SkyscraperPage Forum - Canadian Airport Thread

Viewing Page 243 of 795

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)

I was under the impression that the A380's days were numbered. Apparently no planes were ordered in 2016 and the net orders for 2017 so far have been negative 2.

No North American airline seems to want to touch them; no non-flag carrier of a major Asian or European country really wants them, either.

Air Canada seems like it would be one of the last major flag carriers to want to order the A380. However, if we're fantasizing, I'd think that the routes it would fly on would be London-Toronto, Montreal-Paris, Vancouver-Hong Kong and Vancouver-Toronto (half the flights seem to be on wide bodies).

Speaking of WS,

WS3 YYZ-LGW was over New brunswick yesterday night, and returned to YYZ. Flight eventually took off (with the same aircraft) at 3 am. The plane tried an approach and overshot. It's now holding over LGW.

Anyone know what is going on?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ws3/#e4e5927

https://www.flightradar24.com/flight/ws3

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipster duck (Post 7881525)

The A380 is dead !

Airbus unveiled the A380Plus enhancement last month, with a 13% cost per seat reduction versus today’s A380. (mostly with increase seating, a la Rouge)

No orders so far, and likely won't get any orders. Airlines don't want any more A380s. The production rate will be cut to 8 in 2019, to try and keep the program alive in hopes that other airlines bite eventually. That strategy will prove unsuccessful. Quads are obsolete.

http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press...-a380plus.html

And to think Airbus had predicted 1200 sales of the whalejet. Only 317 orders so far, with 213 already delivered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrNest (Post 7880954)

if Air Canada were to place orders for A380s, which routes would they use them on?

Purely hypothetical, but I would speculate Montreal-Paris, Toronto-Heathrow, and Vancouver-Shanghai/Beijing as potential routes. Maybe even Toronto-Vancouver. Any other suggestions?

Since it's hypotetical, I'll bite.

AC would order 4 A380's, start some of the routes you mentioned, YYZ-FRA/LHR and YVR-HKG/PVG. A year later, they would realize it's the wrong aircraft for their fleet, and would try to offload them to the highest bidder.

When that proves unsuccessful, they would strike a deal with Boeing to buy those A380s in exchange for some 77W/787s.

Now a bit of non hypothetical.

There is a reason only EK flies the A380 to YYZ. (And even they would probably send 2 daily 77Ws to YYZ if they could, rather than that A380)

BA, LH, AF, KE, EY all have the whalejet and serve YYZ with no A380. Why? Because Canada isn't a high yield market, so even a route with a ton of demand will have a hard time filling the F class of an A380. These carriers rather fly their A380s to higher yielding destinations in North America, such as JFK, LAX, SFO, MIA, etc.

AF tried the A380 to YUL, failed miserably.

BA can make the A380 work at YVR, because BA is the most premium European airline flying to the most premium and congested airport in Europe, LHR. If BA can't make the A380 work at LHR, no European airline can.

So bottom line, AC would never order the A380. Too big, too expensive to operate, and the need for fill an F class, which AC doesn't even offer btw, are all negative aspects you cannot overlook. Even without an F class, do you really want Rouge to operate an 800 seat A380 from YYZ/YUL to CUN or LAS? Not me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7881527)

Even without an F class, do you really want Rouge to operate an 800 seat A380 from YYZ/YUL to CUN or LAS? Not me.

Interesting and fair points you made. With regards to the above, at peak times (summer, Xmas, Spring break) I can see Rouge making an 800 seat flight work to the likes of your suggestions. Particularly if they can market all those seats at a lower per passenger fare than on the 767/319. (Assuming Cancun/Vegas etc can actually handle an A380). However, I speculate that the rest of the time of year those flights would be very empty.

Maybe Rouge could then lend the aircraft to WestJet to collectively ferry all the passengers delayed from the "regular" cancellation of 767 flights...

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7881527)

Speaking of WS,

(1) WS3 YYZ-LGW was over New brunswick yesterday night, and returned to YYZ. Flight eventually took off (with the same aircraft) at 3 am. The plane tried an approach and overshot. It's now holding over LGW.

Anyone know what is going on?

(2) The A380 is dead !

Airbus unveiled the A380Plus enhancement last month, with a 13% cost per seat reduction versus today’s A380. (mostly with increase seating, a la Rouge)

No orders so far, and likely won't get any orders. Airlines don't want any more A380s. The production rate will be cut to 8 in 2019, to try and keep the program alive in hopes that other airlines bite eventually. That strategy will prove unsuccessful. Quads are obsolete.

http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press...-a380plus.html

And to think Airbus had predicted 1200 sales of the whalejet. Only 317 orders so far, with 213 already delivered.

(3)Since it's hypotetical, I'll bite.

AC would order 4 A380's, start some of the routes you mentioned, YYZ-FRA/LHR and YVR-HKG/PVG. A year later, they would realize it's the wrong aircraft for their fleet, and would try to offload them to the highest bidder.

When that proves unsuccessful, they would strike a deal with Boeing to buy those A380s in exchange for some 77W/787s.

Now a bit of non hypothetical.

There is a reason only EK flies the A380 to YYZ. (And even they would probably send 2 daily 77Ws to YYZ if they could, rather than that A380)

BA, LH, AF, KE, EY all have the whalejet and serve YYZ with no A380. Why? Because Canada isn't a high yield market, so even a route with a ton of demand will have a hard time filling the F class of an A380. These carriers rather fly their A380s to higher yielding destinations in North America, such as JFK, LAX, SFO, MIA, etc.

AF tried the A380 to YUL, failed miserably.

BA can make the A380 work at YVR, because BA is the most premium European airline flying to the most premium and congested airport in Europe, LHR. If BA can't make the A380 work at LHR, no European airline can.

So bottom line, AC would never order the A380. Too big, too expensive to operate, and the need for fill an F class, which AC doesn't even offer btw, are all negative aspects you cannot overlook. Even without an F class, do you really want Rouge to operate an 800 seat A380 from YYZ/YUL to CUN or LAS? Not me.

1. Is Westjet still having problems with their 767s? Their reliability was pretty miserable in their freshman season at Westjet, is their sophomore season better? Or do you think this might be a pilot thing? Anyway, I'm still not convinced about Westjet's transatlantic operation to Gatwick at any rate - I'll spend the money to fly Air Canada or British Airways and get to London reliably, thanks.

2. The A380 is good for precisely one airline - Emirates. It is a wonderful plane for high volume, slot-constricted airports moving mass quantities of people between hub cities. For everybody else, it stinks.

As for the 104 A380s on order - 37 of those are pretty much 'on paper' orders now. Qantas, Virgin Atlantic, Amedeo (airline lessor), and Air Accord (aircraft holding company for bankrupt Transaero) don't want theirs.

The last hope for the A380plus is that congestion in Chinese airspace or slot restrictions become an issue and Chinese airlines buy them for volume reasons, kind of like Japan Airlines' domestic 747 routes in the 1980s.

The big knock against the A380 is that aside from the extra maintenance of the quad-engine design, it is such an inflexible aircraft from an operations point of view. As an example, Air Canada can use its 787s and 777s for domestic routes or a variety of international routes, depending on how demand shifts. The A380 is really only good for the above mentioned scenario - long-haul, high volume, slot restricted airports. Flying it any other way is a money loser.

3. Yeah, you pretty much nailed it. Even on the busiest AC route (YYZ-LHR), Air Canada would have to sacrifice frequency for capacity with an A380. While AC might make some money off leasing/selling a slot at Heathrow, I doubt it would come out ahead on the whole affair, not to mention the loss of business customers due to the decreased frequency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrNest (Post 7881600)

Even at peak times, an 800 seat aircraft would be hugely overcapacity. Unless there's some kind of slot restriction, it is just easier to up-gauge to a larger aircraft or to run an additional flight.

I could see an outside operator buying a used A380 for charter flights that involve mass quantities of humanity (ex. pilgrimage to the Hajj), but there's nothing in North America that justifies that kind of capacity, aside from some sort of major storm/issue that creates a huge backlog of passengers.

with nearly what? 90? weekly flights to France? .. 55 to Paris alone summer only... why didn't the AF A380 survive?... is it because of timing?? I know they did remove a flight when they were flying the A380? can anyone elaborate thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.S MTL (Post 7881643)

The configuration of the Air France A380 is designed with premium markets in mind. 9 First, 80 Business.

The demand on YUL-CDG is there, but for more Economy seats. If Air France had a 2-class A380 config like Emirates (58 Business, 557 Economy), it might work better for YUL. I believe Air France is suppose to reconfigure their A380s soon, maybe they will try a few aircraft with a less premium heavy config.

Doesn't Air Canada operate the 450 seater 77W on this route also? This definitely seems to suggest the premium class demand on this route is limited, but there is plenty of Economy demand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7881527)

Even without an F class, do you really want Rouge to operate an 800 seat A380 from YYZ/YUL to CUN or LAS? Not me.

Why not? :haha:

11-abreast A380 is still more comfortable and will have wider seats than a Rouge A319/767 or AC's 787 or 777s.

;)

But AC doesn't need an A380 when they can cram 450 seats in their 777s already
We are more likely to see 777-9X at Air Canada

I wonder why BA does the A380 to YVR and not YYZ. Is frequency > size? :shrug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker (Post 7881756)

A long enough flight, not worth it to have two frequencies? Beyond a certain point, everyone will choose a particular arrival time when going trans-atlantic?

My guesses (in no particular order):

1. Need something that will have enough capacity, but won't tie up more slots at Heathrow.

2. YVR is more suited to the 'optimal range' for an A380 - where the economics work best for the plane.

3. We have 12 of these bloody things, where can we stick them?

4. YYZ is more business-oriented, especially to LHR on BA. Tourists will tend to use AC to LHR or Rouge/Air Transat/Westjet to LGW. Offering choices with respect to time of travel might be better to lure the F/J crowd.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7881606)

2. The A380 is good for precisely one airline - Emirates. It is a wonderful plane for high volume, slot-constricted airports moving mass quantities of people between hub cities. For everybody else, it stinks.

That's good insight. What do you think the future for Emirates will be after Airbus discontinues the A380 and their planes start to age?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipster duck (Post 7882287)

That's good insight. What do you think the future for Emirates will be after Airbus discontinues the A380 and their planes start to age?

They will need to keep their A380s longer. They have a fleet policy of getting rid of aircraft once they near 10 years of service. I think that policy will change once the A380 production line is closed. Long haul aircraft cycles/hours permit them to be flown for 30 year or so. Look at the 747s that are being retired today. Some of them have close to 30 years of service.

That being said, if the A380 numbers do start to go down, they can always purchase the 777-9 and add frequency to those airports that saw A380 service.

Quote:

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey (Post 7878300)

http://www.admtl.com/sites/default/f...presse-ANG.pdf

Total growth of 9.1% YoY for YUL in June, 11% for the second quarter.

ADM revised their numbers for June :

http://www.admtl.com/sites/default/f...det_Fra_17.pdf

Up 9.8% instead. 11.3% for the quarter.

So here is the tally so far for June 2017 and YTD.

YYZ - waiting on June numbers (May +4.1%, YTD 7.7%)
YVR +7.6% (YTD +8.4%)
YUL +9.8% (YTD +8.8%)
YYC +4.1% (YTD +3.1%)
YEG -0.7% (YTD +1.9%)
YOW - didn't even bother checking. probably stagnant.
YWG - Q1 2017 +5.5%, Q2 2017 +8.8%

I wish the whole terminal was visible! but here is the International and Trans border. YUL

https://scontent-yyz1-1.cdninstagram...96152064_n.jpg

https://www.instagram.com/robertcatto/

So many cute RJs

Which airline is that at the top with the red near the tail?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian74 (Post 7884344)

So many cute RJs

Which airline is that at the top with the red near the tail?

Air Algerie A332

Viewing Page 243 of 795