 2016, 3:04 PM
If anyone does, it will be Air Canada.

jmt18325
Sep 20, 2016, 3:36 PM
So, will Sichuan bring their new A350s to YVR?

Hourglass
Sep 20, 2016, 4:03 PM
Vielen vielen dank!

Hopefully this FINALLY puts to rest those who think YVR is lacking service or is getting screwed by AC.

Warum sprichst du Deutsch? :)

This may simply be a perception, but the relationship between YVR and AC these days does seem stronger and more collaborative than in years past. I distinctly recall Calin Rovanescu addressing the VBOT a few years back to specifically make the case that a strong YVR required a strong hub airline (ie AC). Why do this if not to make a point and combat certain perceptions?

Water under the bridge anyway. It's good to see AC growing its hub in Vancouver.

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 4:59 PM
Is anyone serving Singapore out of YVR, or anywhere in Canada, for that matter? Is there the market for it? Would be nice to see someone, perhaps WS (when they get their wide body fleet properly improved/expanded), service SIN out of YVR/YYC, if the traffic demand is there.
It would be shocking to see Westjet serve Singapore within the next 10 years. They have numerous hurdles in place before being able to serve a destination none of the legacy carriers have served in years. Although I am curious to see if WS chooses, when they do, to expand out of YVR or YYC for asian travel. YVR obviously has more demand, but YYC is fairly uncontested minus Hainan, and AC.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 8:05 PM
Is anyone serving Singapore out of YVR, or anywhere in Canada, for that matter? Is there the market for it? Would be nice to see someone, perhaps WS (when they get their wide body fleet properly improved/expanded), service SIN out of YVR/YYC, if the traffic demand is there.

See this...


This is what is happening now with YVR-SIN and YVR-BKK (among others :)) AC is apparently still pursuing these routes with their forecasting models. There must be some credence to the numbers for them to be looking so closely. However, if the conditions keep coming back with a negative NPV, they won't be launching. There will be a minimum benchmark they would have... if this is met and the aircraft is available, then it's a go.

So, will Sichuan bring their new A350s to YVR?

As far as I'm aware Sichuan isn't getting any A350s?

Warum sprichst du Deutsch? :)

This may simply be a perception, but the relationship between YVR and AC these days does seem stronger and more collaborative than in years past. I distinctly recall Calin Rovanescu addressing the VBOT a few years back to specifically make the case that a strong YVR required a strong hub airline (ie AC). Why do this if not to make a point and combat certain perceptions?

Water under the bridge anyway. It's good to see AC growing its hub in Vancouver.


Yes, Vancouver's economy along with some other factors have now made these new routes viable and AC is jumping on them. His address about the hub was his way of countering the restrictions on other airlines accessing YVR. Which of course AC is probably the biggest lobbier against them (see my comments above). His aim was to convince the audience that only AC would be able to make YVR the powerhouse that it is becoming. Of course all the other new airlines that have come online must see that a little differently. YVR has actually managed to develop so many new routes with new airlines without a fortress hub... And that's probably why. We all knew the Dreamliner/A350 would be game changers. YVR has and will continue to benefit from these aircraft.

nname
Sep 20, 2016, 8:39 PM
As far as I'm aware Sichuan isn't getting any A350s?

The deal was signed yesterday. Four leased A350s to be delivered on 2017.

Gordon
Sep 20, 2016, 8:43 PM
YVR seems to have critical mass as far as int'l long hall routes goes. I think it would be hard for Calgary to catch up.

I think YvR should be using some sort of covered loading structures for all ground load positions( pier A & the Ac area (C)

one of gates 90-92 should be fitted an adapter so Alaska & any other Turbo prop operator has a proper loading bridge 90-92 fit an rj 700 wit out an adapter.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 20, 2016, 9:08 PM
The deal was signed yesterday. Four leased A350s to be delivered on 2017.

Hadn't read that yet.. Thanks for the info. Looks like the word is they are planning on using them for expansion to North America. Since there aren't any frequencies available to them to Canada I would assume they would use them for flights to the US. Since their A332s can make the trek to YVR quite handily they would most likely use them on longer range routes such as LAX.

I think YvR should be using some sort of covered loading structures for all ground load positions( pier A & the Ac area (C)

one of gates 90-92 should be fitted an adapter so Alaska & any other Turbo prop operator has a proper loading bridge 90-92 fit an rj 700 wit out an adapter.

That would be a great idea. No need to have to walk out in the rain or cold in the winter.

twoNeurons
Sep 20, 2016, 9:41 PM
YVR seems to have critical mass as far as int'l long hall routes goes. I think it would be hard for Calgary to catch up.


YYC has very few geographical advantages compared to YVR. Also has a smaller population.

If I were an airline, I can't think of 1 good reason to go to YYC instead of YVR, but I may add it as a route.

There's only ONE direct flight to Osaka from Canada, a secondary city with a CMA the size of Toronto. What change does a 1M-pop city like Calgary have from large int'l destinations?

:runaway:

CareerShow
Sep 20, 2016, 11:23 PM
YYC has very few geographical advantages compared to YVR. Also has a smaller population.

If I were an airline, I can't think of 1 good reason to go to YYC instead of YVR, but I may add it as a route.

There's only ONE direct flight to Osaka from Canada, a secondary city with a CMA the size of Toronto. What change does a 1M-pop city like Calgary have from large int'l destinations?

:runaway:
The only advantage YYC has on YVR is for transcontinental routes to the centre/eastern USA, as the flight is closer, as well as Caribbean and Mexico in most cases. This is probably a big reason why Westjet has many routes out of YYC that they dont serve out of YVR to the USA and other sun destination, obviously conincided with the major hub of Westjet being Calgary

Cage
Sep 21, 2016, 12:07 AM
Look at Westjet and oil-downturn-YYC. YYC passenger numbers are slightly positive despite a bad economy and i suspect that is due to WJ's (and to a lesser extent AC's) efforts to support its YYC hub.

YYC numbers are flat because the business community in Calgary continues to support necessary air travel. This is due to large number of head offices in Calgary.

Here is a good example:
In 2014 I was working for an oilfield services company with head office in Calgary plus Corporate offices in Denver, Houston, Mexico, Colombia, and Adelaide Australia. The oil recession hits and the companies revenue is cut in half. Canada and USA office operations are consolidated at the senior level. So the VP Ops in USA is let go and the VP Ops in Canada gets to spend half his time in Calgary and the other half in Houston. Same goes for the Calgary based Controller.

Contrast YYC airport with YEG where traffic reductions are occurring in the double digits. YEG's problem is that they have much smaller head office base so job reductions occurring in the companies with regional offices in Edmonton are not being replaced from an air travel perspective.

Further, Edmonton's largest employer is the provincial government, so there is reduction in government business travel to/from YEG. The NDP government has responded to oil downturn by hiring more staff in Edmonton. This makes YEG economic stats look better but does not translate into additional flying from YEG.

casper
Sep 21, 2016, 4:03 AM
....
Contrast YYC airport with YEG where traffic reductions are occurring in the double digits. YEG's problem is that they have much smaller head office base so job reductions occurring in the companies with regional offices in Edmonton are not being replaced from an air travel perspective.

Further, Edmonton's largest employer is the provincial government, so there is reduction in government business travel to/from YEG. The NDP government has responded to oil downturn by hiring more staff in Edmonton. This makes YEG economic stats look better but does not translate into additional flying from YEG.

Government is a different beast.

Private sector you have:
1) travel to meet customers
2) travel to meet supplier
3) travel for internal management
4) travel for professional development etc.

For a multi-national or corporate head office 1-3 can include long-haul. No 4 maybe for the correct position and organisation. You would think video conference etc would have an impact. Perhaps it does, but there is still a lot of business travel.

In the case of a provincial government 1 to 3 will be predominately local to the province. Number 4 runs the risk of public attention if there is to much of it.

I would always expect a Government town to have more regional travel that a business centre of equal size. Ottawa may be the one exception given it does have operations everywhere.

mezzanine
Sep 21, 2016, 4:37 AM
YYC numbers are flat because the business community in Calgary continues to support necessary air travel. This is due to large number of head offices in Calgary.

Here is a good example:
In 2014 I was working for an oilfield services company with head office in Calgary plus Corporate offices in Denver, Houston, Mexico, Colombia, and Adelaide Australia. The oil recession hits and the companies revenue is cut in half. Canada and USA office operations are consolidated at the senior level. So the VP Ops in USA is let go and the VP Ops in Canada gets to spend half his time in Calgary and the other half in Houston. Same goes for the Calgary based Controller.


But it wouldn't be a stretch to say the winter westjet service to LGW is not driven by business travel, but by leisure travel.

and to a place that does involve itself heavily in oil services like dallas, AA has downgraded its YYC-DFW flight from an airbus to an embrarer ~ half its size.

I still think that a major reason why calgary has not seen contraction of passengers is because of the hub status placed by WS. compared to other airlines, putting more growth in YYC doesn't make sense in the short term, but may make sense strategically, longer term for YYC's hub airline.

What change does a 1M-pop city like Calgary have from large int'l destinations?

For transiting at YYC, a major point would be WS's existing north american network.

If WS ever joins any alliance, it would be interesting to see how the YYC/YVR balance shifts. would intl flights grow to YYC or would they stay put at YVR and WS grow its network at YVR?

Johnny Aussie
Sep 21, 2016, 4:56 AM
I still think that a major reason why calgary has not seen contraction of passengers is because of the hub status placed by WS. compared to other airlines, putting more growth in YYC doesn't make sense in the short term, but may make sense strategically, longer term for YYC's hub airline.

Since this is the YVR thread but the point you are making I will quickly address here. Believe it or not I think all one has to do is look at YEG's recent traffic figures to help explain why YYC is actually not contracting. YEG's transborder figures have just collapsed down almost 40% in August. Domestic travel is up very slightly by a fraction of a % though. The entire YEG-USA market hasn't collapsed but a significant number of pax would now be transiting through YYC to get to their destination. Even through the YEG market is quite a bit smaller than YYC (in terms of O&D) even in economic downturns... Calgary's unemployment now exceeds 9% but Edmonton's isn't that far behind either... YYC will have the advantage due to its location and larger O&D. It's easier for airlines to funnel domestic pax and transborder pax from YEG through YYC than vice versa.

mezzanine
Sep 21, 2016, 5:33 AM
Since this is the YVR thread but the point you are making I will quickly address here. Believe it or not I think all one has to do is look at YEG's recent traffic figures to help explain why YYC is actually not contracting. YEG's transborder figures have just collapsed down almost 40% in August. Domestic travel is up very slightly by a fraction of a % though. The entire YEG-USA market hasn't collapsed but a significant number of pax would now be transiting through YYC to get to their destination. Even through the YEG market is quite a bit smaller than YYC (in terms of O&D) even in economic downturns... Calgary's unemployment now exceeds 9% but Edmonton's isn't that far behind either... YYC will have the advantage due to its location and larger O&D. It's easier for airlines to funnel domestic pax and transborder pax from YEG through YYC than vice versa.

I suppose I can see that. Again it suggests YYC's numbers are not from ongoing innate demand from the calgary area but the hubbing of YEG traffic, among from other areas.

Maybe it was inevitable that as this current alberta recession continues YYC would emerge to be preeminent in alberta. I also suspect YVR is capturing a large chunk of YEG transfer traffic.

Why am i talking about this on a YVR thread? IMO YVR really needs to up its north amercian network. finally AC seems to be showing some love to YVR, and it's exciting to see the intl destinations but it's really the domestic/transborder additions i'll be looking out for and it's finally in play. YYC is in flux with its new terminal about to open but ongoing low oil prices. even YYZ is in flux within NA as it has been eating the lunch of rust belt airports (http://airlinegeeks.com/2016/07/25/abandoned-in-the-rust-belt-part-one/) but i suspect it is close to maximizing that market.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 21, 2016, 5:46 AM
I suppose I can see that. Again it suggests YYC's numbers are not from ongoing innate demand from the calgary area but the hubbing of YEG traffic, among from other areas.

Maybe it was inevitable that as this current alberta recession continues YYC would emerge to be preeminent in alberta. I also suspect YVR is capturing a large chunk of YEG transfer traffic.

Why am i talking about this on a YVR thread? IMO YVR really needs to up its north amercian network. finally AC seems to be showing some love to YVR, and it's exciting to see the intl destinations but it's really the domestic/transborder additions i'll be looking out for and it's finally in play. YYC is in flux with its new terminal about to open but ongoing low oil prices. even YYZ is in flux within NA as it has been eating the lunch of rust belt airports (http://airlinegeeks.com/2016/07/25/abandoned-in-the-rust-belt-part-one/) but i suspect it is close to maximizing that market.

Yeah the YEG figures only tell part of the story plus YQR has lost all of its transborder flights other than the leisure routes on Westjet. YYC is the most natural transfer point.

As for YVR what really amazes me is that YVR has this incredible international network by so many carriers without a "massive" North American network. Numbers don't lie though, there are very few unserved YVR-USA markets left that are viable. Also, there are very few unserved domestic routes that would be big enough to have nonstop service.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 21, 2016, 8:19 AM
AA is adding a second flight to PHX again for 3 1/2 weeks from the 15 Dec 16 - 8 Jan 17. Last winter AA operated this route twice daily for the entire winter.

The extra flight:

AA604 PHX 1115 - 1328 YVR 319 D
AA1851 YVR 1429 - 1836 PHX 319 D

jmt18325
Sep 21, 2016, 2:14 PM
Yeah the YEG figures only tell part of the story plus YQR has lost all of its transborder flights other than the leisure routes on Westjet. YYC is the most natural transfer point.


Unless of course you're going to MSP or ORD....or really anywhere East. For the closer two, YWG makes far more sense. For most further places, YYZ is better, and better connected.

mezzanine
Sep 21, 2016, 5:07 PM
Yeah the YEG figures only tell part of the story plus YQR has lost all of its transborder flights other than the leisure routes on Westjet. YYC is the most natural transfer point.

As for YVR what really amazes me is that YVR has this incredible international network by so many carriers without a "massive" North American network. Numbers don't lie though, there are very few unserved YVR-USA markets left that are viable. Also, there are very few unserved domestic routes that would be big enough to have nonstop service.

IMO the feather in YVR's NA cap would be IAD/DCA. this would be a natural fit for the existing network and a magnet for bilateral transfer traffic.

I also suspect other low hanging fruit would be SLC and ABQ. ABQ/Santa Fe's innate draw and lack of overseas connections IMO make this an easy gimmie for YVR-ABQ link. But I also think you're right about diminishing returns for AC on other NA destinations.

If we get nonstop to SE Asia and further Australia connections (MEL), this would be a further magnet for eastern US connections, but I'd be happy if we can maintain what we have (new additions DFW, ORD, SJC, SAN) and add on Washington DC.

Gordon
Sep 21, 2016, 5:22 PM
We Do have SLC delta\skywest. I think they use a CRJ 900

Has anyone seen how the Pier a work is progressing?

CareerShow
Sep 21, 2016, 5:29 PM
AA is adding a second flight to PHX again for 3 1/2 weeks from the 15 Dec 16 - 8 Jan 17. Last winter AA operated this route twice daily for the entire winter.

The extra flight:

AA604 PHX 1115 - 1328 YVR 319 D
AA1851 YVR 1429 - 1836 PHX 319 D
So are they downgrading this year to one daily for most of the winter?

osirisboy
Sep 21, 2016, 5:51 PM
We Do have SLC delta\skywest. I think they use a CRJ 900

Has anyone seen how the Pier a work is progressing?

Pier a? Hasn't that been finished for well over a year?

mezzanine
Sep 21, 2016, 5:54 PM
We Do have SLC delta\skywest. I think they use a CRJ 900



Sorry I wasn't clear, but all those flights/network in that post would be AC's.

CareerShow
Sep 21, 2016, 6:50 PM
Does anyone know how many flight attendants AC have on their CRA 700's? I would guess three but by law they only have to have 2 right? But my thinking has been with only 2 flight attendants it would be hard to manage Transport Canada's new regulation of having 2 people in the flight deck at all times.

Orcair
Sep 21, 2016, 9:16 PM
Does anyone know how many flight attendants AC have on their CRA 700's? I would guess three but by law they only have to have 2 right? But my thinking has been with only 2 flight attendants it would be hard to manage Transport Canada's new regulation of having 2 people in the flight deck at all times.

When I flew a CRA from YUL-YOW, there were only 2. That being said, the longer flights to Texas might be different...? But given that it is AC delegating to Jazz, I'm sure its the minimum ;)

Johnny Aussie
Sep 21, 2016, 9:21 PM
So are they downgrading this year to one daily for most of the winter?

Yes. AA has really slashed and burned a lot of capacity in Western Canada.

YVR loses one daily PHX for most of the winter. So the winter sched is 2 daily mainline 738s to DFW, a daily 738 to PHX (plus the extra flight mentioned above) and 2 daily E75s to LAX.

YYC has lost PHX completely and will now be served with only two daily E75s to DFW downgauged from 2 daily mainline 319s.

YEG has lost DFW and LAX nonstops and will be down to a sole daily CR9 to PHX this winter.

Johnny Aussie
Sep 22, 2016, 12:09 AM
http://www.yvr2037.ca/growth/documents/3855/download

A lot is rehashed info but this is a pretty good summary.

Most people seem interested about terminal expansion. Starts at page 11.

Shouldn't be long before an actual announcement is made.

I have been made aware that between about 10:00 and 14:00 there will be no available international gates. So until an expansion is completed any further additions to International flights will have to be outside these hours. Still plenty of opportunities for late night flights to Asia and South Pacific.