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)

thenoflyzone Jul 27, 2020 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denscity (Post 8993180)
YVR has zero airlines based there.

LOL.

So you think Flair isn't flying to YUL because AC and TS headquarters are there?

We both know that's not true. When you said "based", I figured you meant in terms of "hub" operations, and especially domestic hub ops.

In which case, YYZ, YYC and YVR most definitely have 2 airlines "based" there, whereas YUL only has 1, again, in terms of domestic ops.

No one cares where an airlines' pencil pushers are based at.

Denscity Jul 27, 2020 5:52 PM

Ya i should use the term "headquarters" not base.

Gm0ney Jul 28, 2020 5:30 PM

A Winnipeg Airport Authority spokesperson was on the local morning news talking about their new mandatory mask order (masks had previously been mandatory going through security and boarding planes, but now it's everywhere in the building).

They were saying Winnipeg Richardson International is operating about 25% of normal passenger flight volumes and about 10% - 15% in terms of actual passengers compared to last year at this time.

hollywoodcory Jul 28, 2020 6:35 PM

Air Transat is cancelled all Western Canada routes this coming winter. Only YVR-YYZ/YUL will still operate for connection purposes.

https://www.travelweek.ca/news/trans...r-canada-deal/

Additionally, the AC/TS deal has been delayed.

thenoflyzone Jul 28, 2020 9:16 PM

YUL handled 84,300 pax in June, which is a 220% increase over May.

Encouraging sign.

YTD total: 4,241,000

https://www.admtl.com/sites/default/...esse_VA_VF.pdf

thenoflyzone Jul 28, 2020 9:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory (Post 8994394)

Additionally, the AC/TS deal has been delayed.

More like delayed indefinitely! Hardy surprising. Transat lives on! Can’t complain.

Dominion301 Jul 29, 2020 1:34 AM

YOW's June pax stats are out:

Sector / Jun-19 / Jun-20 / % Change
Dom: 363,732 / 20,256 / -94.4%
TB: 48,101 / 219 / -99.5% - farewell to transborder pax until ???
Int'l: 23,088 / 0 / -100.0%
TTL: 434,921 / 20,475 / -95.3%

Sector / YTD 2019 / YTD 2020 / % Change
Dom: 1,918,579 / 773,127 / -59.7%
TB: 386,410 / 163,093 / -57.8%
Int'l: 263,212 / 168,382 / -36.0%
TTL: 2,568,201 / 1,104,602 / -57.0%

12 Months Rolling / % Change vs Year End 2019
Dom: 2,848,101 / -28.8%
TB: 462,980 / -35.8%
Int'l: 331,807 / -14.4%
TTL: 3,642,888 / -28.72%

I added a new, at least for the time being, more meaningful metric: month-over-month changes:
Sector / May-20 / Jun-20 / % Change
Dom: 8,386 / 20,256 / +141.5%
TB: 535 / 219 / -59.1%
Int'l: 0 / 0 / N/A
TTL: 8,921 / 20,475 / +129.5%

Nicko999 Jul 29, 2020 3:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 8994598)
YUL handled 84,300 pax in June, which is a 220% increase over May.

Encouraging sign.

YTD total: 4,241,000

https://www.admtl.com/sites/default/...esse_VA_VF.pdf

Encouraging yes but still behind YYC's numbers post pandemic.

Obviously, that is explained by more domestic pax in Calgary. Even in a pandemic, YUL pax stats for May were 37% international (44% including transborder).

thenoflyzone Jul 29, 2020 4:02 PM

Q
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicko999 (Post 8994973)
Encouraging yes but still behind YYC's numbers post pandemic.

Obviously, that is explained by more domestic pax in Calgary. Even in a pandemic, YUL pax stats for May were 37% international (44% including transborder).

Each airport played to its strengths. YYC on the domestic front, and YUL on the international front.

YUL always lagged behind YYC in terms of domestic passengers. This was true before the pandemic as well. When international travel all but disappeared, this fact was highlighted even more.

That being said, YUL still managed to retain service to Europe (AC, AF) and Asia (QR) throughout the pandemic, something YYC wasn't able to replicate.

In fact for all of Q2, YYC had a mere 345 international passengers, all of them in April, and zero in May and June. Considering YYC is still one of only 4 airports in the whole country that can accept flights from Europe and Asia, that is pretty bad, and highlights YYC's weak spot. Whereas the core of international routes out of YUL have already returned to service. We are even going to get a new carrier, TAP, shortly. This to me, is far more important than passenger numbers.

Like I said, the 220% increase in 1 month at YUL is encouraging, and, if kept up, should level the playing field in a month or two. TS resuming operations is a big push for Eastern airports, and will have nil effect on west Coast airports. That should help as well. By the time Porter resumes operations, all will be back to normal....

All of this, assuming there is no second wave, and that Europe keeps accepting Canadians. If that door closes one more time, all bets are off.

hollywoodcory Jul 30, 2020 1:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 8995391)
That being said, YUL still managed to retain service to Europe (AC, AF) and Asia (QR) throughout the pandemic, something YYC wasn't able to replicate.

Alberta's trash economy played a factor in this. Otherwise, KLM likely would have stuck it out like they had intended to.

YYC's June Transborder numbers were also pretty good given there was just 2 flights for most of the month.

wave46 Jul 30, 2020 9:15 PM

This is kind of an aside and not related to Canadian airports per se, but today Boeing announced it would end production of the Boeing 747 in 2022.

As Airbus had previously announced the A380's end in 2021, the era of very large 4-engine aircraft comes to an end.

While I get the economics behind twin-engine aircraft and why aircraft manufacturers and airlines have standardized around the wing-mounted twin-engine aircraft design, it's sort of disappointing to see.

At one point, the airways of the world were filled with all kinds of unique commercial airplanes. Rear-mounted twinjets, trijets, big quadjets, even the Concorde. In a sense, I feel the same way I do in the "Lamenting the decline of the car" thread - we see increasing homogenization because the costs are merciless on the economics of production.

I'll still remember the first time when I went to Pearson Airport as a kid, got out of the car at the parking lot and just by chance, saw a 747 fly directly over on takeoff. It was awesome.

I think we'll still have the 747 (and the kind of ugly-ducking A380) making appearances here for a bit in Canada, but sadly I don't think I'll ever have the chance to fly on one. So, in a small sense, today's a kind the announcement of the denouement of an era.

Dominion301 Jul 31, 2020 1:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 8996851)
This is kind of an aside and not related to Canadian airports per se, but today Boeing announced it would end production of the Boeing 747 in 2022.

As Airbus had previously announced the A380's end in 2021, the era of very large 4-engine aircraft comes to an end.

While I get the economics behind twin-engine aircraft and why aircraft manufacturers and airlines have standardized around the wing-mounted twin-engine aircraft design, it's sort of disappointing to see.

At one point, the airways of the world were filled with all kinds of unique commercial airplanes. Rear-mounted twinjets, trijets, big quadjets, even the Concorde. In a sense, I feel the same way I do in the "Lamenting the decline of the car" thread - we see increasing homogenization because the costs are merciless on the economics of production.

I'll still remember the first time when I went to Pearson Airport as a kid, got out of the car at the parking lot and just by chance, saw a 747 fly directly over on takeoff. It was awesome.

I think we'll still have the 747 (and the kind of ugly-ducking A380) making appearances here for a bit in Canada, but sadly I don't think I'll ever have the chance to fly on one. So, in a small sense, today's a kind the announcement of the denouement of an era.

I would not be surprised if the next quad engine aircraft is electric or at the very least a hybrid. Will any quads of any type still be built other than Hercs? I would imagine eventually something will to replace AN-124s, C-17s, etc.

thenoflyzone Jul 31, 2020 1:42 AM

TAP inaugural about to land at YUL in 40 minutes.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/tp253

Last QR flight to YYZ was today. Flights are no longer bookable.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/qr767

esquire Jul 31, 2020 1:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 8996851)
This is kind of an aside and not related to Canadian airports per se, but today Boeing announced it would end production of the Boeing 747 in 2022.

As Airbus had previously announced the A380's end in 2021, the era of very large 4-engine aircraft comes to an end.

While I get the economics behind twin-engine aircraft and why aircraft manufacturers and airlines have standardized around the wing-mounted twin-engine aircraft design, it's sort of disappointing to see.

At one point, the airways of the world were filled with all kinds of unique commercial airplanes. Rear-mounted twinjets, trijets, big quadjets, even the Concorde. In a sense, I feel the same way I do in the "Lamenting the decline of the car" thread - we see increasing homogenization because the costs are merciless on the economics of production.

I'll still remember the first time when I went to Pearson Airport as a kid, got out of the car at the parking lot and just by chance, saw a 747 fly directly over on takeoff. It was awesome.

I think we'll still have the 747 (and the kind of ugly-ducking A380) making appearances here for a bit in Canada, but sadly I don't think I'll ever have the chance to fly on one. So, in a small sense, today's a kind the announcement of the denouement of an era.

I feel this. The 747 and Concorde were in some ways the grand finale to an era of incredible progress in aviation... in the course of one lifetime we went from nothing at all to the first flight at Kitty Hawk (1903) to the first flights of the 747 and Concorde (1969). Someone born in 1900 would have taken their first steps in a world where no aviation existed, and by the time they were elderly they had the full range of modern jet-age travel available to them.

Since then it's been nothing but moderate and incremental change. Lots of tinkering around the edges, searching for efficiency, that kind of thing. But to anyone who isn't an accountant or engineer, the sight of a 321XLR or whatever will never stir the soul the way that a 747 did. I realize the search for efficiency has brought air travel to the masses and there is something to be said for that... but just the same, the era of the huge leaps in technology appears to be over for the time being.

thenoflyzone Jul 31, 2020 3:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire (Post 8997407)
I feel this. The 747 and Concorde were in some ways the grand finale to an era of incredible progress in aviation... in the course of one lifetime we went from nothing at all to the first flight at Kitty Hawk (1903) to the first flights of the 747 and Concorde (1969). Someone born in 1900 would have taken their first steps in a world where no aviation existed, and by the time they were elderly they had the full range of modern jet-age travel available to them.

Since then it's been nothing but moderate and incremental change. Lots of tinkering around the edges, searching for efficiency, that kind of thing. But to anyone who isn't an accountant or engineer, the sight of a 321XLR or whatever will never stir the soul the way that a 747 did. I realize the search for efficiency has brought air travel to the masses and there is something to be said for that... but just the same, the era of the huge leaps in technology appears to be over for the time being.

I get the nostalgia. But....

Aviation is still progressing. The difference is the average person can't see the progression, because it has less to do with hardware, and more do to with software.

The leaps in technology you speak of are happening, but mostly on aircraft avionics or engines, to meet new performance, efficiency, and navigational standards and requirements.

EVS (enhanced flight vision system), RNAV LPV approaches, RNP AR approaches with curved segments, ADSB: These systems were not around as early as 20-25 years ago. Systems that operate behind the scenes and that the flying public in general has no clue about, but make a huge difference in the cockpit. It enable these planes to land at airports they couldn't a few years prior, especially in bad weather. Think of Paro, Bhutan, or even Castlegar or Kelowna, BC.

Airlines who want to hold on to their 30 year old frames often spend millions on them just to make sure they are up to snuff in terms of avionics requirements. AC and their A320s are a perfect example. Up until a few years ago, AC didn't even have GPS on their A320s. Simply an INS/IRU. That meant they couldn't fly all these new RNAV approaches popping up left and right at airports with no ILS, which meant that in inclement weather, they would often have to divert. Today, AC has GPS on all their A320s and can fly those RNAV approaches. It cost them a lot of money to upgrade, but they did it. But to an average person looking at an Air Canada A320, it still looks like the 30 year old planes they were back when they got them in the 90s. Not so.

Retrofit spending in commercial and business aviation is a $3-4 billion a year industry. The biggest segments in current fit and retrofit are navigation, surveillance and communications,

This is why aircraft part out and scrapping is such a big business. The airframe per se isn't worth much. Future coke cans, that's about it. It's the engines, landing gear and avionics that bring in the big bucks when reselling.

All this to say, an A321LR rolling out of Hamburg today is a far more advanced machine than the first A321 that rolled out 30 years ago. You can't see the difference or the technological advancements, but it's there. Just with the new engines and sharklets alone, an A320neo airframe is 15 to 20% more efficient than a A320ceo. That's amazing, to say the least.

The CSeries burns as much fuel as an E190 between YUL and YYC, carrying 40-45 more passengers and bags. These are huge gains for the industry, ones that the flying public doesn't see.

Coldrsx Jul 31, 2020 6:28 PM

While it might not be as obvious or in your face, stating that a 787 is not a massive step forward in aviation technology or for the industry is missing a lot of the point.

esquire Jul 31, 2020 6:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx (Post 8997761)
While it might not be as obvious or in your face, stating that a 787 is not a massive step forward in aviation technology or for the industry is missing a lot of the point.

That is the point, though. The changes in the early era were rapid and dramatic, we went from no flight to flight to jet flight at breakneck speed. Now it's more about refining what's already there, or incremental changes.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing, obviously going from not existing to existing is the biggest change of all. Just noting that the era of rapid, dramatic evolution in a way that captures the public's imagination is over for now.

thenoflyzone Jul 31, 2020 6:41 PM

Air China seems to have resumed PEK-YUL today. (Edit: Dont know if its a one off or not, because on their website, the schedules show the route operating only as of Sept 2, 2020.)

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ca879

So, here is the list of foreign airlines (except US) that are operating or have resumed service to YUL.
  • Air France (never stopped service)
  • Qatar (never stopped service)
  • Lufthansa
  • Swiss
  • KLM
  • Turkish Airlines
  • Aeromexico
  • Tunisair
  • Royal Air Maroc
  • Air Algerie
  • TAP (New service)
  • Air China

Here is a list of carriers that will resume service, but are currently not operating
  • Royal Jordanian - 1x weekly, August 13, 2020
  • British Airways - 3x weekly, September 2020
  • Copa Airlines - October 5, 2020

Here are the airlines that have announced they will only resume service next year.
  • Corsair - summer 2021

Airlines that are uncertain to return
  • Austrian Airlines (retired half their B767 fleet)
  • Icelandair
  • Level Airlines
  • InterJet
  • Azores

Anyone with info like this for Canada's other majors, please post as well.

wave46 Jul 31, 2020 6:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx (Post 8997761)
While it might not be as obvious or in your face, stating that a 787 is not a massive step forward in aviation technology or for the industry is missing a lot of the point.

Sure. I'm absolutely not disagreeing on that point.

My point more was that in the era past, there was a lot more variety because aircraft manufacturers were still hunting for that optimal design of what worked best.

It was like the 1960s-1980s in car design - there were several competing drivetrain layouts:

Front-engine, rear drive
Front-engine, front drive
Rear-engine, rear drive
Mid-engine, rear drive
Front-engine, all-wheel-drive

Now, the average car (excluding sports cars, expensive luxury cars and trucks) have pretty much standardized around the front-engine, front-drive/AWD layout. Modern cars are much more efficient and some pack in a boggling amount of tech (hybrids and the like), but since the secret of what layout works most efficiently has been discovered, manufacturers have flocked to it.

There's more variety in cars as they're a consumer item that can be specialized, but the general trend holds.

hollywoodcory Jul 31, 2020 7:03 PM

^
YYC didn't have many foreign carriers to start but here goes:

Currently Operating:
KLM

Planning to Resume Service:
British Airways - March 2021
Condor - May 2021
Edelweiss - May 2021

Uncertain:
Hainan Airlines (unlikely)
Eurowings
AeroMexico


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.