YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Will we ever get A380s? That's a real plane.

I like the A380 for its sheer size and technological prowess, but in terms of looks, I don't think I'll ever see a plane that is as well-proportioned and as good-looking as the B747.

Beluga vs. Dolphin

The A380 is a more comfortable ride for passengers, however, so from a passenger perspective, much better.

[Chikinlittle]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I was speaking to a contact in the YVR marketing department two days ago, and he said Brisbane is a likely new destination from Vancouver, as it is the closest to North America. Flights could make a stop there then continue on to Sydney and / or Melbourne

I was not aware than AC ever flew to Melbourne at one time.

FYI, at the present rate of growth, predictions are that it sill overtake Sydney as the largest city in Australia within 20 years. Sydney will remain the most desirable city, but for business passengers, Melbourne may be the top destination.

BNE used to be a destination out of YVR (again with a touchdown in HNL) some 8 years ago in the old Canada 3000 days. In the winter their A330s would make a twice weekly loop of the South Pacific... YVR-HNL-BNE-SYD-AKL-RAR-HNL-YVR and vice versa. In the summer months, it used to operate solely as YVR-HNL-BNE-SYD and return.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

How do you figure? The 787 is more of a modern replacement to the 767 than anything else (in terms of capactity). The 777 more replaces the 747 than does the 787.

These new planes are built for more direct point-to-point flying.

They're essentially designed for places like Vancouver/Calgary/Edmonton.

What you might see is that instead of an airline flying one Jumbo Jet into Vancouver, and then to Calgary, they'll find they will assume less risk on two more efficient 787s flying into each destination.

I've started to rethink how I think about YVR. I think that YVR's growth will have more to do with Vancouver's growth than its role as a Pacific hub.

Of course, I'd like to see YVR as a hub bigger than its population warrants... but that's purely for selfish reasons.

[PaperTiger]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

The A380 is a more comfortable ride for passengers, however, so from a passenger perspective, much better.

Really?? I have never flown in an A380, But I have flown on every other Airbus and all modern Boeings and I would rather be on a Boeing any day.

In fact, Malaysian Airlines Trans-pacific 747-400 is the best economy flying experience I have ever had. It was so good that it almost made up for my annoying YVR-LAX-TPE-KUL-SYD routing.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by PaperTiger

Really?? I have never flown in an A380, But I have flown on every other Airbus and all modern Boeings and I would rather be on a Boeing any day.

In fact, Malaysian Airlines Trans-pacific 747-400 is the best economy flying experience I have ever had. It was so good that it almost made up for my annoying YVR-LAX-TPE-KUL-SYD routing.

Well, the A380 is quieter, has bigger windows and is more spacious than a 747.

The 787 will trump all of them apparently, for passenger comfort.

[zivan56]

Don't worry, all airlines will find a way to make both the A380 and 787 as uncomfortable as possible in order to cram as many people in as possible in them. I'm not that tall and I still can't sit in a non-aisle/exit row seat on most major airlines (Lufthansa, BA, etc) without my kneecaps feeling like they are about to pop off due to pressure from the seat in front.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Don't worry, all airlines will find a way to make both the A380 and 787 as uncomfortable as possible in order to cram as many people in as possible in them. I'm not that tall and I still can't sit in a non-aisle/exit row seat on most major airlines (Lufthansa, BA, etc) without my kneecaps feeling like they are about to pop off due to pressure from the seat in front.

While that's true about the distance between seat rows, the A380 is really before its time. They COULD maximize the plane and put 800 people in there in a 100% economy setup... however, most airlines are ordering the plane with under 500. So, until there is some mega demand for moving 800 passengers daily going from one destination to another, the A380 will be spacious.

The 787 could be cramped, but where its comfortableness lies is that they can raise the humidity because the airframe's not metal and they can pressurize the cabin at higher pressure. This can't be done on ANY plane today. They've also put the largest windows of any aircraft on the plane.

Comparing the 787 to an A340 ( or any other Boeing craft too, I'd imagine )

These things are what will make even a cramped flight more comfortable.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Of course, I'd like to see YVR as a hub bigger than its population warrants... but that's purely for selfish reasons.

Me too! I'd like to see Vancouver punching way over its weight, but not ONLY for the Pacific Rim, which everyone seems obsesed with.

I'd like to see better sceduled to service to Europe. (A YVR marketing official told me that Paris and Munich are the two most likely new destinations there, now that Open Skies is active)

And I'd like to see a flight to Bangkok, better, more consistent service to Australia, and by that I mean NOT ONLY sydney, and a reliable connection into Latin America as well.

And direct service to India. (This, I was told is being held up by a disorganised and over-competitive situation within India, not a typical snag-up from Ottawa).

One Asian airline (Cathay or JAL) is soon dropping the YVR - Mexico city run. Good thing there's Mexicana to take its place, but it would be great to see year-round service to Guadalajara as well, if the market will support it.

Yes, it would be great to see YVR assume a role that is "pivotal" in world aviation traffic patterns. And I'm talking about year-round scheduled service, not seasonal traffic or charters.

[whatnext]

Looks like US-bound travellers are going to be in for some delays ex-YVR. I can't see how this is going to be workable:

MONTREAL December 26, 2009 -- Air Canada advises passengers travelling to the U.S. that due to enhanced government security measures air travellers should arrive early at airports to allow extra time to clear security screening. Passengers should also expect flight delays, cancellations and missed connections, and limit themselves to a single piece of carry-on baggage.

Air Canada recommends passengers travelling to the U.S. to arrive early at the airport for their flight in order to allow adequate time for additional personal searches. Under new rules enacted by Transport Canada and the U.S. Transportation Security Administration, passengers and their carry-on baggage will be subject to full searches both at airport screening points and prior to boarding at the aircraft gate area.

As a result of the added security precautions, passengers should also expect delayed and cancelled flights as well as missed connections. Air Canada will endeavour to transport passengers to their destination as quickly as possible and rebook passengers who miss their connections at no charge.
While these measures directly affect only flights from Canada to the United States, domestic and international flights may also experience delays due to airport congestion and delayed aircraft. For information on a flight's status please consult www.aircanada.com.

In addition, new rules imposed by Transport Canada will limit the amount of carry-on baggage to one item per person travelling on flights from Canada to the United States. Existing checked baggage rules remain in effect. For details on checked baggage allowances, please consult http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/airport/baggage/index.html.

"The safety of our customers and staff is our number one priority at Air Canada," said Duncan Dee, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. "Our operations teams will be working closely with airport and government authorities to minimize any inconvenience to our customers and to ensure that our customers reach their destinations safely and comfortably."

New rules imposed by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration also limit on-board activities by customers and crew in U.S. airspace that may adversely impact on-board service. Among other things, during the final hour of flight customers must remain seated, will not be allowed to access carry-on baggage, or have personal belongings or other items on their laps. (bold mine)
http://www.aircanada.com/en/news/trav_adv/091226.html

[Yume-sama]

Is this because of what happened yesterday? Or did they always plan to make going to the USA more miserable than it is now.

Either way, another over reaction that will stick around way too long (no shoes, no liquids, etc.). Yay!

In addition, new rules imposed by Transport Canada will limit the amount of carry-on baggage to one item per person

Why?

Among other things, during the final hour of flight customers must remain seated

Tell me how that even begins to make sense. So, what, you just have to make sure you bomb the plane early on?

Even a Nigerian terrorist wannabe has a watch.

[WBC]

Seriously, why are these people obsessed with bombing planes?!? And in the most idiotic way possible?

I say nudist flights are the way of the future...The only thing is - I would like to see some throw-away cushions.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by WBC

Seriously, why are these people obsessed with bombing planes?!? And in the most idiotic way possible?

I say nudist flights are the way of the future...The only thing is - I would like to see some throw-away cushions.

Hmmm, well, planes are about the most obvious thing that doesn't fit in with their 12th century World view.

I wonder what the last few remaining uncontacted tribes of people in the World think when a plane flies over their heads

[vansky]

747 got a classic exterior look, but it's very small inside...they can combine the two planes together to form sth even better.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

While that's true about the distance between seat rows, the A380 is really before its time. They COULD maximize the plane and put 800 people in there in a 100% economy setup... however, most airlines are ordering the plane with under 500. So, until there is some mega demand for moving 800 passengers daily going from one destination to another, the A380 will be spacious.

The 787 could be cramped, but where its comfortableness lies is that they can raise the humidity because the airframe's not metal and they can pressurize the cabin at higher pressure. This can't be done on ANY plane today. They've also put the largest windows of any aircraft on the plane.

Comparing the 787 to an A340 ( or any other Boeing craft too, I'd imagine )

These things are what will make even a cramped flight more comfortable.

now if they could only remove the shades - everytime i fly someone next to the window keeps the sdhade down teh entire flight take off to landing

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

now if they could only remove the shades - everytime i fly someone next to the window keeps the sdhade down teh entire flight take off to landing

Hmmm, well, they technically did get rid of them. The windows are electronic, and can dim to varying levels of brightness.

[zivan56]

I would rather they all be closed 100% of the time with cameras around the plane you can watch from the video screen. The worst thing is try to get some sleep with all lights off and some idiot has the shade open lighting up the whole plane.

[GeeCee]

I read recently that due to the new electronic windows, when the plane's interior is in 'sleep mode' the windows will be restricted as well which should help. A plane with no windows at all in the cabin would be kinda scary..

[sacrifice333]

The humidity factor is supposed to greatly reduce jet lag on the 787.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

now if they could only remove the shades - everytime i fly someone next to the window keeps the sdhade down teh entire flight take off to landing

Well, as part of these new security regulations airlines have had to disable the map feature on their IFE. And they're forbidden to point out any US landmarks they're flying over. So perhaps they'll just close all the shades for the whole flight!

[Spork]

I just bought 50,000 shares in Greyhound.