YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[en2]

http://www.yvr.ca/latestinfo/index.asp?id=550

Observation Deck at YVR - Your Input Requested
[Last updated on 12/5/2008 at 7:10:43 PM]


Vancouver Airport Authority is developing an observation and information area at YVR that will be open to the public in 2009. Along with a large space to view activity on the airfield, we are considering a number of additional elements for this area, with the goal of informing, educating and entertaining our customers and those who live in the local community.


We are asking for your input regarding what you would like to see, do or learn about in a viewing area. Please take a few moments to complete our online questionnaire. We will collect responses until December 31, 2008.

Thank you for participating. Your valuable input helps keep Vancouver International Airport as one of the best airports in the world.

[fever]

That sounds really cool. Sure would beat waiting in the waiting room.

[Yume-sama]

I voted for a Cockpit simulation thing. Or even just a cockpit mockup.

Of at least a 737, but a 747 would be even more awesome.

[Hot Rod]

Yeah, Seattle is a huge hub for Alaska and the smaller cities of the US NW. A lot of flight options go from major cities like Chicago, NY, to Seattle then on to Spokane or Missoula or Eugene, OR or Bellingham/Yakima/Pasco - resulting in a lot of double counting.

I would say, of Seattle's Pax traffic; 10M would be true domestic origin/destination *with Vancouverites probably making up 1M of that (who knows?), 16M would be transient, 3M International. Vancouver puts up way more International (and often is something most Seattleites are jealous about). JFK also handles roughly the same amount of PAX as Seattle but you would have to agree that JFK is MUCH busier and definitely has more O/D passengers.

As for double counting, Atlanta is a MAJOR offender (87M is really more like 25 M, 5M international, plus 57M who are double counted). Atlanta is WAY more of a major business center than Seattle despite being only 1.5 times larger.

I would say Vancouver's demise in relative EUROPEAN TRAFFIC has more to do with Canadian regulations than Vancouver as it's status as an international city. Keep in mind, Seattle only has service to one city European city that Vancouver does not (and it isn't a daily I don't think), Vancouver does have more flag carriers to Europe (and definitely to Asia).
Seattle recently lost it's China Air service, Im not sure the Hanian Air to Beijing will last much longer either (the ONLY service to China btw). Only ONE airline (United) has ONE flight to japan (I hear Delta is dropping the NW flight), and NOW only one airline has one flight to Taiwan. ...

One more thing, I live in Seattle and USE SeaTac airport. I travel to Japan for business - and on numerous times, non-business people will ask me where I am from; I say Seattle, and they look confused and perplexed. Then I say, near Vancouver and they immediately chime in with - Oh, Vancouver... very nice city. ditto that for people from China and Taiwan.

Who cares if somebody from South Africa doens't know where Vancouver (or Seattle) is. I don't know where most of their cities are either, other than Cape Town and Johannesburg. Im not saying Vancouver can't improve, but to sit and whine about what somebody from NOWHERE thinks or doesn't know about Vancouver - that's just petty and immaterial.

Rather than complaining about it on this site, perhaps some of you should lobby your government or vote people in to open the skies of Vancouver and promote Vancouver so it can compete. The city has the potential to really be the Singapore of North America.

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

The city has the potential to really be the Singapore of North America.

With the radical nimbyism in Vancouver, I wouldn't doubt chewing gum will cease to exist.

[vansky]

new york, singapore and hong kong, these are names I have heard since childhood. as an immigrant, I haven't even heard of Canada before my friend told me that he immigrated here. obvisouly this city is unknown to a lot of people.

[giallo]

You hadn't heard of Canada? Seriously? How old were you when you found out?
I've taught six year olds in China and Taiwan that know of Canada.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

Yeah, Seattle is a huge hub for Alaska and the smaller cities of the US NW. A lot of flight options go from major cities like Chicago, NY, to Seattle then on to Spokane or Missoula or Eugene, OR or Bellingham/Yakima/Pasco - resulting in a lot of double counting.

I would say, of Seattle's Pax traffic; 10M would be true domestic origin/destination *with Vancouverites probably making up 1M of that (who knows?), 16M would be transient, 3M International. Vancouver puts up way more International (and often is something most Seattleites are jealous about). JFK also handles roughly the same amount of PAX as Seattle but you would have to agree that JFK is MUCH busier and definitely has more O/D passengers.

As for double counting, Atlanta is a MAJOR offender (87M is really more like 25 M, 5M international, plus 57M who are double counted). Atlanta is WAY more of a major business center than Seattle despite being only 1.5 times larger.

I would say Vancouver's demise in relative EUROPEAN TRAFFIC has more to do with Canadian regulations than Vancouver as it's status as an international city. Keep in mind, Seattle only has service to one city European city that Vancouver does not (and it isn't a daily I don't think), Vancouver does have more flag carriers to Europe (and definitely to Asia).
Seattle recently lost it's China Air service, Im not sure the Hanian Air to Beijing will last much longer either (the ONLY service to China btw). Only ONE airline (United) has ONE flight to japan (I hear Delta is dropping the NW flight), and NOW only one airline has one flight to Taiwan. ...

One more thing, I live in Seattle and USE SeaTac airport. I travel to Japan for business - and on numerous times, non-business people will ask me where I am from; I say Seattle, and they look confused and perplexed. Then I say, near Vancouver and they immediately chime in with - Oh, Vancouver... very nice city. ditto that for people from China and Taiwan.

Who cares if somebody from South Africa doens't know where Vancouver (or Seattle) is. I don't know where most of their cities are either, other than Cape Town and Johannesburg. Im not saying Vancouver can't improve, but to sit and whine about what somebody from NOWHERE thinks or doesn't know about Vancouver - that's just petty and immaterial.

Rather than complaining about it on this site, perhaps some of you should lobby your government or vote people in to open the skies of Vancouver and promote Vancouver so it can compete. The city has the potential to really be the Singapore of North America.

- - - - - -
Whether or not Vancouver has the potential to be the Singapore of North America, one main, or rather THE MAIN reason that more airlines aren't flying out of here to Dubai, Paris, New Delhi, Rome or whatever unserved, yet necessary, destination you care to name (unless you enjoy the priviledge of changing planes at Toronto's new "Superterminal 1") is simply because: the federal government has MPs. MPs want to keep their jobs. Regarding air transport, more MPs will keep their jobs if they cater to the large Ontario and Quebec population centres where the voters live. Therefore, it is in their interest to make people in Vancouver who want to fly to Paris in 8 hours, to change in Toronto and take 14 hours instead. Ditto for many other markets, such as Rome or Dubai. The government wants the airlines to serve their voting base, and that's why Montreal, and even moreso Toronto, are the "gateways" to Canada, and Vancouver is still a "spoke, " and not a "hub." Japan Airlines flies nonstop Tokyo-Toronto. Now Air Canada wants to serve Toronto - New Zealand with a flight that touches down at Los Angeles for fuel. (With a 787 Dreamliner, they could make it a nonstop) * Does Vancouver have a Paris non-stop, an air market estimated at being possibly second in Europe after London? NOPE* Why? No French air lines are allowed to land at Vancouver. What about Air Canada? If you hadn't already guessed, it makes you go through Toronto, or perhaps Montreal. Emirates? Change in Toronto. Ditto Eithad Airlines of Abu Dhabi. Ditto Air India (even though a Delhi-Vancouver nonstop was supposed to come onstream in 2008, but never did. Thank you, Mr. Cannon) UNTIL CANADA NEGOTIATES SOME FORM OF "OPEN SKIES" AGREEMENT, VANCOUVER WILL BE A "SPOKE" CITY, REGARDLESS OF HOW ECONOMICALLY STRAGIC IT BECOMES. GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS TYING THINGS UP, TO VANCOUVER's DISADVANTAGE. UNDERSTAND, FOLKS?

[Gordon]

Non stop Toronto - Aukland is that even possible from what i understand yvr to Aukland is at the outside edge of the of the 777s range. The 777 200LR can do the flight

[punkster1982]

To be fair, many of these bilateral agreements are decades old, when Vancouver was nothing more than a logging town. Unfortunately, many of these deals haven't been updated since then and still name Montreal and Toronto as the only points they are allowed to land. However, the federal government is currently in negotiations with the EU for an open-skies type deal that would likely me an increase in flights from Vancouver. Germany is one of BC's largest tourist sources, they love outdoor adventures and I'm sure would help support a few new flights into Vancouver and Calgary. I think the open-skied deal we signed with the UK a few years back is proof the demand is there since even Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Halifax have seen increases in direct flights there in the summer.

[sacrifice333]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

- - - - - -
Whether or not Vancouver has the potential to be the Singapore of North America, one main, or rather THE MAIN reason that more airlines aren't flying out of here to Dubai, Paris, New Delhi, Rome or whatever unserved, yet necessary, destination you care to name (unless you enjoy the priviledge of changing planes at Toronto's new "Superterminal 1") is simply because: the federal government has MPs. MPs want to keep their jobs. Regarding air transport, more MPs will keep their jobs if they cater to the large Ontario and Quebec population centres where the voters live. Therefore, it is in their interest to make people in Vancouver who want to fly to Paris in 8 hours, to change in Toronto and take 14 hours instead. Ditto for many other markets, such as Rome or Dubai. The government wants the airlines to serve their voting base, and that's why Montreal, and even moreso Toronto, are the "gateways" to Canada, and Vancouver is still a "spoke, " and not a "hub." Japan Airlines flies nonstop Tokyo-Toronto. Now Air Canada wants to serve Toronto - New Zealand with a flight that touches down at Los Angeles for fuel. (With a 787 Dreamliner, they could make it a nonstop) * Does Vancouver have a Paris non-stop, an air market estimated at being possibly second in Europe after London? NOPE* Why? No French air lines are allowed to land at Vancouver. What about Air Canada? If you hadn't already guessed, it makes you go through Toronto, or perhaps Montreal. Emirates? Change in Toronto. Ditto Eithad Airlines of Abu Dhabi. Ditto Air India (even though a Delhi-Vancouver nonstop was supposed to come onstream in 2008, but never did. Thank you, Mr. Cannon) UNTIL CANADA NEGOTIATES SOME FORM OF "OPEN SKIES" AGREEMENT, VANCOUVER WILL BE A "SPOKE" CITY, REGARDLESS OF HOW ECONOMICALLY STRAGIC IT BECOMES. GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS TYING THINGS UP, TO VANCOUVER's DISADVANTAGE. UNDERSTAND, FOLKS?

It's so outdated... I'll fly direct to London or Amsterdam first every time and then fly to my final destination from there.

No Toronto from me, unless absolutely required.

One has to go through Toronto for most Caribbean destinations too if they're not a charter.

[yesheh]

Well, you can have your cake and eat it too...

Originally Posted by Canadian Press

Canada reaches aviation pact with European Union
3 hours ago
BRUSSELS, Belgium — The European Union and Canada have reached a landmark deal to open up their air services markets to each other.
EU Transport Commissioner Antonio Tajani says the pact will lead to more transatlantic trade and spur competition in the air services sector. He says the deal, which removes restrictions on ownership and direct flights, makes "the EU-Canada market one of the most open in the world."
Expected to come into force in the first half of 2009, the deal will allow airlines based in the 27-member European Union bloc to operate direct flights to Canada from anywhere in Europe.
It removes restrictions on routes, prices and the number of flights allowed between the two sides.
It also foresees a phase-out of restrictions on investment and foreign ownership in airlines and could lead to European investors setting up airline operations in Canada.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jZ2ZjR5X-PvDFd4LoOy-toJXT_pQ

Here's hoping for a few more direct flights to/from Vancouver.

[flight_from_kamakura]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

With the radical nimbyism in Vancouver, I wouldn't doubt chewing gum will cease to exist.

hAHAHAH.

seriously, if there's an award for inside humor specific to the vancouver skyscraper page forum, you've just won it. "radical nimbyism"! classic!

[LeftCoaster]

"It also foresees a phase-out of restrictions on investment and foreign ownership in airlines and could lead to European investors setting up airline operations in Canada."

Amazing. Fingers crossed for Ryan Air.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Amazing. Fingers crossed for Ryan Air.

Please. No.

Or were you being tongue in cheek...?

[LeftCoaster]

No not at all... why would you not want ryan air in Canada??

I have taken over a dozen flights with Ryan air and had only positive experiances.

[Yume-sama]

I hope we get flights to Paris, Rome, and Madrid.

Then we can go ANYWHERE

[eduardo88]

ryanair to vancouver is never going to happen. and why would you want it to happen? i hate flying with them, though i hate easyjet even more, thats why i only use BA when i go back to berlin on weekends now.

[LeftCoaster]

well idealy we could all fly BA, but when I was a student backpacking around europe Ryan Air was a godsend. Its great for what it is, a low cost people mover. Comparing it to a national airline like BA or Lufthansa is like comparing a Rolls Royce to a bus.

[trofirhen]

The recent announcement of an "open skies" type agreement between Canada and the 27 -nation EU Bloc doesn't automatically mean that Ryanair will dominate most new overseas European routes out of Vancouver. But what if it did, anyway? We'd be getting more destinations at cheaper prices than with Air Canada or European flag carriers. Ditto Easy-Jet.
I am not advocating all new European routes be awarded to Ryananir or Easyjet. Far from it. All I'm say is that (with a gasp of disbelieving relief) Air Canada, Westjet, Transat (which are now our principal flag carriers) and whomever else you care to name, be it Iberia, Swiss Air Lines, Air France, SAS, and yes, even Ryanair and Easyjet, will now, finally, at last, after so many years of being shut out of YVR, have a chance to offer more cities, more service, at competitive prices. Is the thought of having to BUY an inflight meal a problem for you? Is flying in a stretch 737 off-putting comared to a Boeing or an Airbus 340? Then go build a boat and paddle across the Atlantic. We are due for more destinations, more airlines, and lower fares. It may take six months or more, but it's on its way. So quit whinging, and appreciate the wider choice of destinations and (hopefully) lower prices that are coming!! If anyone disagrees with this, please tell me. - and - as they say in university - JUSTIFY YOUR RESPONSE, OK.? We're FINALLY on our way, free of the shackles that have held us back for so many years, and here you are whining about "oh... no... please... not Ryanair..." Just take your thumb out of your mouth and appreciate the turn of events. !