SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Canada (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Canadian Airport Thread (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=153826)

kwoldtimer Jul 20, 2017 12:01 PM

edit

Acajack Jul 20, 2017 1:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey (Post 7870462)
Yes, I don't understand the comment. Quebeckers fly a tons to sun destinations, even low-income ones.

Shiny happy people?

http://kerrisdalegallery.com/boni/wp...ss-the-ice.jpg

SaskOttaLoo Jul 21, 2017 2:58 AM

A lot of the new announcements I see on here seem to be AC and other airlines adding new international destinations. I recognize that's more exciting than announcing another Calgary - Edmonton flight, but are there many new flights being added between Canadian destinations? Having just booked some flights for vacation this summer to Halifax, I'm annoyed at how much I've had to pay and hoping that there's a some light at the end of the tunnel in terms of increased supply coming up.

wave46 Jul 21, 2017 3:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskOttaLoo (Post 7871349)
A lot of the new announcements I see on here seem to be AC and other airlines adding new international destinations. I recognize that's more exciting than announcing another Calgary - Edmonton flight, but are there many new flights being added between Canadian destinations? Having just booked some flights for vacation this summer to Halifax, I'm annoyed at how much I've had to pay and hoping that there's a some light at the end of the tunnel in terms of increased supply coming up.

If you ever look at the price graph on Google flights, you'll notice that the price of flights jumps about 15-20% come mid-June between Canadian destinations.

I'm not sure where you are, but NewLeaf might be an option if you pack light.

As for increased supply, other than up-gauging aircraft, I don't foresee any huge expansion in domestic supply. There might be an occasional flight added here and there, but otherwise, the status quo holds.

SkahHigh Jul 21, 2017 4:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truenorth00 (Post 7870309)
Business travel. Quebec killed its economy with the referendums. And Montreal lost its place as the commercial capital of Canada. The air traffic went with it.

Montreal is much more a regional centre than it is a national and international hub. And as such gets far less traffic.

This has barely anything to do with the referendums my friend.

YUL is definitely a national hub, only supplanted by YYZ and YVR in terms of international outreach. It's not even close.

someone123 Jul 21, 2017 4:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskOttaLoo (Post 7871349)
A lot of the new announcements I see on here seem to be AC and other airlines adding new international destinations. I recognize that's more exciting than announcing another Calgary - Edmonton flight, but are there many new flights being added between Canadian destinations? Having just booked some flights for vacation this summer to Halifax, I'm annoyed at how much I've had to pay and hoping that there's a some light at the end of the tunnel in terms of increased supply coming up.

The options along the routes I travel have improved a bit in recent years but they're still pretty bad, and very expensive compared to other countries.

I did an 1150 km flight in Europe recently and it cost $70 (good time, not a special). Sometimes there are $99 deals for similar routes in Eastern Canada but usually even a short flight is $200-300.

There are direct flights from Vancouver to Halifax but it looks like they're about $750 during the summer. In the fall the price drops to $400 but there is a stop in the middle (i.e. even when more fuel is used, it is profitable with much lower ticket prices). It is often cheaper to fly to Europe or Asia from Vancouver than it is to fly to Halifax, even though the flight distance is about 70% greater.

Sometimes the excuse given is that Canada is too large and too sparsely populated compared to other countries. This is a silly excuse when it comes to routes like Toronto-Montreal, Vancouver-Calgary, Toronto-Vancouver, Toronto-Halifax, etc. Those are all busy routes. You can get round-trip nonstop flights from Sydney to Darwin for $440. That's a 3,000 kilometer flight to a city with 150,000 people in it. Aeroflot is going nonstop Moscow-Vladivostok for $800 right now, marginally more expensive than WestJet's Vancouver-Halifax flight. That's a 6,400 km trip.

Domestic air travel is just another one of those industries in Canada that's not very competitive and therefore costs Canadians way more than it should.

ACT7 Jul 21, 2017 2:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh (Post 7871410)
This has barely anything to do with the referendums my friend.

YUL is definitely a national hub, only supplanted by YYZ and YVR in terms of international outreach. It's not even close.

If you exclude U.S. cities, YUL more international destinations than YVR.

wave46 Jul 21, 2017 3:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 7871422)
The options along the routes I travel have improved a bit in recent years but they're still pretty bad, and very expensive compared to other countries.

I did an 1150 km flight in Europe recently and it cost $70 (good time, not a special). Sometimes there are $99 deals for similar routes in Eastern Canada but usually even a short flight is $200-300.

There are direct flights from Vancouver to Halifax but it looks like they're about $750 during the summer. In the fall the price drops to $400 but there is a stop in the middle (i.e. even when more fuel is used, it is profitable with much lower ticket prices). It is often cheaper to fly to Europe or Asia from Vancouver than it is to fly to Halifax, even though the flight distance is about 70% greater.

Sometimes the excuse given is that Canada is too large and too sparsely populated compared to other countries. This is a silly excuse when it comes to routes like Toronto-Montreal, Vancouver-Calgary, Toronto-Vancouver, Toronto-Halifax, etc. Those are all busy routes. You can get round-trip nonstop flights from Sydney to Darwin for $440. That's a 3,000 kilometer flight to a city with 150,000 people in it. Aeroflot is going nonstop Moscow-Vladivostok for $800 right now, marginally more expensive than WestJet's Vancouver-Halifax flight. That's a 6,400 km trip.

Domestic air travel is just another one of those industries in Canada that's not very competitive and therefore costs Canadians way more than it should.

Was the $70 flight in Europe a Ryanair flight? I don't think we'll ever see a similar model domestically here on that scale.

I'm curious about how the percentage of fees/taxes stacks up between Australian and Canadian flights. I know taxes and fees are more expensive here as compared to the US as airports here are managed by aviation authorities and operate more on a user-pay system as opposed to the publicly subsidized model in the US (airports are generally owned by municipalities). I wonder how the Aussies package their fees and taxes.

harls Jul 21, 2017 3:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7870351)
In most places, vacations are a big driver of traffic. Quebeckers don't seem to do that in big numbers either.

Check out Wildwood, NJ and Old Orchard, Maine. The latter had a French speaking dude at the gate at 11 pm in a Tuesday! Even my Anglo butt was surprised!

My friends from Lac Simon were hoping their kids would pick up some English on vacation..turns out all of the campsites next to them were full of Quebecers :)

LeftCoaster Jul 21, 2017 8:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACT7 (Post 7871645)
If you exclude U.S. cities, YUL more international destinations than YVR.

Well primarily thanks for the plethora of 1-2 per week destinations offered by Transat, it still lags YVR in peak long haul seats which is a much better measure of which airport sees more international action.

At summer peak YVR sends about 13,000 international wide body seats per day, with YUL being about 12,000, so the two airports are pretty comparable for long haul flying. Given that Montreal is roughly 1.5 million people larger than Vancouver I'd say it still lags where it should be in international flying as well.

thenoflyzone Jul 23, 2017 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 7872090)
...in peak long haul seats...

Sure, but that's a pretty specific criteria, and one that is frankly not as important as you make it out to be. Sure, for 8 or 12 weeks in the summer, YVR's intl seat count is larger than YUL's, but for most of the remaining year, that is not the case. That speaks volume's to the fact that Quebecers do indeed travel, even with the lowest disposable income in the country. Whether it's Cuba or China is irrelevant. International travel is international travel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 7872090)
Given that Montreal is roughly 1.5 million people larger than Vancouver I'd say it still lags where it should be in international flying as well.

Not true. In overall passenger count, maybe (and even then, as I've said numerous times, city population has no direct correlation to airport passenger stats), but not international flying.

I would argue the contrary in fact. YUL and YVR punch above their weight when it comes to international travel, especially when compared to similar sized cities such as PHX, PHL, TPA, PDX, CLT, CVG, CLE, STL, SLC, PIT, SAN, DEN etc...

Even YYC hold's its own, when you consider that several larger cities in the States have no European/Asian service whatsoever.

isaidso Jul 23, 2017 4:51 PM

If YUL wants to look at where it should be, Melbourne is a better benchmark. YUL actually serves a bigger population base. There are more people within an hour of downtown Montreal than downtown Melbourne and Quebec has significantly more people than the state of Victoria. To top it off Montreal has a massive foreign market right next door in the USA.

YUL should, at the very least, equal the traffic posted by Melbourne but Melbourne's passenger traffic is double that of Montreal. YUL is posting good growth but it's nowhere near where it should be.

G.S MTL Jul 23, 2017 8:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7873295)
If YUL wants to look at where it should be, Melbourne is a better benchmark. YUL actually serves a bigger population base. There are more people within an hour of downtown Montreal than downtown Melbourne and Quebec has significantly more people than the state of Victoria. To top it off Montreal has a massive foreign market right next door in the USA.

YUL should, at the very least, equal the traffic posted by Melbourne but Melbourne's passenger traffic is double that of Montreal. YUL is posting good growth but it's nowhere near where it should be.

there are tons of major international airports close to YUL. Melbourne is Melbourne... totally different city, location.... you cannot compare it. Don't forget that most of these major airports, a lot of people connect through them. YUL lacks that, although is it a major international hub. With over 140 destinations served worldwide.

Nicko999 Jul 23, 2017 8:37 PM

His point still stands, YUL is nowhere near where it should be. Melbourne and Montreal have similar population but one airport is twice as busy as the other one. Go figure!

In 1991, Melbourne airport served 8.3M passengers while Mirabel and Dorval combined for 8M passengers as well.

The airport numbers today are a representation of Montreal's decline due to the referendums and Loi 101 (also to some extent choosing Dorval over Mirabel).

WhipperSnapper Jul 23, 2017 11:06 PM

People. It's isaidso. Things are never as simple as comparable populations. Melbourne/ Australia are nowhere. Flying many, many hours is the only escape.

wave46 Jul 24, 2017 1:03 AM

I'm always curious on the 'where it should be' aspect that seems to permeate here.

It's almost as if a city is judged by its population and therefore should have whatever amenities/metric that other cities its size should have, as if real life is some sort of SimCity-like game.

Perhaps (call me crazy here), each individual city has a series of individual factors (location, population, culture, to name a few) that much do a much better job of explaining why certain cities have certain things.

Nicko999 Jul 24, 2017 3:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper (Post 7873510)
People. It's isaidso. Things are never as simple as comparable populations. Melbourne/ Australia are nowhere. Flying many, many hours is the only escape.

Then explain to me why both cities had similar passengers numbers in 1991? This means that something went terribly wrong in Montreal. A 16M difference in 25 years is massive.

WhipperSnapper Jul 24, 2017 4:22 AM

Yeah, something must have gone terribly wrong comparing the 1991 numbers to now with absolutely zero analysis. Apples to Oranges. That's what isaidso has done every time he compares our losing little backwater's (meaning Canada) passenger numbers to Australia as if the sky is falling.

OutOfTowner Jul 24, 2017 5:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicko999 (Post 7873694)
Then explain to me why both cities had similar passengers numbers in 1991? This means that something went terribly wrong in Montreal. A 16M difference in 25 years is massive.

The Australian airline industry was deregulated in 1990. Since then, air travel has quadrupled with 3/4 of the increase occuring domestically. Domestic flights are incredibly cheap - it's nothing for an Aussie to fly from Melbourne to Brisbane for the weekend, as an example. My friends do it all the time. Also, the rise of Asian economies - China and India in particular - has resulted in a huge increase in regional tourism from practically nothing in the 80's-90's.

In Melbourne's case, the closest major cities are Canberra, Adelaide, Sydney - a 7,8,9 hour drive (under ideal conditions) respectively. Much quicker and cheaper to fly than to drive.

Aussies are also great travellers which is why, even though there are only 22 million of them, they seem to be everywhere!

Which is a good thing because they're a good bunch and a lot of fun.

OutOfTowner Jul 24, 2017 5:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper (Post 7873710)
Yeah, something must have gone terribly wrong comparing the 1991 numbers to now with absolutely zero analysis. Apples to Oranges. That's what isaidso has done every time he compares our losing little backwater's (meaning Canada) passenger numbers to Australia as if the sky is falling.

Isaidso seems to think that population/x should always=y, regardless of any external factors.

He worships big numbers for their bigness - bigly.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.