Good video of what Delta is doing. I would expect the Canadian airlines to do the same....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbx88jkOx1k

I’ve heard a rumour that AC will be permanently parking the entire E90, 319 and 767 fleets. The E90s and mainline 67s were on their way out by the end of 2021 either way, but all 319s and 767s, must mean a) the end of Rouge and b) TC will soon give AC the green light to takeover TS, thus making Rouge redundant.

Correct, the following is from Air Canada's Q1 update:
Air Canada is accelerating the retirement of 79 older aircraft from its fleet – Boeing 767, Airbus 319 and Embraer 190 aircraft, with the Embraer aircraft exiting the fleet immediately. Their retirement will simplify the airline’s overall fleet, reduce its cost structure, and lower its carbon footprint.

To be fair, the E190s were scheduled to leave the fleet before the end of this year anyways. Also, The A319s (and A320s) didn't have long left as AC was always going to shift its focus away from the baby buses and onto the MAX/Cseries/A321 combo for narrowbody ops.

The 767s leaving shouldn't come as a surprise either, as AC was always talking about long haul fleet flexibility (i.e retiring older aircraft), should an economic downturn happen.

Well, it's happened, and AC has just flexed its muscles.

Also, Rouge still has 18 narrowbodies left. So they aren't going anywhere for now. Even when the government approves the AC/TS merger, the companies wont merge operations that quickly. Rouge will still be required for a number of years to come.

Aeroméxico updated their Canadian service for the months of May:

Vancouver (YVR) - Operations resume May 1 with 1 weekly flight (737-800). 2 weekly from May 7 to 31.

Montreal (YUL) and Toronto (YYZ) - Suspended until May 31. Operations resume on June 1.

https://www.razon.com.mx/negocios/an...artir-de-mayo/

The 319 retirements seem to exclude Jetz aircraft as including them I think would = 82. While the 319s weren't in the long-term plans, AC were planning on another 5 years of 319/320 mainline ops. Looks like that'll now be 320/321/223 and someday MAX ops.

I know its still way to early to be looking at S21, but I just noticed AC has changed YYC-NRT to a 788.

If the route had ran this year, it would have been the last remaining long haul mainline 767 route.

AC reports $1 billion loss in Q1:

Air Canada posts $1-billion loss as carrier faces ‘darkest period’ in commercial aviation history

The COVID-19 pandemic drove Air Canada to a $1-billion loss in the first quarter as most air travel came to a halt.

Air Canada burned through $880-million in liquidity in the first three months of 2020, as it reduced its schedule by 90 per cent since March 16.

“Our first quarter results reflect the severity and abruptness of the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on Air Canada, which started to be felt across the global airline industry in late January with the suspension by many carriers, including Air Canada, of services to China,” Air Canada said in a statement accompanying its results on Monday morning. “The impact was exacerbated during the month of March with mandated social distancing, unprecedented government-imposed travel restrictions in Canada and around the world and the shutting down of economies.”...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...ic-brings-air/

It is interesting to see how fleet planning has really evolved. A few years ago, simplicity was the mantra du jour. However, given the MAX grounding that no longer looks to be the wisest plan.

When a major grounding could basically end one's operations (think Southwest if they exclusively used the MAX) one fleet is a huge risk.

Air Canada is kind of in an advantageous situation right now. It has a few paid-for models in its fleet (E90/A319/A320/767) that can easily be retired without big writeoffs. It has a bunch of 737 MAXs that aren't flying that Boeing is liable for compensation while they sit, not that AC probably minds that they're grounded/not delivered yet.

The E90s were gas-guzzlers too - apparently they used as much fuel as a 737 MAX on a similar flight length, despite only having 97 seats versus 169.

They've also bought more used A330s instead of going all 787, which gives them more flexibility in their operations at lower capital cost. At large, AC seems to have a very diverse and capable fleet - which is good for tailoring one's operations.

Since Q1 usually sucks for AC anyway, I'm mostly surprised it isn't worse than that.

That being said, there's going to be a bunch of ugly numbers coming out of the airline industry in the near future.

Edit: never mind. Looks like it was another weird error

Yes it seems so.

It is also important to note the Air Canada booked a $711 million foreign exchange loss in the quarter (drop in CAD vs USD) - otherwise their operating loss was ~430 million in Q1, which isn't too bad considering...

Whoops, that is Mexico City to/from YVR, YYZ & YUL...

I dont know. Has it really?

AC never really had a single fleet type. Starting from the mid 60's, AC has operated DC-8s, Vanguards, DC-9s, B727s, L1011s, B737s, B747s, B767s, A340s, A320s, A330s, E190s, and now A220s, and MAXs. Let's not forget the fleet of DC-10s they inherited from CP when they merged.

In the early 2000s, they appeared to be headed towards fleet commonality when they got rid of the DC-9s, 737s and 747s and were relying on the A320s, A330s and A340s, but that all disappeared when they ordered the B77W/LRs and retired the A340.

Fleet planning hasn't evolved. It's the same really. Get what you can that will do the job efficiently, for the least amount of $$$$$$$$.

That's exactly what AC tried to do when it acquired the MAX, and it bit them in the ass. Had they gone for fleet commonality - and incidentally better product - as they should have, they would have bought brand new A321neo's.

They are now realizing their mistake, explaining the second hand A330 and A321 lease or purchases. Over shorter missions across the Atlantic, the A330 is just as efficient, if not more efficient than the B787, if you factor in acquisition costs.


LOL. You didn't need to go out of your way to explicitly mention Mexico City. It goes without saying where the flights originate. But I appreciate your thoroughness.

YHZ have dropped from 11,000 daily average pax to 200: https://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/n...4-8fde49c5c4dd

Of course it can. With the same modifications to the 747, a plane with far less max takeoff weight and thrust, it could easily carry a space shuttle. Just because it doesn't, doesn't mean it can't.

As it stands the A380 is the more powerful aircraft, it flies faster and longer than the Antonov. The Antonov carries more cargo and is longer and has a far superior wingspan. They are very different aircraft designed for very different missions, but bottom line is both are incredible aircraft, which makes your sloppy jab all the more obvious.

It wasn't a circle jerk, it was a few fourmers excited for a new A380 coming to the airport. Only really became an issue when one forumer got jealous and had to take a shot at the plane to make himself feel better. Typical behaviour from him really.

ADM posted February and March stats.

https://www.admtl.com/sites/default/...et_2020_EN.pdf

February 2020

Total: 1,529,526 +6.8%
Domestic: 490,533 +3.3%
International: 686,126 +10.0%
Transborder: 352,867 +5.7%

March 2020

Total: 921,162 -46.2%
Domestic: 295,333 -46.2%
International: 418,677 -43.1%
Transborder: 207,152 -51.5%

Forget about the space shuttle. The way you describe it, seems like it would be a perfect aircraft to carry medical supplies across the globe right about now.

And yet, out of 242 A380s built, only 2 are currently airborne. Incredible aircraft indeed.

Nice try.....

This debate is hilarious to follow.

WestJet's CEO gave a glimpse into it's future in a recent interview:

https://calgaryherald.com/business/w...-b7d5ef619baa/

Some takeaways:

I think the 6th 787, which is in final assembly currently, will be taken but the 4 expected next year will either be reduced or outright cancelled.

I think AC's CEO said something similar to this? I can also see sun destinations like Mexico, Jamaica, Cuba, etc somewhat recovering for next winter too.

I'm assuming this is only speaking about 787 destinations as it doesn't mention Glasgow or Barcelona.

As this doesn't mention any specific timeline other than "as soon as it's safe to do so" I imagine that only London and maybe Paris will come back by years-end. Dublin and Rome are TBD.

I imagine YVR-LGW won't resume this year either. All traffic routed via YYC or YYZ.

----

On another note, based on WestJet only offering its US/International flights in full-fare in June, I suspect it will extend the suspension until July.

NAV Canada announces suspension of overnight services at 18 different airports. 11 are in BC.