YEG - Edmonton Int Airport - Page 46

tuffyy · #**901** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 7:07 PM**

^And thats something to be said,Being the by far the busiest non hub airport and still the fastest growing says something...Our per annual growth pattern is the strongest in Canada and one of the strongest in N.America.If that isnt a key marketing tool then I dont know what is...Demand to/from Europe is strong here as has been proven by the daily LHR flight.If you dumped the AC hub we would likely see YYC producing similar numbers to us...Cant say anything for WestJet as they do have a hub in YEG.I dont fly AC for the obvious reasons unless totally required.

craneSpotter · #**902** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 7:16 PM**

One thing I have noticed of late, is that when you fly WJ from YYJ or YVR to YXE,YQR or YWG you sometimes get connected through YEG now. It happened to me twice recently and a buddy and his family flew YYJ-YEG-YWG last month.

That just didn't happen, in my experience, 2 years ago. Maybe this explains some of YEG's impressive passenger growth of late?

Bigtime · #**903** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 7:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by craneSpotter

I would expect LH to do the same if they decide to do a daily direct from YYC-FRA.

LH will use a 333 on the daily YYC run and AC will switch from the 333 to a 763 apparently.

tuffyy · #**904** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 7:51 PM**

Wouldnt it rock if it went 333 YEG-LHR and a 763 YEG-FRA...

Ahhh well it was a thought.

Jasper and one o nin · #**905** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:08 PM**

this is a job posted on the YEG website.. interesting

Description:
The Director, Projects will act as the driver to ensure the proposed $1 Billion 5 year expansion program is executed successfully. Working along side the Vice President, Infrastructure & Technology this position is a key member of the senior management team and is responsible for the execution of all expansion and sustaining capital projects. This individual will liaise closely with all airport stakeholders including key external customers, external consultants and key internal partners, such as Airport Operations, Maintenance Services and Marketing & Real Estate Development. Key areas of responsibility:
Air Terminal Redevelopment (ATR) – Over the next 5 years, phase I of the long term airport expansion program will be executed which includes $1B of expansion projects, the first of which is the major terminal building expansion which will increase existing capacity from 5.5M to 9M passengers per year. Also planned in this 5 year period is a new combined Office/control tower, expanded baggage handling systems and additional parking facilities. In order to keep pace with passenger growth forecasts, phase II construction of the long term airport expansion program will need to start immediately following the construction of phase I. Project Delivery – Ensures effective Project Management on all Edmonton Airports construction, development, enhancement and life cycle capital projects.

Coldrsx · #**906** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:29 PM**

^im assuming then it will be on top of the "new terminal"?

KrisYYC · #**907** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:45 PM**

AC and LH codeshare on their transatlantic flights. The AC FRA flight is oversold almost everyday. Obviously there was some growth potential for this route. Because AC and LH already code share on the route, it could have gone either AC adding a second flight, or LH operating one flight and AC operating the other. An agreement was made that LH will operate the A330 flight and the AC flight will go 767. Both airlines sell tickets on both flights and share revenue. This is the beauty of the STAR alliance.

So, to sum it up: AC and LH wanted YYC-FRA to grow. AC doesn't have the metal right now. LH agrees to operate one flight and AC switches its flight to a 767. Freeing up an A330 for AC. Who knows YEG, that 330 might be for you

When it comes to codeshare flights with airlines that are in bed with each other as much as AC and LH you almost have to think of it as a single airline. You can book the LH flight through Air Canada and it'll even show an AC flight number, there'll just be an asterisk with *operated by Lufthansa. You'll still get your Aeroplan points and everything.

Kris

Jasper and one o nin · #**908** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:53 PM**

I've heard from a contractor that the existing office buildng and control tower will be demolished

Jasper and one o nin · #**909** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:55 PM**

look at us thinking doom and gloom for YEG

murman · #**910** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin

I've heard from a contractor that the existing office buildng and control tower will be demolished

I like that retro element of the old airport...

Edmonchuck · #**911** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 9:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin

look at us thinking doom and gloom for YEG

Not doom and gloom, but frustration that the numbers are not being listened to (allegedly). It is time for Air Canada and others to realize that we can, and will, support service. We as a city have moved on.

...which is why I want to take a big big big roll of duct tape to Koziak and Caterina...

Edmonchuck · #**912** Posted **Oct 24, 2007, 9:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin

this is a job posted on the YEG website.. interesting

Description:
The Director, Projects will act as the driver to ensure the proposed $1 Billion 5 year expansion program is executed successfully. Working along side the Vice President, Infrastructure & Technology this position is a key member of the senior management team and is responsible for the execution of all expansion and sustaining capital projects.

Damn me for being a technology delivery/project manager....I shoudl have gone to construction!!!

LO 044 · #**913** Posted **Oct 28, 2007, 5:58 PM**

I'm curious what Horizon's take is on the Q400 accidents recently. Some poeple on airliners.net think Horizon might buy up SAS's Q400's. Not a good sign for us considering Horizon uses the plane on its YEG-SEA service.

I recently flew on the plane to Seattle. The afternoon YEG-SEA flight was half empty but the ride was fairly smooth. The SEA-YEG evening flight was full and very uncomfortable. There was constant turbulence from start to finish. I am curious if Horizon's RJ's give a smoother ride. Anyone have experience flying YEG-SEA on a Horizon RJ? Was the ride smooth? I believe the Q400 flies at a higher altitudes than most turboprops so i would have thought travel on this plane would have been without turbulence. I'm curious if an RJ would have made a difference on my flight.

EdmTrekker · #**914** Posted **Oct 28, 2007, 8:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LO 044

I'm curious what Horizon's take is on the Q400 accidents recently. Some poeple on airliners.net think Horizon might buy up SAS's Q400's. Not a good sign for us considering Horizon uses the plane on its YEG-SEA service.

I recently flew on the plane to Seattle. The afternoon YEG-SEA flight was half empty but the ride was fairly smooth. The SEA-YEG evening flight was full and very uncomfortable. There was constant turbulence from start to finish. I am curious if Horizon's RJ's give a smoother ride. Anyone have experience flying YEG-SEA on a Horizon RJ? Was the ride smooth? I believe the Q400 flies at a higher altitudes than most turboprops so i would have thought travel on this plane would have been without turbulence. I'm curious if an RJ would have made a difference on my flight.

I have flown on both may times to SEATAC. Of course the RJ is much better in terms of the quiet ride etc. Neither is particularly comfy though - and any larger aircraft would be preferable.

BlueFusion · #**915** Posted **Oct 29, 2007, 3:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LO 044

I'm curious what Horizon's take is on the Q400 accidents recently. Some poeple on airliners.net think Horizon might buy up SAS's Q400's. Not a good sign for us considering Horizon uses the plane on its YEG-SEA service.

I don't think they are to concerned, the Q400 is a very good aircraft, and Horizon has not experienced the same issues that SAS has. It is also kind of odd that only SAS has had this happen, and those three accidents have all happened in the last two months. I don't think it will be easy to find homes for the Q400's that SAS wants to dispose of though, and I doubt Horizon would want to be burdened with them.

LO 044 · #**916** Posted **Oct 29, 2007, 5:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueFusion

It is also kind of odd that only SAS has had this happen, and those three accidents have all happened in the last two months.

A couple of months ago, the front landing gear of an ANA Q400 didn't retract and an emergency landing took place.

#**917** Posted **Oct 29, 2007, 2:54 PM**

Interesting with the Q400. GE and Bombardier are in for an interesting legal ride.

tuffyy · #**918** Posted **Oct 29, 2007, 4:10 PM**

^The company is saying it maybe a mtc issue.No N.american operators have seen this problem.We have 5 Dash 8-100's based at our hanger and have not seen this problem with them atall.Maybe the Q400's gear may need to be reinforced to cope with the larger airframe...I have no idea...

BlueFusion · #**919** Posted **Oct 29, 2007, 5:35 PM**

LO 044 - I meant they have been the only airline so far that has had issues with the main landing gear. ANA and another carrier in Japan have both had issues with the front landing gear, and apparently those two incidents also happened rather close to each other.

Tuffyy - From what I understand the Q400 has different landing gear then the rest of the Dash 8 family, and they are also made by different companies. So I think that is why we are not seeing any issues with the original Dash 8's.

tarapoto · #**920** Posted **Oct 30, 2007, 9:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LO 044

A couple of months ago, the front landing gear of an ANA Q400 didn't retract and an emergency landing took place.

It may have been a ground crew error. It's possible the Q400 has a nose gear lock down pin which prevents the main gear from collapsing while towing the aircraft with a tractor. if the pin was left locked down by the ground crew, the (nose) gear would not be able to retract. Shouldn't affect the main gear though