[evolv]

The traffic at YYC is up almost 11% this year. I was wondering if anyone knew if they will need to add termianl space and the parallel runway soon?

[Bokimon]

I think YYC will continue to do well within the next couple of years thanks to our super strong economy and astounding growth.
As long as the Condo and Office boom continues, YYC will continue with its record numbers.

Anybody catch that Alaska with the Engine "fire" on Sunday?

[Rusty van Reddick]

Alaska is a fucking nightmare.

[evolv]

I did a search on airliners.net for new YYC routes and there is a rumour that British Airways will start a YYC-London flight. Would be awesome to get a carrier like BA into YYC. Right now YYC is dominated by the charters.

[Rusty van Reddick]

huh?? what charters?

[chinookcity]

The latest YYC expansion was made to handle 11 million passengers, which they assumed would be by 2009, YYC may hit 11 million this year.
Which one would assume will accelerate the new runway and yet another Terminal expansion.

[Edmonchuck]

16L/34R is a way of yet. They have not invoked flow control to YYC in a long time, so I would have to assume that the current capacity is there and is OK.

[Wooster]

So YYC has 11 million passengers a year. How does that compare to the other major cities in Canada? Does anybody have those numbers.

I could see them starting construction on the new runway and terminal expansion within 5 years. It seems like traffic is sharply up and above forcasts right now.

[evolv]

Toronto ~ 30 million
Vancouver ~ 15 million
Montreal ~ 11 million
Calgary ~ 10-10.5 million

[Wooster]

Calgary has by far the highest per-capita. What is the deal with that?

[WhipperSnapper]

being in the middle of nowhere?

[Thunderball]

Commerce. Oilpatch capital of Canada, and one of maybe a dozen key Oil centres in the world. Thats why 11 million passengers and tops per capita.

Well, that and this little, insignificant tourist town called Banff.

[JBB]

Its also a secondary hub for Air Canada and a primary hub for Westjet so many passengers particularly from Edmonton and Saskatchewan are forced to hub through Calgary. That makes YYC punch above its weight as its catchment area refers not just to Metro Calgary but also includes a decent chunk of the million people in Edmonton and the million in Saskatchewan.

[Doug]

being in the middle of nowhere?

Or a huge amount of corporate activity or by far the highest disposible incomes in the country or a central location realtive to the population of the west.

[CMD UW]

Being thee gateway to one of Canada's largest tourist destinations contributes alot to YYC's numbers.

[JBB]

Yeah, I think we can conclude that there are several major factors contributing to YYC's impressive numbers:

1) Banff and the Rockies (I was in Chicago and I noticed that on the flight information boards at O'Hare they showed the flights to YYC as "Calgary/Banff". A good indicator as to how important the mountain resorts are.)

2) Business travelers/high number of head offices in Calgary (As a major white collar center, Calgary has a large number of frequent travelling business types, certainly far more than say Edmonton, a city of comparable size. Business travelers are the bread and butter of air-travel...)

3) Hubs (Related to points one and two, YYC is a designated hub for AC and Westjet meaning that YYC's passenger numbers include the many hundreds of thousands if not millions of people who hub through that airport from Edmonton and Saskatchewan)

4) Economy doing well (As the economy is doing well, people have more disposable income and are using it to travel. Businesses do more business abroad so there are more business trips and individuals and family embark on more holidays)

-That seems like a nice summary...

[marts1x]

A big contributing factor is the rebirth of the Japanese ecotourism market. Plus we basically do 70 percent of all Edmonton international traffic.

Some pics of the short to long term expansion plans for YYC from their master plan at www.calgaryairport.com

http://www3.telus.net/yycmarts/airport.bmp

http://www3.telus.net/yycmarts/airport2.bmp

[Wooster]

Those are some impressive plans. I suppose it will be a very long time before our terminal is that big, and there is an LRT line going there.

[AB Born]

Funny enough the C-Train line isn't far away from the airport, especially when the new NE station opens.

[Bassic Lab]

Those are some impressive plans. I suppose it will be a very long time before our terminal is that big, and there is an LRT line going there.

I'm wondering where that LRT line goes, due north doesn't particularly seem like the best allignment. Possibly part of the Greater Airdre Transportation Network?

[Wooster]

My guess is that it would either turn to connect to either the NE line or the future North line.

[Bassic Lab]

My guess is that it would either turn to connect to either the NE line or the future North line.

Well yeah, obviously, but you'd think a different ROW would be more efficient.

[Wooster]

Not above ground. Perhaps, underground it could cut under the air field.

[duper]

Being thee gateway to one of Canada's largest tourist destinations contributes alot to YYC's numbers.

The Calgary Tower? ;) :D

[Wooster]

Didn't you hear? They put in the glass floor. That probably explains most of the 11% increase!

[Saska2ntown]

Calgary's stats are all articially inflated because of the Sask. and Edmonton connections. If given the choice, I refuse to connect through Calgary. Especially on US-bound flights where the Minneapolis connections are much, much more convenient and timely.

[polishavenger]

Umm, how can stats be inflated? The number of people going through YYC is the number of people going through YYC regardless of why, where and how.

[Wooster]

I agree. Are YYZ's numbers inflated because I have to connect through there for several international flights, not by choice?

[Arriviste]

/\---I was about to ask the same thing. Inflated hey? What are the stats on Saskatoon, and Regina's airports? How many flights are there to Calgary from those two centers? I can't see Saskatchewan really adding a substantial amount of volume to YYC through connections.
Edmonton probably contributes far more to YYC's numbers than does Sask. And if Sask does add substantial numbers, where the hell are you people flying too so often?
I think Banff, and the business passengers are by far the greatest addition to YYC's outstanding total.
And the fact that we are in the middle of nowhere. It's tough to access anywhere substantial by car.
Purley as an observation, I have noticed a general trend where Calgarians seem to fly alot more than most other major cities. I don't know many people in this city that fly less than 3 times a year. Compare Calgary to Ottawa for instance. Avergae per capita flyership(did I just make that up?) is more than likely much higher.

[duper]

^

I think the answer for YYZ and YYC is both yes, but I don't see how you can call that artificially inflated. All hubs work that way.

[marts1x]

Calgary's stats are all articially inflated because of the Sask. and Edmonton connections. If given the choice, I refuse to connect through Calgary. Especially on US-bound flights where the Minneapolis connections are much, much more convenient and timely.


There are thousands of people from saskatchewan that land in Calgary. But unfortunatly for your province they dont connect back to saskatchewan.

[shreddog]

I think those commenting about transit passengers are on to something. I think airports should only count PAX that either represent a person living in the city proper (not the metro, or a vistor who stays a minimum of 3 nights in the city and spends at least $500!

Come on, a person using an airport is a person using an airport. It matters not whether that person is on a connecting flight, originating or terminating a flight. They still use the airports facility and that is why it matters what these numbers are! (Though they do break out O/T and transit as they do use some different services.)

Next someone will be saying that we should pro-rate kids in these numbers since they're not quite as big as an adult!

[Coldrsx]

^should babies count?

[harls]

Calgary's stats are all articially inflated because of the Sask. and Edmonton connections. If given the choice, I refuse to connect through Calgary. Especially on US-bound flights where the Minneapolis connections are much, much more convenient and timely.


There are thousands of people from saskatchewan that land in Calgary. But unfortunatly for your province they dont connect back to saskatchewan.

that sounds like a burn.

ouch.


and about pro-rating kids - should they count obese people that buy two seats as one person or two? that's "inflating" the numbers a bit, isn't it?

[Edmonchuck]

Umm, how can stats be inflated? The number of people going through YYC is the number of people going through YYC regardless of why, where and how.

Um, no. They can be inflated if they choose to count bodies or enplaned and deplaned passengers seperately.

IE I fly to Calgary to connect. Getting off, I am deplaned passenger #1. Getting onto my connecting flight, I am enplaned passenger #2 even though I am still 1 physical body.

-OR-

I am passenger #1 in both scenarios.

The enplaned/deplaned favors hubs by inflating numbers, but is not lying. It is jsut the statistic they use. However, don't look for huge terminal redevelopment because of this. I am still warm body Edmonchuck, taking up the same space even if I am "double counted".

Places like YYC can artificially inflate these numbers accordingly. I am curious to see the # of unique warm bodies vs the # of passengers.

The CAA could use these nubmers to get funding for more terminal expansion, but in actuality they are working with the ERAA and seeing provincially what is needed. Why overbuild when the trends could say otherwise - especially if YEG keeps growing like it has.

Anyway, this argument is why I keep saying do NOT expect 16L/34R soon. The real stats for that runway come from aircraft movements NOT from passengers. You can increase equipment types to get more on the same plane vs 6 more smaller ones for example. Although your passenger count increases, the # of planes don't (hence why rare flow control @ YYC since the demise of CAI, C3 et al).

Include with this the move to smaller jets by AC and the less relaince on hubs (and increased frequency to YQR, YLW, YEG et al), you could actually see YYC's numbers flatline or even drop. If they grow, it will be more plausible and gradual. Throw into this the increased numbers of passengers utilizing YEG and flying direct instead of connecting in Calgary, and this will add to that "correction".

Plus, AC has stated time and time again that it has 2 main hubs - YYZ and YVR. YVR is undergoing a major expansion faster than YYC will, and will take even more international flights. That will also contribute to YYC's levelling off and possibly making it harder to get that elusive Asian flight.

Don't get me wrong, YYC will still experience good to great growth. I just don't see the need to spend the millions to make the twin 16/34 yet. If 10/28 didn't intersect, the need for 16L/34R would be even smaller.

However, that new runway would be cool! The taxi times stil would suck, but at least it would be cool!

[Coldrsx]

^go back to the edmonton posts....we dont want you here.

[The Chemist]

^You can't discount the possibility of more international carriers taking notice of the rapid growth of the Calgary area, plus increased tourism to the region (especially now that China will be accepting Canada as an acceptible tourist destination for its citizens). I'm convinced that within 10 years, Calgary will have at least 2 direct flights to China (possibly 3 - Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Beijing) as well as possibly more direct flights to Europe and larger east coast destinations in the United States (i.e. Boston, New York, possbily Miami). The only way that passenger numbers are going in Calgary are up - the booming economic growth here will guarantee that.

[harls]

^You can't discount the possibility of more international carriers taking notice of the rapid growth of the Calgary area, plus increased tourism to the region (especially now that China will be accepting Canada as an acceptible tourist destination for its citizens). I'm convinced that within 10 years, Calgary will have at least 2 direct flights to China (possibly 3 - Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Beijing) as well as possibly more direct flights to Europe and larger east coast destinations in the United States (i.e. Boston, New York, possbily Miami). The only way that passenger numbers are going in Calgary are up - the booming economic growth here will guarantee that.

Westjet will be adding non-stop flights to Fort McMurray 5 days a week starting Jan. 6.

They're upping flights to Phoenix to 7 per week (up from 2), and Palm Springs tp 4 (up from 1).

[Edmonchuck]

who is discounting anything? I am just saying that YYC is not as big of a target as YVR for Asian growth. Could one appear - yes. Is the CAA, Travel Alberta, et al working on this - yes. Could more US flights occur - hell yes.

However, you CANNOT discount the growth at other airports and their impact on the Calgary pseudo-hub. Really. That will have an impact and the CAA knows this. Will they be fine - hell yeah

[Rusty van Reddick]

Calgary is not a pseudo-hub- Calgary IS an AC hub. Look at the route map in EnRoute. And of course we are a WestJet hub.

You make it sound as if AC held a press conference and declared that only Mtl and Tor were its hubs. Never happened.

[JBB]

Yes, Calgary is a hub on the EnRoute map, but if you read AC development plans and internal documents they distinctly categorize Toronto and Vancouver as "Primary Hubs" and Calgary and Montreal as "Secondary Hubs". Calgary can be seen as a hub for transborder and domestic flights, but it cannot justifiably be seen as an international hub on the level of Toronto and Vancouver with flights only to LHR and FRA.

[Saska2ntown]

Thank you Edmonchuck for clarifying what I was trying to state in my original post. I suppose I'm not as much of a "nerd of all things flying." ;)

It is continually frustrating that I have to connect through Calgary to get to Edmonton.

[Edmonchuck]

Calgary is not a pseudo-hub- Calgary IS an AC hub. Look at the route map in EnRoute. And of course we are a WestJet hub.

You make it sound as if AC held a press conference and declared that only Mtl and Tor were its hubs. Never happened.

er...they did but it is YVR not YUL. Their long term growth plans call for increased international capacity from their 2 main hubs - YYZ and YVR. They have publically stated this over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over in shareholder meetings, employee meetings, union meetings, etc.

YYC is a prairie gathering point for AC and domestic routes, save the couple of international flights AC provides - again a prairie thing.

NOTE - no major international increases in frequency or destinations in YYC by Air Canada? Oh boy, with all this growth hyperbole you'd think AC would have expanded at YYC instead of looking to YVR.

EnRoute - yep, that's my route bible. NOT. ...but if you MUST look at EnRoute, look at the domestic map and compare it to the international one....AC is focusing on INTERNATIONAL routes, and Jazz will be domestic. Therefore, the hubs for AC will be YYZ and YVR.

Calgary is a pseudo-hub only becasue of WJ's success. Prior, it was overserved due to AC's predatory practices of trying to kill CAI, and Calgary gladly reaped the benefits. After the CAI/AC merger, Calgary lost the MOST frequency and capacity - the direct example of how much it was overserved.

It is also a pesudo-hub as with the light jets being introduced, look for AC to offer even more point-to-point service between places like Regina-Ottawa et al. This again will limit the need for a 767 or extra 319/20's @YYC.

Also look at the AC IAH route - shrinking equipment YET AGAIN!

However, even CAI was shifting the majority of its focus to YVR over YYC. Additionally, there was a lot of talk that NavCan was going to move more operations to the Vancouver TAC from Edmonton due to YVR's growth and for cost cutting measures. That was stopped when NavCan heavily invested in the facility at YEG.

Now throw in open skies....Hmmm....

Gee, inject some industry knowledge to balance out some of this hyperbole and get slammed! I never said YYC won't grow nor be a great player in the Canadain market. I am just letting you all know that DON'T expect major increases in runways et al right away. The industry is moving to smaller aircraft, migrating from any hub and spoke mentality, and consolidating international operations at fewer locations. YYC's growth will be in transborder mainly, just like YEG, and YQR and YLW and YOW and....

YYZ and YVR are the counties 2 main airports. YUL and YYC have a major part to play domestically. YOW and YEG are poised to make passenger gains at the expense of YYZ and YYC respectively as the aviation market moves to RJ's to lower costs, offer better city pairs, and deal with cheaper planes for more frequency. People HATE connections and the industry is responding.

[Coldrsx]

^ it thought there were direct flights now...WJ?

[Saska2ntown]

/\ There are..but the schedule is still the shits.

[Edmonchuck]

It is continually frustrating that I have to connect through Calgary to get to Edmonton.

Look for that to change soon with increased RJ's. I just hope the schedule does change.

[Saska2ntown]

/\ The new RJ's on YXE to YYZ are much better than the 319's IMO.

[Saska2ntown]

http://members.cox.net/dogmatix/Thread%20Hijacked.JPG

[CMD UW]

/\ hahahaahaahh....

[Edmonchuck]

Plus we basically do 70 percent of all Edmonton international traffic.



Where did you get THAT hyperinflated number from? Maybe in 1996....

YEG is routing a lot of its international traffic through MSP, IAH, YYZ, YVR, SEA and LAX.

@ Sask - hijacked how? ;)

[IntotheWest]

Well, 11 million for Calgary - or 16 million for Vancouver may sound impressive, but from a NA perspective, or International perspective, they are both quite small.

Ending 2004, Vancouver ranked 31st busiest in NA, with a touch over 16 million passengers (which hasn't changed a lot in the past 6 years) - where Calgary ended in 45th place at 9.1 million. Some other notable airports in the top 30 include Cincinatti, Baltimore, and Ft Lauderdale. Toronto sits at 17th busiest in NA, and 29th in the world at about 29.5 million passengers.

Atlanta is still the busiest at 85 million a year.

In Canada, no other airport has seen the gains YYC has seen since the open skies agreement of 1995 - more than double in the past 10 years.

And for talking about movements vs passengers - that it somehow inflates YYCs numbers - YYC had 218,000 movements last year. Par for the course considering YVR is at 314,000, Toronto at 403,000, and Montreal at 205,000. YEG had about 95,000 movements and just over 4 million passengers.

I don't think your convincing anyone that YYC is not a hub - it most definitely is for Westjet.

BTW - Banff only attracts about 3 million visitors a year...good, but no where near the numbers TO, Van, Whistler, and Niagara attract. It helps, but what helps more is a)having one of the highest disposable incomes per capita in Canada (Calgarians travelling), and b) more importantly, the amount of business travellers (such as myself). If you've ever been to the airport at 8am Monday morning, the lineup for security is at least a couple hundred strong (for gate A) going as far as Montana's. The same happens Thursday afternoon/Friday afternoon.

[IntotheWest]

^You can't discount the possibility of more international carriers taking notice of the rapid growth of the Calgary area, plus increased tourism to the region (especially now that China will be accepting Canada as an acceptible tourist destination for its citizens). I'm convinced that within 10 years, Calgary will have at least 2 direct flights to China (possibly 3 - Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Beijing) as well as possibly more direct flights to Europe and larger east coast destinations in the United States (i.e. Boston, New York, possbily Miami). The only way that passenger numbers are going in Calgary are up - the booming economic growth here will guarantee that.

From August through October, I fly from YYC to YVR every Monday. I would guess that between 60-75% of the passengers (BTW - which were packed, with a flight every hour between the two cities). were either South Korean or Japanese....all wearing their fresh new "I Love Calgary" or "I Love Banff" caps. I asked one (that managed to speak some english) where they were travelling to/from, and they were visiting Van, Cgy/Banff, and Toronto.

Oh, and they loved seeing snow in early Oct before heading home :-)

I can see the Asian traffic (and Banff tourism) growing in the very near future.

The flights are a lot less busy now.

[CMD UW]

/\ that's just Banff...there's Lake Louise, et al to consider.

Its not the movements, its double-counting of passengers that Edmonchuk was referring to.

[Bigtime]

huh?? what charters?

-All Nippon Airlines(ANA) from Japan in the Winter
-Balair
-LTU
-Monarch
-Fly! (UK based)
-Condor
-Martinair
-Thomas Cook

As for the 16/34 parallel, it could happen a lot sooner. As it would allow for shorter taxi times to the active runways. However it would require the new tower to be built as well.

As for BA showing up on YYC-LHR, I'll believe it when I see the first 777 touchdown here. That rumour has been around for quite some time, eh Bo? :)

[Rusty van Reddick]

I KNOW there are charters that fly into and out of YYC, my question was rhetorical based on the silly assertion that MOST YYC flights are chartered.

[IntotheWest]

/\ that's just Banff...there's Lake Louise, et al to consider.

Its not the movements, its double-counting of passengers that Edmonchuk was referring to.

Banff is by far the largest chunk of the 3 million that head out that way - and by "Banff" I include Lake Louise. Last time I checked it was still Banff....not sure what "et al" refers to. Outside that, there is a lot less tourist traffic (Kananskis, Jasper, for example).

If you read his whole post, you'd see his comments about movements. Regardless, ACI's approach to counting passenger traffic only counts those passengers once...the data is available.

[chinookcity]

Like every other major City doesn't double count, Atlanta 85 million! they are a major hub as well as Fed ex hub, maybe people are shipping themselves by Fed-ex to cut down on costs.
The top American cities over 40 million are all hubs. As for Toronto's 30 million, everytime I've used Aeroplan points to fly east they alway's fly me through Toronto.

[Bokimon]

:D hehehe.. Thats right.

The G8 Visit of a BA777 doesn't count!
I heard that next year it would become more of a reality but then again who knows. Maybe Virgin should fly here if BA doesn't jump the gun.

Already we get loads of UK Charters spitting out flights from London, and Manchester plus a bit of our own. Its time that a real airline establish a year round link to us.

As for transborder links, YYC needs to get better. Stats show a small increase with a few decreases during some months of this year. Bring more US carriers; Wtf happened to Big Sky? Transport Canada say no or something?

As for the runway, I hope it doesn't get built anytime soon. No need for it plus the existing one can do well for the time being. The day the A380 serves this city will be the day when the new runway gets built. The planners had that aircraft in mind when it was being proposed. At least 15000' in length is what they had said in the master plan. I think maybe we may be competing for the worlds longest paved runway. :)

[Bokimon]

In the world of Cargo, we are doing quite well.
About time we surpassed the 100 thousand tonnage/yr mark.
Plus the only city in the country with dedicated freight links to both Europe and Asia.

[Wooster]

we are getting a seasonal direct flight to Paris. That will be great. I really wish we had a flight to Tokyo and Hong Kong though. I hope it is just a matter of time.

[IntotheWest]

In the world of Cargo, we are doing quite well.
About time we surpassed the 100 million tonnage/yr mark.
Plus the only city in the country with dedicated freight links to both Europe and Asia.

Yes, it is getting better with direct cargo flights to Korea. Still a long way off to even get in the "top 30" in the world...which in 30th is Brussels with over 600,000 m.tons.

The busiest being MEM (3.5 million mt), HKG (3.1 million), Tokyo (2.3 million), and Anchorage (2.3 million).

[IntotheWest]

Like every other major City doesn't double count, Atlanta 85 million! they are a major hub as well as Fed ex hub, maybe people are shipping themselves by Fed-ex to cut down on costs.
The top American cities over 40 million are all hubs. As for Toronto's 30 million, everytime I've used Aeroplan points to fly east they alway's fly me through Toronto.

The little note under all these stats says:

"NOTES: Total passengers enplaned and deplaned, passengers in transit counted once." - which is accurate...no double counting.

[eventhrzn]

Yes, it is getting better with direct cargo flights to Korea.

I thought I heard somewhere that the Korea cargo flights didn't last and are no longer. Anybody else hear this?

[IntotheWest]

Yes, it is getting better with direct cargo flights to Korea.

I thought I heard somewhere that the Korea cargo flights didn't last and are no longer. Anybody else hear this?

Asiana Cargo still flies to Calgary. Korean Air Cargo is not.

[Edmonchuck]

As for the runway, I hope it doesn't get built anytime soon. No need for it plus the existing one can do well for the time being. The day the A380 serves this city will be the day when the new runway gets built. The planners had that aircraft in mind when it was being proposed. At least 15000' in length is what they had said in the master plan. I think maybe we may be competing for the worlds longest paved runway. :)

You'll get your wish (not built anytime soon). 16/34 is quite long, and with 34 being utilized more often in conjunction with 28, YYC has plenty of capacity. 34 has 9,900 feet before the intersection of 28 - plenty long enough for most every plane that uses YYC to land safely and come to a complete stop before it reached 28. Plus, with Dash's using 28 , they can readily stop in the 3,500 feet from the threshold of 28 to the intersection of 34. In fact, I remember riding jumpseat in a 737-200 and they were asked to hold short of 34 on landing on 28, and they did it. My eyeballs were on the throttles and I think my brains were in the instrument panel a la spaceballs, but they stopped! Good thing these pilots were YXD veterans! So really, YYC operates quite well in this configuration. Add the recent taxiways for 10, and the capacity increased.

Length - DIA has a longer runway already (KDEN 16R/34L). As for the world's longest paved runway, don't hold your breath. YYC did have the longest CIVILIAN runway in North America with the original 16/34, but that is not something done to get hyperbolic bragging rights. It is that long due to the height of YYC and this wonderful thing called density altitude. Form followed function here.

As for the runway 16L/34R in YYC, when this runway was originally conceived, the A380 wasn't even the A3XX, in fact, it wasn't even conceived. The B767 was just and idea and Airbus was fledgling. The parallel 16/34 has been around pretty much since the terminal was built on the north side of the field. What the 15000 feet is for is not the A380, but the same reason why Denvers new runway is over 16,000 feet long - long enough to give a 747-400 enough room to reach Vr safely while being fully loaded to the gills and bound for Asia - and this on a 35 degree day with calm winds.

@ chinookcity - FedEx's hub is Memphis, not Hartsfield. As for your double count rationale, it is what they do with this count and how they reference it in their literature that is at issue. As IntoTheWest notes, as long as they indicate what they base their numbers on, then you take it as it is. The Chicago Airport System breaks their stats down in the best way I've seen in the North American industry - enplaned, deplaned, movements, capacity, operational efficiencies - it's all there in black and white.

[wild wild west]

That Edmonchuck really knows his airport codes.

Is Calgary still getting a direct to NYC?

[The Chemist]

^Well, I saw a billboard advertising a direct AC flight to Newark (EWR), which I believe is in the NYC metro area.

[Edmonchuck]

Yep, and if the PATH is back running, it is a simple train to Lower Manhattan.

EWR is literally right across the river. Easy commute by taxi via the Holland Tunnel.

There was also talk of YYC-LGA which would make midtown travellers happier.

[Bigtime]

YYC-LGA would be a great service. Although I guess one can't complain about getting EWR right now either.

The bloody landing fees are up again for GA traffic however, $24 a landing now. I'd go over to Springbank but word is they are starting to charge as well. Although likely not as high a rate as that.

[brento79]

I fly EWR not a bad airport, and very easy access to NYC

[wild wild west]

Newark is fine for a link to NYC. I'm happy with that. I thought Continental was going to be doing those flights?

[brento79]

I believe that was just a seasonal flight. Air Canada is year round.

[IntotheWest]

EWR works better for me - covers both the better access to Manhattan Financial District, and the pharmaceuticals in NJ...I think this works well for most people - unless wanting to get to mid-town (as Edmonchuk pointed out LGA is better)...however, I can't see much use for JFK.

[marts1x]

Literally edm does 800 international pax a day while calgary does between 5000-7000. Thats passengers actually clearing customs. Edmontons airport cant even be considered in the same breath as Calgary's. Its more comparable to WPG and Saskatoon.

[Saska2ntown]

/\ This should go over well.

[circle33]

Saskatoon is hardly on the same level as Winnipeg or Edmonton.

Just sayin'...

[harls]

Don't be gettin all elitist on us now, Laughing Cow.

[circle33]

Elitist? I was actually coming from the other direction.

[Edmonchuck]

/\ This should go over well.

Yeah, stuble jumpin banjo players never align with Winnipeg. That banjo, much better than the Edmonton instrument of choice - a comb and wax paper Kazoo.... ;)

[marts1x]

Saskatoon is hardly on the same level as Winnipeg or Edmonton.

Just sayin'...

Looks like your right, Saskatoon does about 800,000 pax anually. Up through Sept of this year Edm is at 3,379,737 WPG is at 2,453,502, Calgary is at 7,693,718

[harls]

Elitist? I was actually coming from the other direction.

I know. :)

[JBB]

I always have had my own categorization of Canadian Airports. It is as follows:

Primary Airports- Toronto and Vancouver

Secondary Airports- Montreal and Calgary

Tertiary Airports- Edmonton, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Halifax

Quarternary Airports- Saskatoon, Regina, Victoria, Moncton, London, Hamilton, St. Johns... and others

[Plus15]

Don't forget Kelowna (YLW). It is on track to surpass 1 million this year, more than Regina or Saskatoon.

[Edmonchuck]

Kelowna is on FIRE! Oh, not literally again...

Rumors of a YLW - YUL direct are rampant, as well as YLW - PDX.

Too bad YYF and the Penticton band can't get along as YYF would be another great entry to the Okanogan.

[IntotheWest]

I always have had my own categorization of Canadian Airports. It is as follows:

Primary Airports- Toronto and Vancouver

Secondary Airports- Montreal and Calgary

Tertiary Airports- Edmonton, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Halifax

Quarternary Airports- Saskatoon, Regina, Victoria, Moncton, London, Hamilton, St. Johns... and others

I'd agree - except for YVR...it is a mid-size airport (yes, a Canadian "gateway" to Asia), and gets half the volume YYZ gets. Toronto is the primary hub in Canada - YUL, YYC, and YVR are in the same league. I have personally and unforunately been a victim of YYZ-as-hub quite a few times.

[CMD UW]

/\ What??

YVR is our gateway to the Pacific!!! Check out the airlines that serve it and most DO NOT serve any other airport in the country, except, maybe YYZ.

Until YYC has as many international routes as YVR, then perhaps it's in the same league. For now, it's not.

[evolv]

I think YYC is under-served, I tried to get a flight to Frankfurt in February this past august and it was already sold out. I think YYC is on the radar screen for major airlines they just don't have the planes to fly the route. Once the 787 comes into service I think YYC will get a lot more direct international traffic.

[Bokimon]

Kelowna is even getting flights to Hawaii via Harmony..
Amazing for a city like that. A small airport like YLW will soon be seeing 757s over the usual Dash 8, and 737s.

YVR is getting better all the time. Hopefully Qantas can return one day.
I also hope that YVR will get a couple of those 1/8mi visibility fog so they can send some planes to YYC. A mixture of Asian heavies would be a pleasant sight at this airport.

[Hardhatdan]

I think YYC is under-served, I tried to get a flight to Frankfurt in February this past august and it was already sold out. I think YYC is on the radar screen for major airlines they just don't have the planes to fly the route. Once the 787 comes into service I think YYC will get a lot more direct international traffic.

Give Edmonton a direct flight to Frankfurt and I guarantee there will be alot more room on the Calgary flights.

Edmonton has go to be the most underserved airport, and its our own fault for dicking around with 2 airports for so long.

Thank goodness things are starting to get much better.

[The Chemist]

I think YYC is under-served, I tried to get a flight to Frankfurt in February this past august and it was already sold out. I think YYC is on the radar screen for major airlines they just don't have the planes to fly the route. Once the 787 comes into service I think YYC will get a lot more direct international traffic.

The 777 would be suitable for most international flights to and from Calgary, as is the A330 that is currently used for flights from Calgary to Frankfurt and Calgary to London.

I'd love to see a scheduled flight to Calgary served by a Triple 7 - those planes are seriously impressive, especially the engines :eek:

[CMD UW]

Kelowna is even getting flights to Hawaii via Harmony..
Amazing for a city like that. A small airport like YLW will soon be seeing 757s over the usual Dash 8, and 737s.

YVR is getting better all the time. Hopefully Qantas can return one day.
I also hope that YVR will get a couple of those 1/8mi visibility fog so they can send some planes to YYC. A mixture of Asian heavies would be a pleasant sight at this airport.
Quantas still serves YVR? No?

[Edmonchuck]

I'd love to see a scheduled flight to Calgary served by a Triple 7 - those planes are seriously impressive, especially the engines :eek:

Yes, amazing and the ETOPS range on this thing is amazing.

Still my favorite plane to date. The 787 needs to seriously be cool.

[Edmonchuck]

I think YYC is under-served, I tried to get a flight to Frankfurt in February this past august and it was already sold out. I think YYC is on the radar screen for major airlines they just don't have the planes to fly the route. Once the 787 comes into service I think YYC will get a lot more direct international traffic.

2 things:

As of 11:37 tonight on http://www.aircanada.com

Fares as low as $828 (median average) and seats availabe every day in February returning every day in February YYC-FRA. Highest return fare was $984 leaving Feb 11 and returning Feb 26 according to their grid. Even the employee site has seats available - can't give you that URL.

You were booking way too far ahead and more than likely the seats, schedules, and fares were not published yet.

YYC is on the radar screen for major airlines and yes, equipment is a factor. However, the 787 will be a REPLACEMENT for most fleets, not fleet augmentation. Don't expect the 787 to be the magic bullet for YYC.

[IntotheWest]

/\ What??

YVR is our gateway to the Pacific!!! Check out the airlines that serve it and most DO NOT serve any other airport in the country, except, maybe YYZ.

Until YYC has as many international routes as YVR, then perhaps it's in the same league. For now, it's not.

I believe I stated it was a gateway for Canadians. However, from YYC we can also use SFO instead for asia flights - and sometimes its cheaper that way. As well, LAX is also an option.

Regardless, the point of contention was the "categorization" of Canada's airports.

IATA ranks YVR as a "medium-sized" airport - those serving 10-30 million. YYC will more than likely make the 10 million mark this year, while YVR continues to serve around 16 million. YUL is also well over 10 million now, putting the three clearly into the medium-sized airports category.

YYZ is clearly in a different league (for Canada), and should top 30 million this year - establishing itself as a "large-sized" airport.

[marts1x]

I'd love to see a scheduled flight to Calgary served by a Triple 7 - those planes are seriously impressive, especially the engines :eek:

Yes, amazing and the ETOPS range on this thing is amazing.

Still my favorite plane to date. The 787 needs to seriously be cool.

Well if Air Canada gets another deal done with its pilots and boeing there could be a heck of a lot of 787 and 777's flying into canadian airports.

However I was talking to some AC mechanics and they have no faith in the 787. they complain that the aircraft will be a maitnence nightmare because it is a 'plane made of plastic'

[slide_rule]

from YYC we can also use SFO instead for asia flights

wouldn't this entail a big detour? you COULD fly via san francisco or even los angeles, but if you can go through vancouver, why waste extra time?

[Glacierfed]

Looking at the vancouver airport website, yvr.ca about 2.5 million of Vancouver's 16.5 million passengers this year will be to/from Asia and the Pacific, easily the most in Canada, with non-stop flights to 9 different cities, and Vancouver is a NA hub for Cathay Pacific, you can fly daily from Van to NYC on cathay.

It is worth while noting that up until this year Toronto was also in this "medium" size airport category. Vancouver and Toronto are international hubs, while Calgary and Montreal are not, these facts are undeniable.

also I feel like Calgary and Montreal numbers have been inflated in this thread, a quick check of the websites and some math show that Montreal will have about 10.9 million passengers this year, and Calgary about 10.176 million.

[The Chemist]

I'd love to see a scheduled flight to Calgary served by a Triple 7 - those planes are seriously impressive, especially the engines :eek:

Yes, amazing and the ETOPS range on this thing is amazing.

Still my favorite plane to date. The 787 needs to seriously be cool.

Well if Air Canada gets another deal done with its pilots and boeing there could be a heck of a lot of 787 and 777's flying into canadian airports.

However I was talking to some AC mechanics and they have no faith in the 787. they complain that the aircraft will be a maitnence nightmare because it is a 'plane made of plastic'

According to what I've been reading over on airliners.net, a new deal HAS been reached, and a few used 777s could be added to AC's fleet as early as next year. The first new 777s are expected to arrive in AC's fleet in early 2007.

I would suggest that AC's mechanics should wait until they actually SEE a 787 before complaining about it, though. There hasn't yet been one even built at this stage, so I think complaints about its construction are just a wee bit premature.

YVR is definitely an airport of higher importance for Canada than YYC - that point is indisputable. Sure, from YYC we could fly to SFO or LAX to fly to Asia, but that requires going through US Customs, as well as the fact that the flights to LAX or SFO are 2.5 to 3 hours, compared to an hour to YVR. YVR is a far more convienient gateway to Asia for western Canadian travellers than SFO or LAX are. Calgary's got all of two international destinations (not including transborder) - Vancouver has a hell of a lot more than that. Not only that, but not a single international airline (i.e. not Canadian or American) serves Calgary on a regular schedule, but several serve YVR.

[Edmonchuck]

According to what I've been reading over on airliners.net, a new deal HAS been reached, and a few used 777s could be added to AC's fleet as early as next year. The first new 777s are expected to arrive in AC's fleet in early 2007.

I would suggest that AC's mechanics should wait until they actually SEE a 787 before complaining about it, though. There hasn't yet been one even built at this stage, so I think complaints about its construction are just a wee bit premature.



As would I. If the AC boys at the old CAI hanger are the source of this complaining, I take it with a grain of salt. They bitched about everything and anything, including the 'plastic tail" on the AirBuis's.

From what I gather on the '87, it should be a neat triumph in design, and with the weight advantage and the new wing, something that actually achieves teh 20% increase in efficiency over the '67.

I have not heard anything concrete from the pilot's union on this. They are keenly trying to get some info here, so I'll ask again today.

[CMD UW]

/\ What??

YVR is our gateway to the Pacific!!! Check out the airlines that serve it and most DO NOT serve any other airport in the country, except, maybe YYZ.

Until YYC has as many international routes as YVR, then perhaps it's in the same league. For now, it's not.

I believe I stated it was a gateway for Canadians. However, from YYC we can also use SFO instead for asia flights - and sometimes its cheaper that way. As well, LAX is also an option.

Regardless, the point of contention was the "categorization" of Canada's airports.

IATA ranks YVR as a "medium-sized" airport - those serving 10-30 million. YYC will more than likely make the 10 million mark this year, while YVR continues to serve around 16 million. YUL is also well over 10 million now, putting the three clearly into the medium-sized airports category.

YYZ is clearly in a different league (for Canada), and should top 30 million this year - establishing itself as a "large-sized" airport.
As mentioned earlier by another forumer, Canadian airports are relatively small, notwithstanding YYZ.

However, I admit that YVR does not handle a huge amount of passengers, however, its role as being one of the major gateways to the Orient makes it an important airport along with SFO and LAX (the other major gateways).