Winnipeg | James Armstrong Richardson International Airport

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by Biff

It's a big building, over 100,000 sq ft, two stories, kind of boomerang shaped, located on a triangle piece of property on Intersite Rd. I am not sure if I can show the plans, so I wont.

Yeah, basic OpSec applies here, my dude.

Of course, all of that will be made "public" in 5-10 years, when Google Maps/Earth shows the completed construction, assuming that our planet is not ravaged by tragic events because of:

a) other humans
2) aliens
iii) see a), but with nukes

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Yeah, basic OpSec applies here, my dude.

Of course, all of that will be made "public" in 5-10 years, when Google Maps/Earth shows the completed construction, assuming that our planet is not ravaged by tragic events because of:

a) other humans
2) aliens
iii) see a), but with nukes

I think "tech bros" would cover both "other humans" and "aliens" wouldn't it?

[cheswick]

Not sure if this has been shared here, didn't see it, but "AirHelp, an air passenger rights and flight claim compensation service based in the United Kingdom, has released its ranking of the world’s best airports." Richardson ranks top in Canada.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/best-airports-canada

[Wpg_Guy]

Originally Posted by cheswick

Not sure if this has been shared here, didn't see it, but "AirHelp, an air passenger rights and flight claim compensation service based in the United Kingdom, has released its ranking of the world’s best airports." Richardson ranks top in Canada.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/best-airports-canada

Nice! WAA should be proud, they've done such excellent work since the new terminal was built.

[optimusREIM]

I'm not sure if this has been shared here yet, but here's the link to a summary of the 2045 master plan. It's kind of neat and shows where they plan on expanding in the long term and near term. Helps for those who are visual like me and who also happen to be aviation nerds.
https://www.ywg.ca/assets/pages/14126r01E_FINAL_PUBLIC_YWG_Master_Plan_2045_ENGLISH.pdf

Here's a photo of an exerpt for fun of the beyond 2045 vision for the airfield.

[BorealLynx]

I find it so hard to believe that Winnipeg doesn't have enough of a critical mass to justify non-stop flights to Europe. We're almost 1 million people! Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Halifax all have direct flights. Surely there's enough business travel alone to justify it, especially to a key hub like London, Paris, Amsterdam or Frankfurt. It's a pain to have to transfer in Toronto or Montreal just to get to a major European city, to then transfer again to get to an end destination.

I know that many Winnipeggers like to talk like we're a bunch of inferior second-class yokels compared to other Canadian cities of similar size, but that's just not the reality. There is a vibrant business community with a lot of entrepreneurial spirit that does a great deal of innovation, and many of them are doing business in Europe and beyond. With the slump in the American economy over the past couple of years (and even bigger slump in American leadership), my business is expanding to Europe. We've travelled there this year and we will travel again. I know a number of other businesses who are doing regular travel to Europe from Manitoba, not to mention friends and family who are foregoing big US vacations in favour of European destinations. This is why the lack of flights baffles me.

It makes me wonder whether it's a geographical thing. Is Winnipeg too close and convenient to the major hubs in Toronto and Montreal that the airlines want to discourage us from flying direct in favour of reinforcing their hub-and-spoke model? Or is it because of limited landing slots in the major European hubs? Is Winnipeg within range of an A321LR or A321XLR?

Has there been any analysis done recently on the total number of travellers from Winnipeg to all European destinations across the year? I'm sure the airlines have this information, but do the economic development authorities have access to it? Are the tourism people and the economic development folks and the MB Government lobbying for direct flights to Europe?

[WayneShuster]

Originally Posted by BorealLynx

I find it so hard to believe that Winnipeg doesn't have enough of a critical mass to justify non-stop flights to Europe. We're almost 1 million people! Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Halifax all have direct flights. Surely there's enough business travel alone to justify it, especially to a key hub like London, Paris, Amsterdam or Frankfurt. It's a pain to have to transfer in Toronto or Montreal just to get to a major European city, to then transfer again to get to an end destination.

I know that many Winnipeggers like to talk like we're a bunch of inferior second-class yokels compared to other Canadian cities of similar size, but that's just not the reality. There is a vibrant business community with a lot of entrepreneurial spirit that does a great deal of innovation, and many of them are doing business in Europe and beyond. With the slump in the American economy over the past couple of years (and even bigger slump in American leadership), my business is expanding to Europe. We've travelled there this year and we will travel again. I know a number of other businesses who are doing regular travel to Europe from Manitoba, not to mention friends and family who are foregoing big US vacations in favour of European destinations. This is why the lack of flights baffles me.

It makes me wonder whether it's a geographical thing. Is Winnipeg too close and convenient to the major hubs in Toronto and Montreal that the airlines want to discourage us from flying direct in favour of reinforcing their hub-and-spoke model? Or is it because of limited landing slots in the major European hubs? Is Winnipeg within range of an A321LR or A321XLR?

Has there been any analysis done recently on the total number of travellers from Winnipeg to all European destinations across the year? I'm sure the airlines have this information, but do the economic development authorities have access to it? Are the tourism people and the economic development folks and the MB Government lobbying for direct flights to Europe?

YWG does have direct flights to Europe. WS summer seasonal flights to Iceland started last week, and this will likely expand next year with the new Westjet and Iceland Air agreement offering further connections to Europe.

The WAA have explicitly stated a big part of their mandate is to acquire more direct flights to Europe. Obviously a market like YWG cannot sustain more than a handful of Transatlantic flights on its own. However with YWG becoming a hub for WS, this may be an opportunity to start funnelling in more passengers to grow and sustain more direct Europe routes.

Oh and FYI, YEG also has the Iceland seasonal flight, as well KLM to AMS, so barely anything. Just thought I'd point that tidbit of info out

[neutroniks]

We used to have direct to Gatwick, I do believe. Would be nice to at least revive that. Once you get into Europe, it's incredibly cheap to fly / train to other destinations.

[James Bond Agent 007]

Originally Posted by BorealLynx

I find it so hard to believe that Winnipeg doesn't have enough of a critical mass to justify non-stop flights to Europe. We're almost 1 million people! Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Halifax all have direct flights. Surely there's enough business travel alone to justify it, especially to a key hub like London, Paris, Amsterdam or Frankfurt. It's a pain to have to transfer in Toronto or Montreal just to get to a major European city, to then transfer again to get to an end destination.

I know that many Winnipeggers like to talk like we're a bunch of inferior second-class yokels compared to other Canadian cities of similar size, but that's just not the reality. There is a vibrant business community with a lot of entrepreneurial spirit that does a great deal of innovation, and many of them are doing business in Europe and beyond. With the slump in the American economy over the past couple of years (and even bigger slump in American leadership), my business is expanding to Europe. We've travelled there this year and we will travel again. I know a number of other businesses who are doing regular travel to Europe from Manitoba, not to mention friends and family who are foregoing big US vacations in favour of European destinations. This is why the lack of flights baffles me.

It makes me wonder whether it's a geographical thing. Is Winnipeg too close and convenient to the major hubs in Toronto and Montreal that the airlines want to discourage us from flying direct in favour of reinforcing their hub-and-spoke model? Or is it because of limited landing slots in the major European hubs? Is Winnipeg within range of an A321LR or A321XLR?

Has there been any analysis done recently on the total number of travellers from Winnipeg to all European destinations across the year? I'm sure the airlines have this information, but do the economic development authorities have access to it? Are the tourism people and the economic development folks and the MB Government lobbying for direct flights to Europe?

Metro Kansas City is almost 3 times the size of metro Winnipeg, and Winnipeg has more international flights than KC. KC literally has just 2 international flights to Mexico, and that's it. Everything else is domestic. At least Winnipeg has a flight to Iceland.

[Myst]

Edmonton’s overseas route was pretty precarious until recently. Losing LHR more than once, and losing Icelandair were blows. Even now I’m not sure AMS is daily. And Edmonton has grown to be a fair bit bigger than Winnipeg.

I would like to have a euro route. I will say that I’m not sure a connection at YYZ or YUL is any worse than one at LHR or CDG. And it does make sense airlines would rather funnel you through their own network rather than another carriers’.

I think and hope the A321XLR will be a game changer. It has a range and size that makes it feasible. But without WS or AF having any, I’m not sure there is a way. I don’t see an expensive LHR slot being used for a smaller aircraft. AerLingus to Dublin would be a good choice, but without a strong partner on this end I don’t see it, and they have a lot of other places that would be higher on their list.

The market is far different than 40 years ago. People demand more regular schedules, and airline economics no longer work on half full loads. I looked at a schedule from July 1983 - YWG-LHR was 1x weekly (Thursday) on an L1011. YWG-AMS was 1x weekly (Tuesday) on a 747 with the aircraft continuing to YVR. And YVR-AMS was 5x weekly, with only one being nonstop and the others being via YYC, YEG, YWG.

[BorealLynx]

I'm not being ignorant, I'm just curious what the actual numbers say. How do Winnipeg's passenger volumes to Europe (and destinations transiting through Europe) compare to other Canadian cities of similar size? Is the lack of any direct flights truly based on the numbers, or is there some other reason at play?

And as for Iceland, this is really nice and a step in the right direction, but I had assumed that most of the traffic on this route would have Iceland itself as the end destination. Is Reykjavik truly a hub city that serves most major centres in Europe, comparable to London, Paris, Frankfurt or Amsterdam?

[LO 044]

I sentiment some of the comments relative to YEG.

WS feeds us crumbs and the WS fanboys around YEG rejoice. WS said they would offer us European service when they had an aircraft. When they got their 767's, they provided something like 10 or 12 flights over the summer months. Then the 767's went away and we were told "just wait until we get new aircraft". Well the aircraft came and they all went to YYC. Even with YYC's terminal / connectivity issues, WS refuses to plant a 787 at YEG for example.

Our proximity to YYC is problematic. Our business and tourist traffic is below YYC's so it's understandable that YYC gets more flights and flight options in general. But from what other people have said, we do have the numbers to warrant another European connection but we probably won't get it. We had to wait a long time to get KL and i'm not even sure if it's daily right now but the fact that it sticks around in the winter a couple of days a week is a win.

Many years ago I said to the fanboys that WS is no different than AC and frankly I now find them worse. AC has chosen YVR, YYZ and YUL. WS has chosen YYC and to seasonal extent YHZ. The rest of us are hub feeder airports for these airlines.

Our airport authority builds racetracks and golf courses and some cargo development. I think I have heard Port Alberta for the last 25 years and "just wait we'll get more flights". YWG is in a better spot geographically so I think YWG's cargo ambitions may make the most sense but I don't believe it will bring you anymore passenger flights or destinations. KL is a great airline and I am glad we have the connection through them instead of AC and WS but I think that KL's 332's would be too big of an aircraft for a YWG-AMS route. They have ordered some 321 NEO's but they all seem to be configured to the European Business Class layout so I'm not sure if they're meant for long-haul routes. The NEO's range is 7,400 km and YWG-AMS is 6,518 km so I'm not sure if that works with fuel reserves and headwinds and all that.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by BorealLynx

I'm not being ignorant, I'm just curious what the actual numbers say. How do Winnipeg's passenger volumes to Europe (and destinations transiting through Europe) compare to other Canadian cities of similar size? Is the lack of any direct flights truly based on the numbers, or is there some other reason at play?

And as for Iceland, this is really nice and a step in the right direction, but I had assumed that most of the traffic on this route would have Iceland itself as the end destination. Is Reykjavik truly a hub city that serves most major centres in Europe, comparable to London, Paris, Frankfurt or Amsterdam?

I would imagine origin and destination numbers from Winnipeg are not that different from other similarly sized canadian cities. The lack of flights has less to do with numbers and more to do with the status of the airport as a hub (or non-hub rather). Airlines prefer to funnel passengers through their hub airports to maximize network efficiency at the airports where they have the biggest investments. This could always change in the future, but it isn't obvious that it ever will absent some black swan economic event that makes Winnipeg suddenly much more appealing economically for any number of reasons.

Keflavik is not a global hub like the other airports you mentioned, but is still directly connected to may airports in Europe per wikipedia. I don't know enough about their scheduling to directly comment on its usefulness as a connection point, but it wouldn't be that useful unless the winnipeg flight was more frequent than once per week.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by LO 044

I sentiment some of the comments relative to YEG.

WS feeds us crumbs and the WS fanboys around YEG rejoice. WS said they would offer us European service when they had an aircraft. When they got their 767's, they provided something like 10 or 12 flights over the summer months. Then the 767's went away and we were told "just wait until we get new aircraft". Well the aircraft came and they all went to YYC. Even with YYC's terminal / connectivity issues, WS refuses to plant a 787 at YEG for example.

Our proximity to YYC is problematic. Our business and tourist traffic is below YYC's so it's understandable that YYC gets more flights and flight options in general. But from what other people have said, we do have the numbers to warrant another European connection but we probably won't get it. We had to wait a long time to get KL and i'm not even sure if it's daily right now but the fact that it sticks around in the winter a couple of days a week is a win.

Many years ago I said to the fanboys that WS is no different than AC and frankly I now find them worse. AC has chosen YVR, YYZ and YUL. WS has chosen YYC and to seasonal extent YHZ. The rest of us are hub feeder airports for these airlines.

Our airport authority builds racetracks and golf courses and some cargo development. I think I have heard Port Alberta for the last 25 years and "just wait we'll get more flights". YWG is in a better spot geographically so I think YWG's cargo ambitions may make the most sense but I don't believe it will bring you anymore passenger flights or destinations. KL is a great airline and I am glad we have the connection through them instead of AC and WS but I think that KL's 332's would be too big of an aircraft for a YWG-AMS route. They have ordered some 321 NEO's but they all seem to be configured to the European Business Class layout so I'm not sure if they're meant for long-haul routes. The NEO's range is 7,400 km and YWG-AMS is 6,518 km so I'm not sure if that works with fuel reserves and headwinds and all that.

I fly to Edmonton pretty often for work - YEG definitely feels underutilized, which is a shame since I rather like the design and flow of the airport. Definitely a nicer experience than Calgary. Ive walked through at all hours and it never feels that busy even compared to YWG, its just bigger. Probably just my impression and not reflected by reality. Worst part of YEG is the terrible placement. Its so far outta town and its bloody expensive to take a cab into downtown or the N side of the city. YWG is certainly more convenient in that regard.

[bomberjet]

Getting from YWG to YEG kind of sucks as most of the time it routes through Calgary, or Saskatoon even. There are direct flights but I've found them more expensive. I haven't flown there probably in the last year so maybe that's different now.

Edit: I see there a bunch of direct flights but they're not cheap.. $1,560 ffs to fly return next week. And thats the cheapest bare bones econo. no insurance lol

[WayneShuster]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Getting from YWG to YEG kind of sucks as most of the time it routes through Calgary, or Saskatoon even. There are direct flights but I've found them more expensive. I haven't flown there probably in the last year so maybe that's different now.

Edit: I see there a bunch of direct flights but they're not cheap.. $1,560 ffs to fly return next week. And thats the cheapest bare bones econo. no insurance lol

If you are booking flights within 2 weeks of the booking date, you will always being paying theough the nose. If you are booking 3-4 weeks put or more, priced are far more reasonable. There are generally 2 to 4 flights per day to YEG on WS, depending in the time of year. Round trip prices to YEG in late July appear to be around $300-$500, so much more reasonable. Yes, it's still far far more than what we used to pay, but so is everything else these days.

You could also try Flair and their summer seasonal flights to YEG.

[Myst]

$1560 is a full-fare economy ticket. Most consumers buy discounted tickets, although they don’t think of them as such. That’s why airlines look for markets with last minute business travellers.

Probably a good way to look at overseas is that YEG was at about 8 million passengers when it got AMS. Back 20 years ago YYC was 10-12 and had 3 year round dailies and a few seasonal charter flights, even serving connections for YLW, YEG, YXE, YQR, and elsewhere and having the Banff tourist draw. I think we’re at the point some carriers might look at service, but even with A321XLR it’s more likely about the time passenger counts hit 6 million or so that we see something that is more than testing the market.