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)

TorontoDrew Jun 20, 2017 4:33 AM

That's what about 21,000 people a week based on an average of 250 per plane?

begratto Jun 20, 2017 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew (Post 7839838)
That's what about 21,000 people a week based on an average of 250 per plane?

Yes, a rough approximation. And it is pretty much equivalent to the 10,000 to 20,000 settlers (depends on the source and the calculation method) who moved to New France from 1608 to 1760.

G.S MTL Jun 20, 2017 2:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew (Post 7839838)
That's what about 21,000 people a week based on an average of 250 per plane?

id say 300+ ... 50.000k a week both ways to France

thenoflyzone Jun 20, 2017 9:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew (Post 7839838)
That's what about 21,000 people a week based on an average of 250 per plane?

All operators on the route have considerably more than 250 seats per plane.

Corsair A333 - 360 seats
TS A332/A333 - 345/375 seats
TS A310 - 250 seats
AC HD 77W - 450 seats
AC A333 - 292 seats
RV B763 - 282 seats
AF HD 77W - 468 seats
AF B772 - 312 seats
AF B789 - 276 seats

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.S MTL (Post 7840060)
id say 300+ ... 50.000k a week both ways to France

That's more accurate.

thenoflyzone Jun 20, 2017 9:22 PM

On another note, some AC reductions for W17/18.

YHZ-LHR gets reduced from 4x weekly to 2x weekly, and gets routed via YYT. YYT goes form 3x weekly A319 to 2x weekly B763.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...ian-maritimes/

YVR-TPE gets reduced to 5-6 weekly for W17.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...rvice-changes/

YYZ-SLC gets converted to summer seasonal (for the time being). This route could get cut entirely.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...ervice-in-s17/

wave46 Jun 20, 2017 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7840567)
On another note, some AC reductions for W17/18.

YHZ-LHR gets reduced from 4x weekly to 2x weekly, and gets routed via YYT. YYT goes form 3x weekly A319 to 2x weekly B763.

I'm aware landing and take-off slots are a precious commodity at LHR.

So, with the YHZ and YYT reductions, AC has 5 extra slots at LHR per week. Any idea what they are planning to do with them? Can they lease them to another airline?

nname Jun 20, 2017 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7840681)
I'm aware landing and take-off slots are a precious commodity at LHR.

So, with the YHZ and YYT reductions, AC has 5 extra slots at LHR per week. Any idea what they are planning to do with them? Can they lease them to another airline?

4x weekly -> 2x weekly
3x weekly -> 2x weekly

That's 3x weekly in total.

We know that AC exchanged a daily summer LHR slot with CZ for a daily slot in PVG, so AC lost second daily YVR-LHR in summer and gained daily YUL-PVG, while CZ gained second daily CAN-LHR during summer.

Now CZ just announced 3 additional weekly flights (on top of the original daily) to LHR during the winter months... guess where those 3x weekly come from?

wave46 Jun 20, 2017 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname (Post 7840699)
4x weekly -> 2x weekly
3x weekly -> 2x weekly

That's 3x weekly in total.

We know that AC exchanged a daily summer LHR slot with CZ for a daily slot in PVG, so AC lost second daily YVR-LHR in summer and gained daily YUL-PVG, while CZ gained second daily CAN-LHR during summer.

Now CZ just announced 3 additional weekly flights (on top of the original daily) to LHR during the winter months... guess where those 3x weekly come from?

Maybe I misunderstood.

Instead of YHZ-LHR (4 weekly) and YYT-LHR (3 weekly), we're now getting YHZ-YYT-LHR (2 weekly), correct? Or am I misreading it?

So, with the 4 slots freed up from the direct YHZ and 1 direct freed up from YYT, AC has 5 slots of play with for the winter.

Acajack Jun 21, 2017 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.S MTL (Post 7840060)
id say 300+ ... 50.000k a week both ways to France

Paris is also a major transit point for people flying from Montreal to cities in Africa and the Middle East.

Bourkky Jun 21, 2017 1:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7840707)
Maybe I misunderstood.

Instead of YHZ-LHR (4 weekly) and YYT-LHR (3 weekly), we're now getting YHZ-YYT-LHR (2 weekly), correct? Or am I misreading it?

So, with the 4 slots freed up from the direct YHZ and 1 direct freed up from YYT, AC has 5 slots of play with for the winter.

It seems to be twice weekly YHZ-LHR + twice weekly YHZ-YYT-LHR. So 3 slots freed up.

thenoflyzone Jun 21, 2017 4:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7840707)
Maybe I misunderstood.

Instead of YHZ-LHR (4 weekly) and YYT-LHR (3 weekly), we're now getting YHZ-YYT-LHR (2 weekly), correct? Or am I misreading it?

So, with the 4 slots freed up from the direct YHZ and 1 direct freed up from YYT, AC has 5 slots of play with for the winter.

Yeah, sorry about that. I wrote that wrong. YHZ-LHR is still 4 weekly. Two of those weekly frequencies are now via YYT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourkky (Post 7840772)
It seems to be twice weekly YHZ-LHR + twice weekly YHZ-YYT-LHR. So 3 slots freed up.

That's right.

SaskScraper Jun 21, 2017 4:24 AM

Bombardier airplanes grounded because of Phoenix hot weather!

..As temperatures approached 50°C this week, airlines with Bombardier aircraft had to cancel their flights.
Boeing & Airbus airplanes were ok since they are tested for flying up to 53°C.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/20/there...x-airport.html

I imagine the Quebec airplane manufacturer hasn't had any opportunity or need to test aircraft with such extreme heat since Quebec has never had temps above 40°C, not to mention Ontario or the Maritimes either for that matter.

As more extremes of heat are more likely in the coming decades, especially in the West (hottest Canadian weather temperature has hit 45°C in Saskatchewan in the past), there may be more Bombardier flight cancellations in the future in the western part of continent.

kwoldtimer Jun 21, 2017 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskScraper (Post 7840932)
Bombardier airplanes grounded because of Phoenix hot weather!

..As temperatures approached 50°C this week, airlines with Bombardier aircraft had to cancel their flights.
Boeing & Airbus airplanes were ok since they are tested for flying up to 53°C.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/20/there...x-airport.html

I imagine the Quebec airplane manufacturer hasn't had any opportunity or need to test aircraft with such extreme heat since Quebec has never had temps above 40°C, not to mention Ontario or the Maritimes either for that matter.

As more extremes of heat are more likely in the coming decades, especially in the West (hottest Canadian weather temperature has hit 45°C in Saskatchewan in the past), there may be more Bombardier flight cancellations in the future in the western part of continent.

As the article indicates, temperatures have exceeded the maximum operating temperature for the aircraft.

casper Jun 21, 2017 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskScraper (Post 7840932)
Bombardier airplanes grounded because of Phoenix hot weather!

..As temperatures approached 50°C this week, airlines with Bombardier aircraft had to cancel their flights.
Boeing & Airbus airplanes were ok since they are tested for flying up to 53°C.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/20/there...x-airport.html

I imagine the Quebec airplane manufacturer hasn't had any opportunity or need to test aircraft with such extreme heat since Quebec has never had temps above 40°C, not to mention Ontario or the Maritimes either for that matter.

As more extremes of heat are more likely in the coming decades, especially in the West (hottest Canadian weather temperature has hit 45°C in Saskatchewan in the past), there may be more Bombardier flight cancellations in the future in the western part of continent.

I don't think the aircraft was designed for the Quebec and Ontario market. From day one they targeted a global market. They may have made some compromises when they were doing trade offs different requirements in the design. Do we know if this is a limit on operating above 50 C or if it above 50 at a certain take off altitude.

thenoflyzone Jun 21, 2017 1:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskScraper (Post 7840932)

As more extremes of heat are more likely in the coming decades, especially in the West (hottest Canadian weather temperature has hit 45°C in Saskatchewan in the past), there may be more Bombardier flight cancellations in the future in the western part of continent.

Doubt it, at least not for the heat ! CRJ's can handle 46/47C out of YXE/YQR.

This is an isolated event. It hasn't been this hot in PHX in over 20 years. Saskatchewan is not Phoenix.

But back on point, the main problem here is performance data on departure. If the pilots don't have the data to calculate takeoff speeds and weight above a certain temperature, then the flight cannot depart. So if the OAT (outside air temp) exceeds the top limit of the temp charts, then you're literally in uncharted territory. You are not allowed to extrapolate.

Bombardier CRJs are certified until ISA+35C (50C / 122 F at sea level, but just under 48C /118 F at PHX, due to it being at 1100 ft MSL). It was 48C for 3 hours yesterday in PHX.

Bombardier didn't spend the extra dollars to certify the plane for hotter temps because these are extremely rare circumstances, the limits of which would not significantly impact airplane sales to the customer.

And for anyone wondering, minimum operating temp for the CRJ is -40 C. This can be more of an issue in Canada than the heat.

SaskScraper Jun 21, 2017 4:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper (Post 7841077)
I don't think the aircraft was designed for the Quebec and Ontario market. From day one they targeted a global market. They may have made some compromises when they were doing trade offs different requirements in the design. Do we know if this is a limit on operating above 50 C or if it above 50 at a certain take off altitude.

I believe I read somewhere that Boeing and Airbus were able to certify at higher temps because materials used for components on their planes were tested at above 50C, they also have additional thrust during takeoff when air is less dense at high temps and higher speeds for takeoff required. It's not known if Bombardier even have the same cushion for that extra thrust or component materials that can with-stand the same temps.

I hope this doesn't impede Bombardier sales in places like the Middle East, especially when considering some of the biggest/fastest growing airlines are from there.

Taeolas Jun 21, 2017 5:03 PM

From further up, it looks like the issue isn't just the heat, it is also the altitude. The ME is basically all at sea level, and the heat tolerances are higher there.

Still, it is expected that more and more places are going to be having deadly heatwaves in the future, so I would hope Bombardier is starting to do what it can to certify their planes for those higher temperatures.

thenoflyzone Jun 21, 2017 5:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taeolas (Post 7841388)
From further up, it looks like the issue isn't just the heat, it is also the altitude. The ME is basically all at sea level, and the heat tolerances are higher there.

Still, it is expected that more and more places are going to be having deadly heatwaves in the future, so I would hope Bombardier is starting to do what it can to certify their planes for those higher temperatures.

They already have. The CSeries is certified til 53 or 54C i believe, in line with Boeing/Airbus.

http://news.commercialaircraft.bomba...ol-in-florida/

thenoflyzone Jun 21, 2017 9:42 PM

Some unofficial traction on the YUL-BEY front. Unofficially, seems as though the federal government and AC are trying to figure out a way to get this route started.

Link in french only.

http://affaires.lapresse.ca/economie...l-beyrouth.php

Here is the English version, courtesy of google translate.

Quote:

Air Canada would like the Trudeau government to authorize a direct flight between Montreal and Beirut, Lebanon, La Presse reported.

The Canadian air carrier wishes to add a direct flight to the capital of Lebanon since 2003, but the federal government refuses to grant the necessary security clearances. Air Canada argues that Beirut is currently "at the top of the list" of new destinations it is considering. No direct flights to Lebanon are permitted in North America, but European countries such as France, Germany and Great Britain allow direct flights to Lebanon.

"Yes, it's definitely at the top of the list [destinations to add]. There is an enormous amount of pressure from the Lebanese community, it is a market that we would like to serve, it is already served by Lufthansa, Air France, British Airways and Emirates. It's an important market, a large community, one of the largest markets that are not currently serviced, "said Calin Rovinescu, Air Canada's President and Chief Executive Officer, interviewed at La Presse .

The Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal (CCMM), which supports the project, has had discussions with the Trudeau government's political staff and "hopes" for a "solution" over the next year. "The federal government is open, constructive, looking for solutions. It is hoped that over the past year the federal government will have found solutions. [...] We were told that the solutions would be examined, "said Michel Leblanc, President and CEO of the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal (CCMM).

The Trudeau government was unwilling to state officially whether it intended to revise Lebanon's status of direct flight. "Our government's priority is the safety of Canadian passengers. Direct flights between Canada and Lebanon are not currently permitted for national security reasons. [...] For security reasons, we are not in a position to elaborate further, "said the cabinet of federal Transport Minister Marc Garneau.

The Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal is aware that no direct flight to Lebanon is permitted in North America, but "it is noted that there are cities in Europe such as Rome, Paris and Frankfurt" that allow Direct flights.

Discussions between Air Canada and the Montreal-based Chamber of Commerce and Industry Canada-Lebanon (CCICL) have taken place in recent months. "Obviously, we are surprised and especially disappointed that there is no direct line [because of the federal government's decision]. [...] If other European airlines that have such high demands serve this city, we can validly ask ourselves the question, "said Mohamed Badreddine, Vice-President of the CCICL and a lawyer at Fasken Martineau.

The CCICL believes that a direct flight between Montréal and Beirut is "essential for the development of economic and commercial relations" between the two countries, not to mention the effects on tourism. "We are a huge community and in July-August, almost everyone goes back to see his family in Lebanon, it's almost a tradition," added Mohamed Badreddine.

The commercial potential of a Montreal-Beirut flight "seems to have been acquired," said the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal. "If we managed to do that, Montreal would be the only North American city that would serve Beirut, it would strengthen our status as a hub," says Michel Leblanc. It is also part of a strategy for several years to do everything possible to stimulate the establishment of direct flights to cities where it is reliable. The Montreal-Beirut route has long been at the top of the list. Some 150,000 Lebanese live in Quebec. By way of comparison, there are 50,000 Portuguese registered in the Portuguese consulate. "

Air Canada did not wish to comment on the federal government's decision and whether it had any recent discussions with the Trudeau government to change that decision.

DrNest Jun 23, 2017 3:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone (Post 7840558)
All operators on the route have considerably more than 250 seats per plane.

Corsair A333 - 360 seats
TS A332/A333 - 345/375 seats

I thought that was a typo at first until I checked the seat maps. 3-3-3 seating abreast on an A330 is brutal. They must be so cramped. I'm glad I've not flown with either of those airlines.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:08 AM.

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