Calgary International Airport III

[Nick]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Interesting rumour from UA folk here about a possible LAS relaunch on UA metal.

Lots of UA service that AC can't/won't offer. Maybe we'll get service to PSP and OGG on UA too.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Interesting rumour from UA folk here about a possible LAS relaunch on UA metal.

Originally Posted by Nick

Lots of UA service that AC can't/won't offer. Maybe we'll get service to PSP and OGG on UA too.

Zero chance. Absolutely zero.

Just like Delta and American, United is 100% a hub-and-spoke network operator.

For operations within North America, every single flight goes to or from one of their hubs. Period. They do not do point-to-point flights that bypass their own hubs.

The only very rare exceptions: EAS subsidized service on puddle jumpers, or flights out of a "focus city", which are simply mini-hubs. And YYC would never become a 'focus city' for a U.S. carrier because they're extremely few and far between: United has only one (CLE), American has only one (AUS) or unofficially/possibly NAS as a second.

All United flights in North America will always go to/from one of eight airports: DEN, ORD, SFO, LAX, EWR, IAD, IAH and (rarely) CLE.

[Zmonkey]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

Zero chance. Absolutely zero.

Just like Delta and American, United is 100% a hub-and-spoke network operator.

For operations within North America, every single flight goes to or from one of their hubs. Period. They do not do point-to-point flights that bypass their own hubs.

The only very rare exceptions: EAS subsidized service on puddle jumpers, or flights out of a "focus city", which are simply mini-hubs. And YYC would never become a 'focus city' for a U.S. carrier because they're extremely few and far between: United has only one (CLE), American has only one (AUS) or unofficially/possibly NAS as a second.

All United flights in North America will always go to/from one of eight airports: DEN, ORD, SFO, LAX, EWR, IAD, IAH and (rarely) CLE.

Look at what United serves in Vegas. Calgary won't be in the mix.

Chicago–O'Hare, Denver, Houston–Intercontinental, Los Angeles, Newark, San Francisco, Washington–Dulles

[ace.yyc]

I really do wish I could reveal the things that come across my desk sometimes.

[msmariner]

I can only think of one US airline service LAS-YYC and that was US Airways. Think that ended 15 years ago or so.

[ace.yyc]

F9 service only 6 years ago must not count.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

I really do wish I could reveal the things that come across my desk sometimes.

Haha so do we! LOL

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

F9 service only 6 years ago must not count.

F9 (ie Frontier) and some other U.S. airlines (Spirit, Alaska, Southwest) do not operate hub-and-spoke models ... unlike UA, DL, AA which do.

While F9 has always been focused on DEN and AS has done the same with SEA, both fly a lot of point-to-point that bypass those 'hubs'. (Spirit and Southwest operate 100% point-to-point, with no hubs.)

Originally Posted by msmariner

I can only think of one US airline service LAS-YYC and that was US Airways. Think that ended 15 years ago or so.

US Airways purchased America West and picked up their route network. America West operated a hub-and-spoke operation out of two hubs: PHX and ... Las Vegas. HP flew almost everywhere in their network non-stop from LAS, including LAS-YYC.


The odds of any U.S. hub-and-spoke carrier (UA, DL, AA) breaking its entire operating model just to operate 'non hub' flights to/from YYC is zero.

[hehehe]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

I really do wish I could reveal the things that come across my desk sometimes.

I wish they considered making LAX year round. Would be nice to have some competition on that route

[ace.yyc]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

F9 (ie Frontier) and some other U.S. airlines (Spirit, Alaska, Southwest) do not operate hub-and-spoke models ... unlike UA, DL, AA which do.

I understand what a hub is, I work at an airport. The claim was that the last US airline to fly it was US Air, I simply corrected that to state it was F9 and made no commentary on anybody's network.

Originally Posted by Tobuz

The odds of any U.S. hub-and-spoke carrier (UA, DL, AA) breaking its entire operating model just to operate 'non hub' flights to/from YYC is zero.

Whatever you say.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Whatever you say.

Show us one instance in North America - just one - where United operates a flight that does not operate to/from one of their hubs.

[thenoflyzone]

I'll chime in here....

AC/UA are now in a transborder JV. That opens the door to some new route opportunities, and everything has to be looked at through the "joint venture" lens. (i.e. it doesn't matter who is operating the route, be it UA or AC, because they are now one and the same)

Yes, the chances of UA operating a route from a non-hub are slim. But they're not 0.

Last year, I would have thought the chances of UA operating SFO-YUL were zero as well. Guess what, they're now operating it, for one reason: The AC/UA JV.

Also, the 14 route carveouts where AC and UA cannot share revenue are still in place. They include YYC-IAH/ORD/SFO. So AC/UA need to think outside the box in order to maximize transborder revenue when it comes to YYC, especially in light of the fact that AC has de-hubbed Calgary.

YYC-LAS might be one such thinking. Not saying it will happen. Just saying just because UA doesn't have that track record doesn't mean it will always stay that way. Things change.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

YYC-LAS might be one such thinking. Not saying it will happen. Just saying just because UA doesn't have that track record doesn't mean it will always stay that way. Things change.

Is there any competition other than WS on that route currently? Surely some competition would be good on that route and surprised nobody wants to give it a go?

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Last year, I would have thought the chances of UA operating SFO-YUL were zero as well. Guess what, they're now operating it, for one reason: The AC/UA JV.

Interesting. It seems like SFO-YUL would be a perfect fit for UA, given that SFO is one of their hubs (and in fact is their key TPAC hub, feeding highly profitable routes) -- plus the fact that YUL is a Star Alliance hub thanks to AC?

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Also, the 14 route carveouts where AC and UA cannot share revenue are still in place. They include YYC-IAH/ORD/SFO. So AC/UA need to think outside the box in order to maximize transborder revenue when it comes to YYC, especially in light of the fact that AC has de-hubbed Calgary.

IIRC, those carveouts in the JV are all hub<>spoke routes? The creativity that might result would likely be UA and AC operating competing (sort of) flights on those routes instead of coordinating schedules and sharing flights and revenue. That means that UA would have some motivation to fly YYC-IAH/ORD/SFO even if AC was already operating them. But with AC's pull-back, they've effectively left those routes to UA. Great for UA, because they are all UA hubs. I don't see how the carveouts would make for a business case for UA to do non-hub cross border flights -- totally outside of their business model. (They don't operate a single flight like that domestically in the U.S. either)

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

Is there any competition other than WS on that route currently? Surely some competition would be good on that route and surprised nobody wants to give it a go?

It's a nice sentiment, but it ain't going to happen.

As for competition, yes. Flair flies it (or at least will fly it, starting in September). It's a good fit for Flair.

Competition - i.e. traditional, mainline airline competition - will flock to high yield routes where there is lots of demand for premium product. That's why you'll see lots of airlines flying the same routes and competing for passengers in/out of places like LAX, NYC, and even YYZ.

LAS is notoriously low yield. High volume of passengers, but low margins. That might make it appealing for discounters and ULCCs -- that's their business. That makes it distinctly unappealing for traditional mainline carriers.

Air Canada "Rouged" everything in and out of LAS years ago. When they Rouged routes, they said that those routes were financially unviable for their traditional, mainline carrier operations.

From LAS, the big three U.S. carriers - UA, AA, DL - all only fly to their hubs. Nowhere else. None have chosen to break their operating model in order to link LAS directly with any other airport, but instead funnel pax through their hubs-and-spokes.

Think about the size of LAS, the number of flights, and the staggering volume of passengers. Yet no mainstream airline has made it a focus, and they only operate flights from there to/from their hubs. Even with all of those flights and passengers, there is no airline hubbed there. That's because of the economics of LAS traffic.

None of the big U.S. carriers are going to "give it a go" to compete on a route like this when (a) non-hub flights are totally inconsistent with how they run their operations and (b) the financials and super low yields of LAS would likely make it one of the least desirable places to be able to make a business case to circumvent their entire operating model.

So, yes, zero chance of UA operating YYC-LAS. I'd put it on par with Etihad starting to fly YYC-YWG.

[hollywoodcory]

Sounds like today was a very good day not to be at work cause it sounds like B and C con's took on some damage. Not so surprising for B, cause it was already falling apart anyways.

[msmariner]

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory

Sounds like today was a very good day not to be at work cause it sounds like B and C con's took on some damage. Not so surprising for B, cause it was already falling apart anyways.

Videos of the damage look scary for those in the concourses 😔

[hollywoodcory]

Originally Posted by msmariner

Videos of the damage look scary for those in the concourses 😔

My co-workers have said it is not good. All aircraft are grounded until they can be hail inspected, they expect ALOT of cancellations and major delays, not to mention equipment failures. As lighting / thunder is still occurring, I'm going to guess the lighting advisory is still in effect meaning people inside the terminal aren't getting any baggage.

My hope is that people are kind and patience with those working tonight. Brutal evening.

[Tobuz]

Utterly amazing to see what happened thanks to this crazy storm, both to the terminal and to WestJet.

Any update on the terminal repairs? It looks like B concourse is fully offline and presumably needs significant fixes?