SkyscraperPage Forum
Viewing Page 415 of 794
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

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)

zahav Sep 20, 2019 5:38 AM
Ya I don't think YUL getting BOG is a diss to YVR whatsoever. Just like adding all the destinations in France, it is much easier for YUL to get destinations that are an easier flying distance. It would be concerning if AC axed KIX flights from YVR and moved them to YUL, or flights to ANC. It was only natural that YUL got South America flights first, same reason Miami gets them before LA. It isn't a win for YUL over anywhere else, it just makes sense

wave46 Sep 20, 2019 12:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zahav (Post 8693082)
Ya I don't think YUL getting BOG is a diss to YVR whatsoever. Just like adding all the destinations in France, it is much easier for YUL to get destinations that are an easier flying distance. It would be concerning if AC axed KIX flights from YVR and moved them to YUL, or flights to ANC. It was only natural that YUL got South America flights first, same reason Miami gets them before LA. It isn't a win for YUL over anywhere else, it just makes sense
For all the banter, each airport serves destinations the other doesn't that are logical.

YUL has a lot of secondary Europe (especially France), which makes sense given the distance to Europe and the demographics (there seem to be a lot of French speaking people in Quebec).

YVR serves a lot of Pacific Rim destinations. Again, distance and market demographics.

It's almost as if for-profit airlines want to maximize the destinations they serve profitably. Funny how that works.

Airports, despite all the furor, really don't have much say in the matter aside from providing the services.

Dominion301 Sep 20, 2019 6:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor3 (Post 8687590)
I've never had an issue with Air Canada. I get the frustration that comes with dealing with an airline, they have some sort of twisted entitlement to jerk people around, but all airlines do it. Air Canada, surprisingly, is the one airline I have never had an issue with.

Westjet is a flying cattle car which cracks jokes to cover up ineptitude. When my flight to the west coast of the island was cancelled I had a ticket agent suggest I just fly to St. John's and get a cab home... "Ok, and who exactly is forking over $400 for a 9 hour cab ride?" followed by the usual response of "Newfoundland isn't that big". Would you suggest somebody flying to Toronto route through Sudbury instead? No.

Porter once left me stuck in Toronto and refused a refund for the cancellation because the flight was technically still going to my destination, it just wasn't originating from the airport it was supposed to. Still haven't figured that one out.

Provincial Airlines once flew me from Stephenville to Deer Lake (20 minutes) and then said, "oh hey, sorry we are bumping you from the flight the rest of the way to St. John's, you'll have to wait in Deer Lake until the next flight and maybe you can get on then". 12 hours later there was a flight to St. John's. There are no flights to Deer Lake during the day. It was just me and the janitor watching the Chilean mine rescue. Not even the restaurant/cafe was open.

Air Canada has successfully charged me too much, allowed me to board, not bumped me off en route, and dropped me at my desired destination, 100% of the time. My only gripe is they won't fly to YJT.
Speaking of YJT, the airport's only year-round airline is pulling out: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...or%20Jan.%2016.

Id didn't realize PAL Airlines (formerly Provincial) were down to a measly 2 flights/week at YJT.

Quote:
PAL's vice-president of business development, Steve Dinn, told CBC News fewer than 150 passengers had used the twice-weekly service so far this year, instead preferring to fly out of Deer Lake.
Assuming that 150 number is enplaned pax only, even for a twice weekly service since the start of 2019, that's an average of 2 pax per flight!

Dominion301 Sep 20, 2019 6:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker (Post 8689533)
Less than eight hours is much faster than I'd've expected. And yeah even if it's after midnight but still less than 24 hours, I'd count that too. Thanks!

(Sent in a correction. Let's see if they say it in the last hour haha)

EDIT: Wow, nope. They say the host tried to do it in June and couldn't get a flight and their business friends can regularly not get there in 24 hours.
YVR to YYT is > 24 hours? Makes no sense. In summer, YVR pax to YYT can connect in YEG, YYC and YYZ on WS and YYZ, YOW and YUL on AC.

I know this summer's been a bit odd due to the MAX, but even still.

lubicon Sep 20, 2019 7:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cage (Post 8692497)
Hearing on another forum that WS wants to sell their 763s PDQ and all aircraft could be gone by next summer.

This summer has the 763s on the following routes:
- YYZ-LGW
- YYZ-BCN
- YWG-LGW
- YEG-LGW
- YVR-LGW

YYZ-LGW converts to Dreamliner service this winter. Safe bet that YVR-LGW can handle the dreamliner w/o tanking yields. BCN and YEG/YWG to LGW are low yield routes.

IF the 763s are gone this will be a low growth year for WS on International front.
I can see that although I wonder if they might keep them around short term until the Max issue is resolved. The extra capacity might come in handy.

Cage Sep 20, 2019 9:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon (Post 8693693)
I can see that although I wonder if they might keep them around short term until the Max issue is resolved. The extra capacity might come in handy.
I'm hearing part of the reason for a quick disposal is due to impending heavy maintenance checks. If so there won't be the extra capacity.

Finally, some of the reasoning is to do with Amazon buying up all the spare 763 capacity it can get its hands on. WS can't grow the fleet, might as well switch over to the Dreamliner while Amazon is offering a good deal.

thenoflyzone Sep 20, 2019 11:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cage (Post 8693924)
I'm hearing part of the reason for a quick disposal is due to impending heavy maintenance checks. If so there won't be the extra capacity.

Finally, some of the reasoning is to do with Amazon buying up all the spare 763 capacity it can get its hands on. WS can't grow the fleet, might as well switch over to the Dreamliner while Amazon is offering a good deal.

This should come as no surprise. The B763s were only a temporary purchase for WS. Three of the four B763s are now 28 years old. It's been 4 years WS has these birds, and D checks are just around the corner. Time to get rid of them.

thenoflyzone Sep 20, 2019 11:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 8692735)
the flight as it exists from YUL isn't possible from YVR.
Of course it is. NCE could have stayed Rouge, and an A333 or B787 could have operated YVR-BOG. Far from impossible. The point is, YVR's best bet for South America service IS Air Canada. That's a fact. AC's long haul expansion is almost at an end (at least in the short-medium term). The more widebodies get assigned to YYZ/YUL, means the less chances YVR has at securing South American service in the short medium term. This is also a fact.

Long term, no one knows what is going to happen. Chances are, YVR will get at least 1 south american destination eventually. Does Craig want to wait 10 years for that to happen? Probably not. Hence my comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 8692735)
Montreal is nearly twice as close to Bogota as Vancouver.
YVR-BOG is only 33% longer than YUL-BOG. A Rouge B763 could easily operate the flight, if necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 8692735)
And for the record, I'm one of the ones who laments the closure of the Rouge base at YVR
I know.

Who knows, if AC had decided to still have some Rouge 767s at YVR, you guys are probably the ones who would have gotten BOG or LIM service. Again, that's the whole point of my comments.

LeftCoaster Sep 21, 2019 12:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 8694003)

Who knows, if AC had decided to still have some Rouge 767s at YVR, you guys are probably the ones who would have gotten BOG or LIM service. Again, that's the whole point of my comments.
Which is also the whole point of mine. The flight is rouge, which can't exist out of YVR. So AC didn't chose YUL over YVR, they didn't have a choice, the flight couldn't have existed out of YVR.

And AC wouldn't have sent an A333 or 788 to BOG since they don't mix rouge and mainline at an proper international destination (ie not transborder/sun flying/mexico). Also YVR isn't an A330 base so rotating through YVR is not an ideal/practical option either.

So it was never going to happen.

YVRs best chance at South America is Santiago, plain and simple. O&D is decent and it's a mainline route for AC and a straight shot south. Best O&D remains Brazil, but it is very constrained by the aircraft timing as you and others have outlined previously. I do think one will happen eventually especially since Vancouver's economy continues to boom and YVR-Brazil O&D is surprisingly strong, but the rotational issues obviously make it tough.

YYCguys Sep 21, 2019 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 8693999)
This should come as no surprise. The B763s were only a temporary purchase for WS. Three of the four B763s are now 28 years old. It's been 4 years WS has these birds, and D checks are just around the corner. Time to get rid of them.
When the 763s do leave the fleet, will there be enough 787s in the fleet at that moment to compensate for the lost capacity?

LeftCoaster Sep 21, 2019 1:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 8694003)
YVR-BOG is only 33% longer than YUL-BOG.
Also that's a significant distance. To put it in perspective, YUL-HKG is only 17% further than YVR-HKG. It's a big deal when you're talking about distances like this.

If you phrase it differently... YVR-BOG is 50% further than YUL BOG.

hollywoodcory Sep 21, 2019 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYCguys (Post 8694044)
When the 763s do leave the fleet, will there be enough 787s in the fleet at that moment to compensate for the lost capacity?
WS is getting 3 more 787s next year, bringing its total to 6. Based on what's currently scheduled for S20, it takes up 4 frames.

I suspect YEG/YWG-LGW would get dropped. YVR-LGW would get upguaged to the 789.

Jury is still out on what would happen to YYZ-BCN though.

They would probably also need 1 or 2 to run between YYC-YYZ-YVR as well?

wave46 Sep 21, 2019 8:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollywoodcory (Post 8694212)
WS is getting 3 more 787s next year, bringing its total to 6. Based on what's currently scheduled for S20, it takes up 4 frames.

I suspect YEG/YWG-LGW would get dropped. YVR-LGW would get upguaged to the 789.

Jury is still out on what would happen to YYZ-BCN though.
Westjet has been moving towards a hub-and-spoke model for awhile, so I would not be surprised to see YWG/YEG-LGW dropped.

In a sense it sucks for these places, but in a sense, they're not losing much. A once a week flight direct from Winnipeg to London isn't really much good for business travelers or anybody who needs flexibility in their plans. Unless you hate connecting (and I see your point there) the flight is of marginal value.

Djeffery Sep 21, 2019 8:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 8694034)
YVRs best chance at South America is Santiago, plain and simple. O&D is decent and it's a mainline route for AC and a straight shot south.
It's not really a straight shot south. From YVR, you are only going approx. 15 degrees to the west to get to SCL compared to BOG, and is 2400 miles farther than BOG. Quebec City is almost the same longitude as Santiago.

Andy6 Sep 22, 2019 2:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 8694437)

In a sense it sucks for these places, but in a sense, they're not losing much. A once a week flight direct from Winnipeg to London isn't really much good for business travelers or anybody who needs flexibility in their plans. Unless you hate connecting (and I see your point there) the flight is of marginal value.
Everyone hates connecting, so the flight isn't of marginal value for "these places".

Pinus Sep 22, 2019 6:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 8694437)
Westjet has been moving towards a hub-and-spoke model for awhile, so I would not be surprised to see YWG/YEG-LGW dropped.

In a sense it sucks for these places, but in a sense, they're not losing much. A once a week flight direct from Winnipeg to London isn't really much good for business travelers or anybody who needs flexibility in their plans. Unless you hate connecting (and I see your point there) the flight is of marginal value.
I've heard these opinions from the likes of people in Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary. It's very easy for these people to poo-poo on sevice to other cities because.... well..... they actually have the direct flights. I'm sure they would be quite pissed if they had their growth continually stifled due to the hub and spoke model favouring other cities. It's always easy to preach when you have the airline industry boosting your growth every chance it gets at the expense of others.

jmt18325 Sep 22, 2019 7:49 AM
I think it’s a weird thing to get upset about.

wave46 Sep 22, 2019 9:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus (Post 8694701)
I've heard these opinions from the likes of people in Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary. It's very easy for these people to poo-poo on sevice to other cities because.... well..... they actually have the direct flights. I'm sure they would be quite pissed if they had their growth continually stifled due to the hub and spoke model favouring other cities. It's always easy to preach when you have the airline industry boosting your growth every chance it gets at the expense of others.
1. I don't live in any of those cities - I have to connect pretty much regardless of where I fly.

2. I'm not preaching. I'm making an observation based on the recent history of Westjet. They seem to want to expand their intercontinental menu and grow in that direction. Maybe I'm wrong, but they seem to be moving away from infrequent flights (the Winnipeg flight was 1/week on a Saturday).

wave46 Sep 22, 2019 9:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 (Post 8694630)
Everyone hates connecting, so the flight isn't of marginal value for "these places".
Sure it is. If you want to travel to London on any other day of the week than the day the flight goes (as in the case of Winnipeg), you end up connecting somewhere else.

Which - if you need the flexibility - makes the flight kind of useless. A minimum of 4/week seems to be what's required for semi-regular travelers.

jmt18325 Sep 23, 2019 2:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 (Post 8694630)
Everyone hates connecting, so the flight isn't of marginal value for "these places".
Connections in Canada are a breeze at most major airports now.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:44 AM.
Viewing Page 415 of 794
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.