YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[trofirhen]

I wonder if and when we'll get any major new destinations over and above Shanghai. The economic downturn has slowed things considerably, but Vancouver is not yet in the Big League when it comes to worldwide destinations. It will be nice if / when it is.

(Wouldn't it be great NOT to have to change planes in Toronto?)

[flight_from_kamakura]

HOLY SMOKE! the airport improvement fee is $35 to the us now??

[Hot Rod]

Vancouver has long has shanghai and China Eastern. This is a permanent INCREASE in service, to daily (from 4 day a week).

I hope China Southern Airlines to Guangzhou is soon to follow, then Vancouver will have every Chinese Gateway covered; Beijing - Air China, Air Canada, Shanghai - Air China, China Eastern, 'Guangzhou - China Southern**'.

Air China is already doing the 2nd flight (night) to Beijing but it is not daily yet. I recently returned on the 'normal' daily CA flight and it was packed - and was not all Chinese as most on here might expect, not even half. I could see the need for the 2nd flight to become daily soon.

I also agree that Vancouver needs the return of Singapore Airlines to Singapore and All Nippon Airlines (or somebody else, but since ANA is hq in Osaka, then. .....) to Osaka.

[Rusty Gull]

I don't think the Osaka service is returning with this latest news from Seattle (courtesy JapanToday.com)

Delta starts Seattle-Osaka nonstop flights
SEATTLE —Washington Gov Chris Gregoire, Port of Seattle and other officials used mallets to break the lid on a barrel of sake Monday in a ceremony at Sea-Tac Airport to celebrate Delta Air Lines’ inaugural nonstop flight to Osaka, Japan.

Along with the addition Friday of a nonstop route to Beijing, Delta says it is positioning Sea-Tac as a major West Coast gateway to Asia.

Delta flies Boeing 767-300 aircraft on the new routes.

[jsbertram]

Saw this story on Friday:

Boeing 787 delays hampering Air Canada growth
http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article1607878.html


They mention specifically that they could make flights to Mumbai or Changzhou using the 787, whereas the 767 doesn't have the range and using the 777 isn't profitable. I suspect the 787 routes they talk about originate in Toronto, not Vancouver, because they mention current European flights out of Montreal and Toronto.

We'll have to wait until 2013 when AC starts using the 787 to see what new routes they'll start flying with it.

[trofirhen]

^Don't count on Vancouver getting much out of any new deals or air routes. We're being eclipsed, little by little.

[Urban Dolphin]

Why does it cost so much more to fly out of YVR than it does to fly out of SEA??? Like almost double

BTW some construction is going on at the airport next to the UPS warehouse. Looks like they're building new tanks to house the airline fuel

[twoNeurons]

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath for any Osaka love from AC when they get the 787s.

Delta's Seattle-Osaka run is replacing the Northwest run that used to run out of Seattle. They're flying older 767s on it.

AC "could" probably return the Vancouver-Osaka run with 787s, but since a lot of passengers are using Japan as a hub for Asia, and since Tokyo has many more flights going out it... I somehow don't see it being a priority for AC.

[trofirhen]

Bet your bottom dollar that ANY 787s AC gets will be used in an out of YYZ ... and nowhere else.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Saw this story on Friday:

Boeing 787 delays hampering Air Canada growth
http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article1607878.html


They mention specifically that they could make flights to Mumbai or Changzhou using the 787, whereas the 767 doesn't have the range and using the 777 isn't profitable. I suspect the 787 routes they talk about originate in Toronto, not Vancouver, because they mention current European flights out of Montreal and Toronto.

We'll have to wait until 2013 when AC starts using the 787 to see what new routes they'll start flying with it.

This quote from the article is telling:
It hopes to increasingly attract business travellers from the U.S. Northeast to fly its growing non-stop service to Asia. It now offers four flights daily from Toronto to Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Tokyo.

Because Toronto has a lot more connections to the US eastern seaboard than Vancouver does, they would seem to be in a better position to operate as a hub to Asia.

Makes me wonder, however, what stops US airlines from flying direct to Asia once they get these long range 787 planes.

Does that bit of extra distance prevent non-stops?

Also makes me wonder if business travelers prefer a short hop + long flight or a medium hop but a shorter long flight.

[trofirhen]

Not to be pessimistic, but YVR won't benefit much, if at all, from any of that -the coming onstream of the 787.
Toronto will be able to fly right over our heads.
The Transport Commission will still block flights from YVR to India or the Gulf States. (Dubai OR Qatar)
We might see a Paris nonstop, a marketing head at YVR told me on the phone.
Flights to India will continue to be hubbed through YYZ.
With Seattle expanding its Pacific destinations, and nonstop flights from the East Coast to Asia becoming possible with the 787, the dream of Vancouver YVR becoming that key hub for the USA to Asia will not materialize.
*
Something's gotta give, and something WILL give ... but just what and how is to bee seen. I just hope it doesn't mean YVR slowly being eroded to more into a regional transfer point than the "Pacific Gateway" everyone rhapsodizes about.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Bet your bottom dollar that ANY 787s AC gets will be used in an out of YYZ ... and nowhere else.

Probably the first two dozen or so. All of their 30 767 will be retiring, and they somehow have 37 787's on order.

The 777's are quite nice and YVR gets those. I just want to see how cool these 787's are

Our best chance at seeing them is from flights that connect in YVR from YYZ on the way to China.

[Gordon]

The article does not specifically mention the Mumbai & Guangzhou as benig Toronto destinations but one certainly assumes this will be the case.

The 787s wil likely be spread througout the various hubs.

The Federal Government seems to coddle Air Canada. Transport Canada should say to Air Canada if you don't routex in 2 years we will give the route to anothe airline that will.

[Yume-sama]

Guangzhou I could see being one of the flights that connect in YVR.

As it is, I do not know if they could sell out their daily flights to China if they did *not* stop in Vancouver.

No way we get Mumbai, though

Also, I don't know why any Americans would choose to connect in Canada, when they could go to JFK and fly out of the USA at what is likely a significantly lower rate. I think it's rather funny and telling of the public perception of Air Canada when they only have 37% of International passengers. 63% of people MUST go beyond and out of their way to avoid them.

[twoNeurons]

To be fair... i would guess that 63% includes charter flights. I think charter flights make up a large percentage of Canadian international flights, a lot of which are tourism-class passengers. Canadians seems to be dollar conscious when it comes to larger purchases ( but have no problem racking up the debt in plastic on little things! )

If it doesn't... wow...

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Gordon

The article does not specifically mention the Mumbai & Guangzhou as benig Toronto destinations but one certainly assumes this will be the case.

The 787s wil likely be spread througout the various hubs.

The Federal Government seems to coddle Air Canada. Transport Canada should say to Air Canada if you don't routex in 2 years we will give the route to anothe airline that will.

Thank you for this post. Air Canada was ALWAYS the coddled child, either when it was a Crown Corporation, or after it got privatized.

**Also a question please: what does "routex" mean? Thanks.

[big T]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Also makes me wonder if business travelers prefer a short hop + long flight or a medium hop but a shorter long flight.

Definitely the first option. The closer you are to home, the more options you have in case you miss your connection. Plus once on the long-haul segment, you then get a chance to settle down and eat/sleep/work on your own schedule. There are only upsides.
Flying business is nothing like the back of the bus. A long flight up front is actually an enjoyable, productive experience. The less interruptions, the better (and you want to minimize the time spent flying domestic "business", which is a world and a half away from international business on most airlines)

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Thank you for this post. Air Canada was ALWAYS the coddled child, either when it was a Crown Corporation, or after it got privatized.

**Also a question please: what does "routex" mean? Thanks.

i think he means Route X

meaning if air canada does not offer that destination aka Route X to Canadians another airline can offer it to Canadians since Air Canada isn't - say kingfisher starts offering direct flights from India to Canada since Air Canada isn't doing so

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

meaning if air canada does not offer that destination aka Route X to Canadians another airline can offer it to Canadians since Air Canada isn't - say kingfisher starts offering direct flights from India to Canada since Air Canada isn't doing so

Yes, that sounds logical in theory. However, Transport Canada is notoriously "dog-in-the-manger" when it comes to allowing air routes and destinations.

The Jet Air to Mumbai may not materialize, simply because Ontario wants to make sure it has the monopoly for a future option. And that route could thus remain "dead" for years.*1

A closer-to hme example was Air France ending up going to Seattle after requesting Vancouver for years and being denied by Transport Canada. Logically, Air Canada would have picked up that route (which, YVR sources tell me, is lucrative). But they didn't start a service. They just "sit on it," allowing only summer charters.

Air Canada is expanding agressively out of YYZ, though. They recently got Seattle, and are on the verge of starting Toronto nonstops to Portland, Oregon, and Copenhagen.

(Copenhagen, incidentally, requested a Vancouver route, but, of course, did not get one. Same with JET Airways to India. They fly Toronto-India, and Toronto-Brussels, which Vancouver was also supposed to get, but never did)*1

Traznsport Minister John Baird is doing everything he can ... to make sure Toronto remains and reinforces itself as the HUB, making Vancouver a SPOKE.

This is not only my personal opinion. A senior marketing contact at YVR told me the same thing.

[SpongeG]

yes so as an example since air canada never picked up the paris route air france after 2 years should be able to pick up the route since air canada didn't - i think thats what he is saying should be done

we all know that can never happen but its a nice idea