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)

wave46 Oct 16, 2016 4:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alexcaban (Post 7594996)
http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...-s17-schedule/

One would think this route would have been doing super well, unfortunately Air Transat has decided to not bring it back next summer.

Once a week services are a token presence, if anything, to be honest.

Unless you're traveling on the specific days it runs, you're flying through another hub, which I imagine most people were doing anyway when going from YVR-Rome. I suppose it works great if you have the luxury of planning a vacation around direct flights, but otherwise it is not worth it.

Cage Oct 17, 2016 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YYCguys (Post 7593700)
I would like to see T3 build a third wing so one wing can be all domestic, the second wing can be all international and the third wing all transborder. And get rid of that ridiculous remote pier that Westjet and Westjet Encore are using at the moment in the process!

A third concourse at T3 was in the original plan back in 1989 when T3 was originally built. However this plan included AC losing all its hanger space or having to rebuild the hanger capacity elsewhere.

With the groundbreaking on AC hanger 5, any plans for a third concourse are officially buried.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flipv (Post 7593742)
There is some expansion work planned for T3. Air Canada is building a new wide body hangar and the old one glued against the T3 satellite is being demolished. Apparently the remote terminal will then be expanded. I don't blame the GTAA for being conservative as they got badly burned by the last round of expansion.

Expansion of the T3 satellite would enable 2-3 new gates at most. With the build out of new AC hanger 5, parked aircraft and gates at the satellite will not be able to "round the horn" at the north end of the concourse.

As per the 2004 strategic plan for airport development, any future air terminal Developmemt will occur at T1. This has been a GTAA policy since late 90s when the overall plan for t1 was developed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325 (Post 7593777)
Last month on urban Toronto I heard the announcement for construction would come any time.

Any announcement will become a design Announcement with construction not to start for another 4-6 years down the road. In the interim, the midfield terminal will be renovated and reactivated. My guess is that they midfield terminal will be used by both T1 and T3 based airlines.

The short term plan will be to continue to force airlines to efficiently use their existing gate space. AC has been working with the GTAA for the past 2 years on gate efficiency initiatives. Summer peak schedule increase will increasingly be handled by remote stands and bussing to terminal operation, especially for late arrival aircraft. Airlines have been monitored on their ability to meet schedule deadlines and be able to turn aircraft in under 1.5 hours. Airlines with turn times exceeding 1.5 hours will have to push their aircraft to remote stands for commissary, fuel, and interior cleaning.

Suwing's move to T3 last May was not at their request. Infact AC kicked out Sunwing from T1 because Sunwing could not keep to their published gate plan schedule. AC could effectively kick out Sunwing through provisions of the long term commercial agreement. The same agreement is forcing all non star alliance airlines to T3.

Very quietly Westjet has signed a long term commercial agreement with GTAA on similar terms to AC.

WS and AC can put the effort and money into Efficient gate utilization program. For AC, they all ready do this at major international airports (LHR, HKG, NRT). TransAt and Sunwing however cannot do efficient ground turnaround times because they are dependant upon higher aircraft utilization. For the charter airlines, to get 4-10 hours behind schedule is not a major problem because they're don't have connections at the hub airport. Further while pax will bitterly complain about being delayed 10 or 24 hours, the following year they will book again to save $30 on the trip. So guess who is being sent to the infield terminal, it won't be the two major players in YYZ. The infield terminal will be airlines who cannot operate efficient turns and comply with the gate plan schedule.

casper Oct 18, 2016 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cage (Post 7596058)
.... Suwing's move to T3 last May was not at their request. Infact AC kicked out Sunwing from T1 because Sunwing could not keep to their published gate plan schedule. AC could effectively kick out Sunwing through provisions of the long term commercial agreement. The same agreement is forcing all non star alliance airlines to T3.

Very quietly Westjet has signed a long term commercial agreement with GTAA on similar terms to AC.

WS and AC can put the effort and money into Efficient gate utilization program. For AC, they all ready do this at major international airports (LHR, HKG, NRT). TransAt and Sunwing however cannot do efficient ground turnaround times because they are dependant upon higher aircraft utilization. For the charter airlines, to get 4-10 hours behind schedule is not a major problem because they're don't have connections at the hub airport. Further while pax will bitterly complain about being delayed 10 or 24 hours, the following year they will book again to save $30 on the trip. So guess who is being sent to the infield terminal, it won't be the two major players in YYZ. The infield terminal will be airlines who cannot operate efficient turns and comply with the gate plan schedule.

I agree the Charter airlines belong in the infield terminal if the main terminals start to become full.

That said, it is going to be interesting to see what happens next summer as TransAt starts to do connections in YYZ from places like Vancouver and Calgary.

flipv Oct 18, 2016 1:02 AM

Great post, Cage! 4-6 years just to start construction seems very long. Are they planning to do the rest of the terminal (G+H) in one go?

And lol... the infield terminal will be time out for naughty airlines. :haha:

G.S MTL Oct 20, 2016 12:32 AM

YUL numbers are out for July and August

July - 1,713,564 +10.5%
Domestic +13.2%
International +11.3%
Transborder +4.6%

August - 1,747,333 +8.9%
Domestic +13%
International +7.9%
Transborder +3.9%

YTD - 11,327,934



Looking good !!

Nicko999 Oct 20, 2016 3:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.S MTL (Post 7598394)
YUL numbers are out for July and August

July - 1,713,564 +10.5%
Domestic +13.2%
International +11.3%
Transborder +4.6%

August - 1,747,333 +8.9%
Domestic +13%
International +7.9%
Transborder +3.9%

YTD - 11,327,934



Looking good !!

Now those are great numbers!:)

SkahHigh Oct 20, 2016 4:05 AM

Wow, that is some great growth.

SpongeG Oct 20, 2016 5:02 AM

has anyone looked into using that new airline - newleaf?

LeftCoaster Oct 20, 2016 5:37 PM

Huge YUL numbers!

Those domestic figures in particular are shocking, what's going on there? When I saw the topline numbers I figured it would be intl growth.

I thought Quebecois didn't like flying to the ROC? ;)

thenoflyzone Oct 20, 2016 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 7598989)
Huge YUL numbers!

Those domestic figures in particular are shocking, what's going on there? When I saw the topline numbers I figured it would be intl growth.

I thought Quebecois didn't like flying to the ROC? ;)

Connections no doubt. As the YUL hub grows on the international front, so will inevitably the domestic end, to feed into it. AC really wants to grow transfer traffic both at YUL and YYZ. Domestic feed is key, but also 6th freedom traffic (US-Europe/Asia) via YYZ/YUL.

Just to give you some numbers....

YYZ 70℅ O&D 30% transfer
YUL 80℅ O&D 20 % transfer

Obviously there is huge potential to grow transfer traffic at both locations.

Johnny Aussie Oct 20, 2016 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7599308)
Connections no doubt. As the YUL hub grows on the international front, so will inevitably the domestic end, to feed into it. AC really wants to grow transfer traffic both at YUL and YYZ. Domestic feed is key, but also 6th freedom traffic (US-Europe/Asia) via YYZ/YUL.

Just to give you some numbers....

YYZ 70℅ O&D 30% transfer
YUL 80℅ O&D 20 % transfer

Obviously there is huge potential to grow transfer traffic at both locations.

And AC's second largest hub at YVR with its ever expanding list of new international routes.

YVR's international growth this year is nothing but phenomenal. Total international arrivals now causing major problems as capacity constraints at peak periods now hindering new flights. Expect the major expansion announcement very soon! Domestic now less than 50% of total traffic... In my opinion that is a good balance.

thenoflyzone Oct 21, 2016 1:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie (Post 7599385)
And AC's second largest hub at YVR with its ever expanding list of new international routes.

YVR's international growth this year is nothing but phenomenal. Total international arrivals now causing major problems as capacity constraints at peak periods now hindering new flights. Expect the major expansion announcement very soon! Domestic now less than 50% of total traffic... In my opinion that is a good balance.

Absolutely. YVR has been on fire....but the customs lineups are nowhere near as bad as at YUL.

Btw, anyone know the O&D /transfer ratios at YVR and YYC? Would be interesting to compare the top 4 airports in the nation in that regard.

Although it has to be said that with the cap on Chinese carriers to Canada, it will be hard for YVR to duplicate in the future the growth it has experienced in the last 5 years. I don't see AC launching service to secondary Chinese cities. They seem to be content with serving PEK, PVG and HKG. They might give YYZ-CAN a go, but no new destinations to China out of YVR seem to be planned for AC. (If BA's recent announcement to exit CTU is any indication, the influx of western carriers launching secondary Chinese cities might be a few years too early, even with all the subsidies being thrown around by the local Chinese governments)

All the intl growth for YVR will have to come from service to other Asian countries and to/from Europe.

jmt18325 Oct 21, 2016 1:32 AM

Air Canada has their sights set on CAN, but only from YYZ according to the little information that we have.

thenoflyzone Oct 21, 2016 2:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325 (Post 7599455)
Air Canada has their sights set on CAN, but only from YYZ according to the little information that we have.

The only route they launched that wasn't on that "2018 growth opportunities" page was YVR-DEL. So I wouldn't completely discard any growth from YVR to China, but nevertheless, all i see happening are more frequency to PEK and PVG once slots become available.

jmt18325 Oct 21, 2016 2:50 PM

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. YYZ - CAN was on that map, but nothing else to China.

nname Oct 21, 2016 6:47 PM

YVR-CAN was on AC's radar until CZ started the route first and ran it daily.

SignalHillHiker Oct 21, 2016 6:49 PM

St. John's had it's busiest summer season ever, largely due to the direct flights to Europe.

Quote:

It was the busiest summer in its history, according to a news release Thursday from the airport authority, with 836,000 people going through the gates, nearly 200,000 in August alone.

The numbers are up 9.4 per cent over the same period in 2015.

...

"The addition of new, direct flights to new destinations, in particular our new European services, also encouraged travel by locals," said Marie Manning, the airport's director of marketing and business development.

Manning said the airport is served by nine commercial airlines, with direct flights to 16 destinations, including three daily flights to Europe.

The news has not all been good for the airport.

Porter Airlines announced Oct. 3 that it is canceling flights out of St. John's between Jan. 4 and April 11, citing slow travel during the winter months, and a declining economy.

LeftCoaster Oct 21, 2016 6:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname (Post 7600151)
YVR-CAN was on AC's radar until CZ started the route first and ran it daily.

Well now 9 times per week for summer 17'.

Still think there'd be some room for a star alliance carrier on the route though, it's been growing like crazy going from daily 788 to daily 777 to 9xPW 777 in 18 months.

LeftCoaster Oct 21, 2016 7:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7599447)
Although it has to be said that with the cap on Chinese carriers to Canada, it will be hard for YVR to duplicate in the future the growth it has experienced in the last 5 years. I don't see AC launching service to secondary Chinese cities. They seem to be content with serving PEK, PVG and HKG. They might give YYZ-CAN a go, but no new destinations to China out of YVR seem to be planned for AC. (If BA's recent announcement to exit CTU is any indication, the influx of western carriers launching secondary Chinese cities might be a few years too early, even with all the subsidies being thrown around by the local Chinese governments)

All the intl growth for YVR will have to come from service to other Asian countries and to/from Europe.

Though the bilateral cap is a frustration, there's still a ton of room for growth at YVR to China and Asia as a whole.
  • Word is Air China may bring the 747-8i to YVR next summer to make up for the frequency cap.
  • China Eastern still sends double daily A330-200s. boosting that up to a 777 would be a 20% in capacity.
  • China southern is more or less maxed unless they want to send the 380. Very unlikely given its current utilization.
  • Sichuan just ordered 4 A350s. Likely those would see action to YVR and be a boost from their current A330-200
  • Hainin still has the two frequencies remaining that will likely go to their planned Tianjin-YVR route, plus they can ferry PAX through Hong Kong on their subsidiary Hong Kong Airlines which has been rumoured to be looking at YVR.

This is just China growth, and doesn't even touch huge markets for YVR like Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong which are not as bogged down as China for capacity.

Add to all this new routes rumoured like Bangkok on Thai and Singapore on SG or AC, Melbourne on AC and there's a ton of potential to keep YVR growing until the next chance to revisit the Chinese bilateral.

2017 for instance is already scheduled for huge growth, with a 15.1 increase in summer seats to Asia-Pac already announced, and it's only Oct. Throw some of the above mentioned growth into 2018 and were then into 2019 and we're ready to renegotiate the bilateral and open up some of that sweet sweet mainland china growth again! :slob:

nname Oct 21, 2016 7:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster (Post 7600155)
Well now 9 times per week for summer 17'.

Still think there'd be some room for a star alliance carrier on the route though, it's been growing like crazy going from daily 788 to daily 777 to 9xPW 777 in 18 months.

I still think SZX is still a better for AC though, as it is a hub for Star Alliance (ZH - Shenzhen Airlines). ZH and CA right now actively expand long-hual and regional destinations out of the airport, whereas CAN is CZ's fortress and have quite limited Star Alliance presence.

CA would be starting FRA, LAX, and MEL from SZX later this year or early next year... Would you think they would've applied for YVR if not for the bilateral restriction?

Plus, the actual city of Guangzhou is between CAN and SZX, about 2/3 of the way. SZX can also serve as a secondary airport to HKG...


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:22 PM.

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