Canadian Airport Thread II

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

twin otters, CL-415 firefighters, etc.

The drawings are a bit of an overkill, as I don't see why they will need all those buildings, but still. Nice to see Dehavilland still alive and kicking.

That control tower is overkill as well, btw... There probably won't be a control tower there intially, unless Dehavilland is ready and willing to pay for it out of pocket (which they probably aren't). It will be an uncontrolled aerodrome.

Could they possibly use that as a tower for UNICOM? Would seem like overkill for a ground UNICOM operator. More likely though it's just part of the artist's rendering.

Or maybe they'll turn the airport itself into a revenue generator for general aviation, thus necessitating eventually a tower...but like you've mentioned previously Nav Can's at the start of a remote tower revolution, so even that could be rendered redundant.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

I'd imagine they will probably get to work leasing out land for private hangar space at some point. Not that the control tower would be needed for a long while, but it isn't inconceivable that they could need it at some point not too far off once the airfield opens. Depends on what kind of traffic ultimately uses the field.

Sure, but Downsview airport in Toronto only had a unicom before it closed. It's not the DeHavilland business that will need a control tower. If the field opens up to GA traffic, then maybe. But with NavCan going the way of remote towers, highly unlikely they will invest the millions required to build a control tower, especially at secondary or tertiatry airports being build mostly for private use.

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Could they possibly use that as a tower for UNICOM? Would seem like overkill for a ground UNICOM operator. More likely though it's just part of the artist's rendering.

Or maybe they'll turn the airport itself into a revenue generator for general aviation, thus necessitating eventually a tower...but like you've mentioned previously Nav Can's at the start of a remote tower revolution, so even that could be rendered redundant.

No one is going to build a tower that big to then put in a UNICOM service. As you said, it's just an artists rendering. Half the buildings you see on there will probably never get built.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by nname

Both YVR-IST and YUL-IST increase to 4x weekly from July for summer season only. YYZ-IST remains 6x weekly. Schedule is still being updated.

Seems TK's additional frequency to YVR is only summer seasonal for now. There was no such mention for YUL.

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/260515-tk3q26yvr

Turkish Airlines today (15MAY26) filed additional schedule changes to Istanbul – Vancouver route. From 05JUL26 to 13SEP26, the Star Alliance member will introduce 4th weekly flight, operating on Sundays with 787-9.

TK075 IST1500 – 1715YVR 789 7
TK075 IST1500 – 1715YVR 77W 246

TK076 YVR1910 – 1710+1IST 77W 246
TK076 YVR1910 – 1710+1IST 789 7

Find it interesting that they are reducing service to ATL, JFK and SEA around the same time. It's a 5x weekly reduction. Let's see if they add 3x weekly service somewhere in Canada in the coming days.

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/260515-tkns26us

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by jc_yyc_ca

Lots of aviation action in Alberta. New cargo hub starting in Edmonton, and a new aircraft manufacturing facility in Calgary.

Seems like runway 12/30 at YEG is getting a CATIII to go along with the ICH.

https://www.navcanada.ca/en/038sup2026en.pdf

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Seems like runway 12/30 at YEG is getting a CATIII to go along with the ICH.

https://www.navcanada.ca/en/038sup2026en.pdf

Do you know if YEG gets fog very often or other tough weather conditions?

This cargo facility seems ambitious if its purpose is to be a freight hub vs a gateway. They’ll be competing with long-established ANC.

[hollywoodcory]

WS is once again showing up to 5x on Saturdays in peak winter on YYC-CUN with over 1,000 seats.

WS2200 YYC 08:05 - 15:30 CUN 789
WS2216 YYC 08:55 - 16:40 CUN 7M8
WS2206 YYC 11:00 - 18:45 CUN 73H
WS2202 YYC 11:15 - 18:40 CUN 789
WS2208 YYC 23:00 - 06:45+1 CUN 73H

Given they also fly to TQO the same day, that means upwards of 6 flights on the same day to the Cancun area. I suspect this will again be corrected when the full schedule is released.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Do you know if YEG gets fog very often or other tough weather conditions?

This cargo facility seems ambitious if its purpose is to be a freight hub vs a gateway. They’ll be competing with long-established ANC.

I don’t think YEG is fog prone. They don’t even have ground radar. If they were frog prone, the controllers would have demanded a ground radar long ago.

Nonetheless, if they really want to become a cargo hub, and attract Canadian and foreign cargo carriers to use YEG as a hub, then a CATIII runway is a must. Airlines look at all criteria when selecting a cargo hub, and having a runway they are able to land on in near zero visibility weather, and not having to divert with time sensitive cargo in the back of the plane is always a plus.

So I think this is a good move by YEG. And besides, even if the weather is not down to CATIII levels, having centerline lighting on your runways and taxiways is always a good thing.

I think when YUL repaves 06R/24L in the coming years, centerline lights will be added. As far as I’m concerned, all major airports in this country need all their runways to be equipped with centerline lights at a minimum. It’s an added layer of safety, especially considering Canada has 200ft wide runways in general. I believe ICAO even recommends it on runways that wide, and yet, most of the runways in this country do not have centerline lighting.

[Dominion301]

AC413, turning to AC422 on YUL-YYZ on 09JUN26 is now loaded as the inaugural XLR departure: https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/260518-acjun26

[Nick]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

I don’t think YEG is fog prone. They don’t even have ground radar. If they were frog prone, the controllers would have demanded a ground radar long ago.

Nonetheless, if they really want to become a cargo hub, and attract Canadian and foreign cargo carriers to use YEG as a hub, then a CATIII runway is a must. Airlines look at all criteria when selecting a cargo hub, and having a runway they are able to land on in near zero visibility weather, and not having to divert with time sensitive cargo in the back of the plane is always a plus.

So I think this is a good move by YEG. And besides, even if the weather is not down to CATIII levels, having centerline lighting on your runways and taxiways is always a good thing.

I think when YUL repaves 06R/24L in the coming years, centerline lights will be added. As far as I’m concerned, all major airports in this country need all their runways to be equipped with centerline lights at a minimum. It’s an added layer of safety, especially considering Canada has 200ft wide runways in general. I believe ICAO even recommends it on runways that wide, and yet, most of the runways in this country do not have centerline lighting.

I believe they have demanded A-SMGCS, but it hasn't gone anywhere. They get a fair amount of morning fog, so this is welcome.

[Coldrsx]

The YEG cargo facility will start at 200 acres, but has a full buildout of ~2000 I am told.

[Dominion301]

AC are increasing capacity on YVR-CUN this winter from a MAX to a 789, still with the same daily frequency: https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/260519-acnw26yvrcun

[RomanR27]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

AC are increasing capacity on YVR-CUN this winter from a MAX to a 789, still with the same daily frequency: https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/260519-acnw26yvrcun

In previous recent winters, when CUN was on a 789 that came at the expense of EWR or YOW, the latter of which had daily 789 ops this past winter. We'll see if YOW ends up going back to all narrowbody service this winter, after having the 789 reduced to 3x weekly in the summer. Though the fuel shortages may impact the ULR TPAC ops this winter and provide more slack in the YVR-based 789 fleet to cancel this out.

[nname]

Originally Posted by RomanR27

In previous recent winters, when CUN was on a 789 that came at the expense of EWR or YOW, the latter of which had daily 789 ops this past winter. We'll see if YOW ends up going back to all narrowbody service this winter, after having the 789 reduced to 3x weekly in the summer. Though the fuel shortages may impact the ULR TPAC ops this winter and provide more slack in the YVR-based 789 fleet to cancel this out.

This winter YVR have an extra 789 for the morning departure due to YVR-HKG moved to midnight departure. They will need an extra morning flight (on top of daily EWR and YOW) to match with the extra late night flight for utilization.

Aeroroute didn't mentioned that in addition to the 1x daily 789, there is also a 3x weekly midnight departure to CUN operated by Rouge.

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by nname

This winter YVR have an extra 789 for the morning departure due to YVR-HKG moved to midnight departure. They will need an extra morning flight (on top of daily EWR and YOW) to match with the extra late night flight for utilization.

Aeroroute didn't mentioned that in addition to the 1x daily 789, there is also a 3x weekly midnight departure to CUN operated by Rouge.

Another thing to consider is, if they're on time, AC are expecting their first two 78Xes by the end of this year. That could free up additional 789 slack.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Another thing to consider is, if they're on time, AC are expecting their first two 78Xes by the end of this year. That could free up additional 789 slack.

Well, from the current winter schedule, AC do require 2 extra widebodies for YVR. First one by Dec 1 (for CUN, coincide with the restart of seasonal AKL plus increase in BKK, MNL, joined by another plane coming from ending of seasonal KIX for this rotation using 2 planes), and second one by no later than Dec 17 (for CTS, plus whatever AC decide to use the other 4x weekly on).

They can't be giving all the resources to YVR, right? So I suspect the first one come from the resources freed up by replacing long-hual routes with XLR since that cannot be delayed and will be affecting 4 routes. Or maybe that's coming from the trimming of the LHR flights...

The second one, in case the 78X is delayed, AC can easily trim 3x weekly somewhere to operate to CTS. They did that last time by taking 3x weekly off PEK.

[RomanR27]

Originally Posted by nname

Well, from the current winter schedule, AC do require 2 extra widebodies for YVR. First one by Dec 1 (for CUN, coincide with the restart of seasonal AKL plus increase in BKK, MNL, joined by another plane coming from ending of seasonal KIX for this rotation using 2 planes), and second one by no later than Dec 17 (for CTS, plus whatever AC decide to use the other 4x weekly on).

They can't be giving all the resources to YVR, right? So I suspect the first one come from the resources freed up by replacing long-hual routes with XLR since that cannot be delayed and will be affecting 4 routes. Or maybe that's coming from the trimming of the LHR flights...

The second one, in case the 78X is delayed, AC can easily trim 3x weekly somewhere to operate to CTS. They did that last time by taking 3x weekly off PEK.

CTS is on the 788 - so I'm guessing the frame there will be rotated from YYZ or YUL, since AFAIK none are based in YVR, just 789s. Unless that is changing?

[nname]

Originally Posted by RomanR27

CTS is on the 788 - so I'm guessing the frame there will be rotated from YYZ or YUL, since AFAIK none are based in YVR, just 789s. Unless that is changing?

It's easy to change it to 789, or even down to XLR (if AC deemed it possible) depending on how well/poorly the reservation is.

Most of the new routes introduced for this summer out of YYZ/YUL ended up using a different equipment than what's originally planned.

Currently there is no YVR-YYZ/YUL operated using 788, and no other YVR routes uses 788. Of course, AC doesn't operates YYZ/YUL-CTS either. So I have no idea how that plane gets to YVR.

[RomanR27]

Originally Posted by nname

It's easy to change it to 789, or even down to XLR (if AC deemed it possible) depending on how well/poorly the reservation is.

Most of the new routes introduced for this summer out of YYZ/YUL ended up using a different equipment than what's originally planned.

Currently there is no YVR-YYZ/YUL operated using 788, and no other YVR routes uses 788. Of course, AC doesn't operates YYZ/YUL-CTS either. So I have no idea how that plane gets to YVR.

I think the winter domestic/TB schedule is largely dummy at this point. For example, I see mainline 7M8s scheduled on YOW-YVR and Florida routes well into 2027, when of course these won't be around. There is also no XLR flights into YOW/YHZ to feed the LHR daytripper.

Drifting a bit off-topic, but from a crewing perspective, I assume the 788/789 (and eventually 781) share a type rating, so even if the aircraft used for this route is based in YYZ or YUL, could it be crewed by the YVR 789 pilot base?

[nname]

Originally Posted by RomanR27

I think the winter domestic/TB schedule is largely dummy at this point. For example, I see mainline 7M8s scheduled on YOW-YVR and Florida routes well into 2027, when of course these won't be around. There is also no XLR flights into YOW/YHZ to feed the LHR daytripper.

Drifting a bit off-topic, but from a crewing perspective, I assume the 788/789 (and eventually 781) share a type rating, so even if the aircraft used for this route is based in YYZ or YUL, could it be crewed by the YVR 789 pilot base?

Should be. YVR had operated 788 before, when there were 2x daily rotations of KIX/CDG/ZRH. Post-covid there were a couple of summer where most routes have a mixed 788/789 on different days. Even now the 788 occasionally rotated into YVR to operate any of the long-haul flights including LHR, ICN, NRT, HKG, etc.

But I would expect YVR gets a full plane though. Since AC don't typically split a plane between YYZ/YUL and YVR unless it operates a W pattern. It only happened once before during pandemic recovery, when AC operated 2x weekly YYZ-PVG-YYZ and 2x weekly YYZ-YVR-PVG-YVR-YYZ which later became 4x weekly YYZ-YVR-PVG-YVR-YYZ. But after 2 schedule changes, AC fully moved PVG back to YVR base and rotate with DUB/KIX with 4/4/6x weekly.

[Coldrsx]

A visual on the cargo hub.