YVR & Sea Island Developments Discussion II

[nname]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Another change nname

Time for another update please!

DXB is the one AC destination from YVR that I almost always forgot about

I pretty sure I checked in the morning when I noticed the DUB increase, and the route was still there...

Oh wells, when I saw AC moved the flights around and make DXB independent of all other routes, I have the feeling that DXB is on the chopping block. So AC only added one 789 to YVR schedule this winter, instead of the 2 originally planned.

Now there's 1 less seasonal route, and one more year-round.

As for PEK, I guess AC just want to pad the schedule to increase reliability, since most of the long haul routes out of YVR are more than 24 hours nowadays, especially during the winter.

For Dec-Jan, two planes are doing the YVR-SYD-YVR-PEK-YVR rotation every 3 days; for Jan-Feb, a plane is doing YVR-PEK-YVR every 2 days, with the extra day coming from reduction in YVR-AKL service.

[LeftCoaster]

Disappointing about the DXB news but not at all surprised and so clearly coming. AC never gave this route a chance with one a few months at a time winter service to a major business and connecting airport. Total fumble.

[nname]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Disappointing about the DXB news but not at all surprised and so clearly coming. AC never gave this route a chance with one a few months at a time winter service to a major business and connecting airport. Total fumble.

Well I'm actually surprised that AC even attempted the route. The route is very long and go through an area that is quite unstable at the recent times. I remember there were some detour/fuel stop needed by the end of last winter season? And then YYZ-DXB was suspended for much of this summer too...

Besides YVR-DXB, additional service added for YYZ-DXB seems to be removed as well.

Maybe flying from YVR to somewhere in East or SE Asia is better use of the plane.

Also, speaking of YMM... it's one of the only two routes left that AC operates out of YYC but not YVR. I wonder if AC is considering YVR-YQU too. For everything else, AC either duplicated the YYC service from YVR, completely moved the route over, or dropped the route altogether.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by nname

Well I'm actually surprised that AC even attempted the route. The route is very long and go through an area that is quite unstable at the recent times. I remember there were some detour/fuel stop needed by the end of last winter season? And then YYZ-DXB was suspended for much of this summer too...

Besides YVR-DXB, additional service added for YYZ-DXB seems to be removed as well.

Reducing YYZ-DXB as well puts it all in perspective.

Not sure how many times some posters need to have the bilateral explained again and again.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by nname

Also, speaking of YMM... it's one of the only two routes left that AC operates out of YYC but not YVR. I wonder if AC is considering YVR-YQU too. For everything else, AC either duplicated the YYC service from YVR, completely moved the route over, or dropped the route altogether.

I think I missed this but this is a resumption as well

3 x weekly on a DH4 - that’s a long route for a prop

https://www.aircanada.com/media/air-canada-announces-changes-to-its-regional-network/

At least a more comfortable experience

https://www.aircanada.com/media/air-cana...ities-offering-new-standards-of-comfort/

AC domestic mainline at YYC down to just YVR YYZ YUL (the three hubs). YWG was moved to Express year round as well

[Johnny Aussie]

Hadn’t looked at cargo stats for awhile but Stats Canada’s latest figures for 2024 were published about 2 months ago

YVR total tonnage was 308k in 2024 up about 20k from 2023

Breakdown about 168k international and 140k domestic

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/...024&referencePeriods=20190101%2C20240101

YVR’s own stats have cargo up 6.5% YTD after an impressive increase in July up 10.9%

[trofirhen]

Excuse me if I sound supercilious, but IMHO, that AC seasonal to DBX was lame. It was rather en embarassment to YVR.
And EK was, years ago, gnawing to get YVR access, but had to settle on SEA-TAC....(for predictable reasons).

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Excuse me if I sound supercilious, but IMHO, that AC seasonal to DBX was lame. It was rather en embarassment to YVR.
And EK was, years ago, gnawing to get YVR access, but had to settle on SEA-TAC....(for predictable reasons).

For a time they were talking about Calgary. Hard to break down a difference on what is a good route in general and what is not a bad route for them given cargo plus passenger super connecting. Versus what they might think is the right incentive to modify the bilateral for the government of the day.

[ninjakafi_81]

Some interesting data from this simpleflying article

Where Air Canada's Vancouver-Dubai Passengers Went

According to booking data for winter 2024/2025, the five most popular countries via Dubai were India, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Sri Lanka. At the city level, Tehran, Delhi, Karachi, Hyderabad, and Kochi were the top markets.

Of all of Vancouver's traffic to/from South Asia and the Middle East, it is estimated that only one in 50 passengers connected in Dubai with Air Canada and Emirates. More people transferred to another flight in Hong Kong, London Heathrow, Delhi, Istanbul, Frankfurt, Montreal, Paris CDG, Toronto, and Seattle than in Dubai. Of course, Air Canada's seasonal service and three weekly flights didn't help.

https://simpleflying.com/gone-after-just...-flights-to-dubai-international-airport/

[VancityAvgeek33]

I have a feeling air Canada might move the three weekly frequency to Osaka making it year round.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by ninjakafi_81

https://simpleflying.com/gone-after-just...-flights-to-dubai-international-airport/

This is why i don't read simpleflying articles.

For a supposed PhD grad in airline strategy, the person who wrote that article clearly has no clue what he is talking about.

It's littered with mistakes and even worse, suggestions that are illegal and would result in the CTA and Transport Canada immediately investigating AC/EK, especially this bit.....

"What happens to Air Canada's freed-up traffic rights is also unclear. Will it expand its Toronto-Dubai service? If it did, Emirates could reduce flights to Canada's most populous city, enabling it to fly to Vancouver."

He's basically suggesting that AC and EK collaborate together on scheduling their flights - something that is illegal, unless you have a JV, which they don't.

[xd_1771]

Would AC be in a position to launch a new SE Asia route with the freed up capacity? (Perhaps to Vietnam?)


Osaka (thus giving us rather insane Japan capacity this winter) would also be pretty reasonable, but the World Expo is over so I feel like AC could be more adventurous...

[nname]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Would AC be in a position to launch a new SE Asia route with the freed up capacity? (Perhaps to Vietnam?)


Osaka (thus giving us rather insane Japan capacity this winter) would also be pretty reasonable, but the World Expo is over so I feel like AC could be more adventurous...

Well with recent year-round extension of BKK, they probably want another route or increase elsewhere to rotate along with it.


Or think of this way, excluding spare and short-haul/transcon:

AC require 16x 787 to support long-haul operation for W24.

For S25, the long-haul fleet reduced to 14x to support (or rather, return to) European operation from the east.

For the month of Nov, YVR long haul remains at 14 (FRA-7, DUB-4, KIX-1, PEK-1, BNE+1, SIN+1, BKK+5)

Then by Dec, this increase to 17x (KIX-3, BKK+2, SYD+3, AKL+5), 1 more than the same time last winter

From late Jan, fleet is reduced back to 16x, the same as last winter (SYD-3, AKL-1). But last winter there was no reduction at this period due to resumption of PEK as soon as seasonal increase for SYD finished. So if AC want to keep the plane in service, this would be a good time to launch something new (and continues into S26) without the need of extra metal. Or they could just send a plane to heavy maintenance?


Or maybe they're only adding one plane to YVR next summer, and it'll do BKK for 6 days (3x weekly that requires 2 days each) and DUB on the 7th day. But it's surprising they'll pick BKK, which require twice as many resource as... say more KIX, LHR, or adding NGO, CTS, EDI, or CDG...

[Johnny Aussie]

YVR will see some KLM 787-10 action before returning to daily 77W for summer 2026

Amsterdam – Vancouver 29MAR26 – 24MAY26 787-10 replaces initially filed 777-300ER, reduce from 7 to 6 weekly


https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/250922-klns26inc

[LeftCoaster]

Was it 77W in March of 25 or is this a boost over a 789 or 332?

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

This is why i don't read simpleflying articles.

For a supposed PhD grad in airline strategy, the person who wrote that article clearly has no clue what he is talking about.

It's littered with mistakes and even worse, suggestions that are illegal and would result in the CTA and Transport Canada immediately investigating AC/EK, especially this bit.....

"What happens to Air Canada's freed-up traffic rights is also unclear. Will it expand its Toronto-Dubai service? If it did, Emirates could reduce flights to Canada's most populous city, enabling it to fly to Vancouver."

He's basically suggesting that AC and EK collaborate together on scheduling their flights - something that is illegal, unless you have a JV, which they don't.

In fairness at no time does he suggest they collude. If AC were to add more to YYZ or YUL EK would be free to move their capacity elsewhere. I don't see why they would, but there was no mention in the article of collusion or capacity fixing, so as much as it is a very unlikely suggestion I see no suggestion of collaboration.

I think it's quite clean why this route failed though, 3x PW for a few months per year as a major connecting strategy is doomed to fail, especially with the inefficient route AC was forced to fly.

[hehehe]

Might be wayyyyy out there but since BKK has been so successful....maybe YVR-HKT (Phuket) one day? They've already got a few international airlines (QR/TK/EK etc)

[Calfan12]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Was it 77W in March of 25 or is this a boost over a 789 or 332?

Yes KLM using both Boeing 777-300ER/ 787-10 is a boost in capacity of 699 total seats on the Amsterdam AMS -Vancouver YVR -AMS route S26, compared to 787-9 & A330-200✅.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Was it 77W in March of 25 or is this a boost over a 789 or 332?

KLM seems to be all over the place with their varied widebody fleet

There was a change from 332s in winter to 772s in spring and then daily 77W for the summer. They seem to be changing equipment on so many routes. The last change for summer 2025 (I think) happened in January so I would expect nothing is solid yet. Was also 6 weekly for the same period. They really are one of the harder airlines to keep track.

The 330s and 772s are being phased out and replaced with A350s so their fleet will be a bit more streamlined

[Zmonkey]

Originally Posted by ninjakafi_81

Some interesting data from this simpleflying article

Where Air Canada's Vancouver-Dubai Passengers Went



https://simpleflying.com/gone-after-just...-flights-to-dubai-international-airport/

1 out of 50 connected onto EK? Does that just seem wrong to people.
Also, no mention of the Russian airspace issue, for flights this length is a big issue in terms of cost/fuel and time. If that goes away it will change the economics of the flight - unless it really is 1 out of 50 connecting.