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)

casper Aug 5, 2015 6:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie (Post 7118519)
To be fair KL only is reducing YEG to two weekly from mid Jan to mid Feb, so only for five weeks. As for what was reported previously, things can change on a dime in this industry as we all know. I am just going off what the GDS systems are showing as of today.

Despite all the winter activities, Western Canada from Europe remains very seasonal. Especially YVR, and I suppose YEG too. The amount of flights from Europe to YVR in the summer versus winter is such a huge variance. Even LH reduces YVR to 5-6 weekly for a few weeks during the really low season. However, in comparison LH reduces most of its North American routes for the same period.

A basic summary of Western Canada services this winter:

YVR
AC to LHR daily 77W (High Density) it does drop to 6 weekly in November, which is two weeks less than last winter.
BA to LHR daily 744 - no change from last winter.
LH to FRA ranges from five weekly to daily 744 LH throughout the winter - no change from last winter.
KL to AMS - five weekly 332s - no change from last winter.
TS to LGW - one weekly 332 for most of the winter but increases to two weekly in mid Feb before ramping up for winter - gain of the one weekly second flight this winter.
AF to CDG - three weekly 772s - new route for the winter

Total 28 - 31 flights per week up from 25 - 27 flights per week last winter.

YYC
AC to LHR - daily 763 but upgauging to daily 788 on 28th January, so an increase in capacity from this date.
BA to LHR - daily 763 but upgauging to daily 788 on 5th December, so an increase in capacity from this date.
LH to FRA - daily 333 - last winter was a mix of 333 and 77L but pretty much same capacity.
KL to AMS - six weekly 332 - no change from last winter.

Total 27 flights per week down from 28 last winter.

Note last winter Air Transat ran a once weekly flight YYC-LGW this has been pulled for the entire winter sched 2015/2016.

YEG
KL to AMS - three weekly 332 - reduced to two weekly mid January to mid February - new route for the winter.
FI to KEF - mostly three weekly 752 - increases to four weekly for a couple of weeks around Christmas and five weekly for one week (the first week of January) then back to three weekly for the rest of the winter - no change from last winter.

Total of 6 weekly flights for the bulk of winter. Fluctuates from 5 - 7 weekly around Christmas. AC to LHR pulled for the winter again.

Minor point, I thought the YYC-FRA was an AC operated flight. Did the LF and AC swap?

Johnny Aussie Aug 5, 2015 6:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper (Post 7118584)
Minor point, I thought the YYC-FRA was an AC operated flight. Did the LF and AC swap?

Cut and paste fail...poor edit check. Thanks for that.... fixed it up.

DrNest Aug 5, 2015 1:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7118425)
Why even bother with 2 weekly. Just make the route seasonal already, which is what it should have been from the start. I think it's bound to happen. Most likely by next winter season. Jan and Feb traffic can easily be rerouted via YYC or YVR.

With all the winter activities avlb out west, it amazes me that KL cant run at least YVR or YYC on a daily basis.

Very true. And with KLM's code share with WestJet allowing through ticketing and checked baggage, it makes sense during the off season to focus on CYYC and CYVR, filling those planes and having passengers connect onwards. It's a short flight up to CYEG if that's really where the passengers want to go.

Johnny Aussie Aug 6, 2015 3:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrNest (Post 7118702)
Very true. And with KLM's code share with WestJet allowing through ticketing and checked baggage, it makes sense during the off season to focus on CYYC and CYVR, filling those planes and having passengers connect onwards. It's a short flight up to CYEG if that's really where the passengers want to go.

Well I guess they need to start somewhere. Even at two to three weekly it's a start and the minimal they could offer to make it attractive. Obviously still testing the market though by being quick to drop to two weekly even for a short period of time. However, they are investing in this new market. Similarly, AF must be "testing" their new YVR-CDG route by making it year-round even if just three weekly over the slow winter months. For the first time ever, Skyteam will have more frequencies transatlantic from YVR than OneWorld over the winter. They were tied over the summer (not by capacity but by frequency).

thenoflyzone Aug 7, 2015 2:56 AM

Speaking of YVR-CDG and YEG-AMS, Reply 2 from the following airliners.net thread is interesting

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/6468092/

Johnny Aussie Aug 7, 2015 5:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7121051)
Speaking of YVR-CDG and YEG-AMS, Reply 2 from the following airliners.net thread is interesting

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/6468092/

To be fair (seem to use that term a lot lately) that is a normal marketing tactic on new routes. Especially to stimulate traffic in off peak periods.

I guarantee LAX-SYD DL flights are far from empty.

Coldrsx Aug 7, 2015 1:53 PM

^all reports from people on the flights is that they are full and from the rates I have seen, $1000-1500, they should be making money.

Nicko999 Aug 12, 2015 3:29 AM

Passengers stats for the top 5 airports as of June 2015

1. Toronto--- 19,657,448 (7.0% YTD)
2. Vancouver--- 9,691,751 (5.2% YTD)
3. Montreal--- 7,493,922 (4.1% YTD)
4. Calgary--- 7,398,128 (1.1% YTD)
5. Edmonton--- 3,489,088 (-2.7% YTD)

Feel free to add more to the list.

jmt18325 Aug 12, 2015 4:29 AM

1. Toronto--- 19,657,448 (7.0% YTD)
2. Vancouver--- 9,691,751 (5.2% YTD)
3. Montreal--- 7,493,922 (4.1% YTD)
4. Calgary--- 7,398,128 (1.1% YTD)
5. Edmonton--- 3,489,088 (-2.7% YTD)
6.
7. Winnipeg--- 1,855,947 (4.3% YTD)

FrAnKs Aug 12, 2015 12:59 PM

By any chance, do you have YQB ?

Boris2k7 Aug 12, 2015 8:54 PM

This YYC International Terminal update was posted in the Calgary section a few days ago...
Quote:

Originally Posted by holhm22 (Post 7123506)
Hey everyone, so we all know that there are a few images from the new terminal on YYC's website available for viewing as on here.
But by changing the number in the URL, I was able to find some hidden images too. Here they are along with the regular ones. Enjoy

http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%201.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%202.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%203.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%209.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%2010.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%2014.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%2015.jpg
http://www.yyc.com/portals/0/Photo%2016.jpg


TorontoDrew Aug 12, 2015 11:07 PM

I hold off on my comments until it's complete, in it's current state it wouldn't be fair to judge it.

SkydivePilot Aug 13, 2015 7:02 PM

I will comment then: Calgary has nice digs; lookin' great!!! :tup:

Pinus Aug 13, 2015 7:17 PM

Calgary's airport, while expanded, isn't terribly impressive. It looks like every other airport in North America; it doesn't stand out at all. So while I'm sure it will ease congestion, there is nothing spectacular about the design at all.

Coldrsx Aug 13, 2015 7:18 PM

^so? It looks good, likely is very functional and will be a great addition to YYC... sadly you would have to go to YYC and so it essentially is meaningless:)

esquire Aug 13, 2015 7:23 PM

Calgary's new terminal looks great and it'll be a godsend from an operational efficiency standpoint. If the worst thing one can say about it is that it isn't spectacular, then that's not really much of a criticism.

Klazu Aug 13, 2015 9:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinus (Post 7128418)
Calgary's airport, while expanded, isn't terribly impressive. It looks like every other airport in North America; it doesn't stand out at all. So while I'm sure it will ease congestion, there is nothing spectacular about the design at all.

I am with you. This is a very generic 2010s airport design. Nothing wrong with it as it is practical, but it is very forgettable and not very homey or cozy. What I really like about YVR is how it feels like a living room. Warm and cozy, like a Starbucks.

SFUVancouver Aug 13, 2015 10:59 PM

I think that the YYC upgrades look pretty good. Good ceiling height, likely a lot of light, looks like it would feel warm and welcoming, plus there looks to be lots of future flexibility built-in. The place is still under construction, and these are hasty snapshots, so it's fair to reserve judgment until it is complete, but it certainly looks like a positive improvement.

TorontoDrew Aug 13, 2015 11:15 PM

And this is why I said I would wait. After it's dusted off and detailed it may look better then just generic. I do like the use of wood and granite though.

TorontoDrew Aug 13, 2015 11:20 PM

If it can pull off a happy medium between YVR'S friendliness and YYZ'S efficiency moving people through then it's a winner. Those two things reversed are what's missing in Vancouver and Toronto.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:41 AM.

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