Calgary International Airport II

[thebus]

Originally Posted by Cage

Technically CA has not officially announced PEK-YUL. I believe the airwhiners reference (which is where I can trace the source of the announcement) was from an internal document.

When CA does officially announce YUL-PEK there will be a cross announcement from AC for the codeshare and JV.

Will be interesting to see how successful the rumoured HAV tag on to the PEK-YUL flight will be.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

What are the odds that this potential economic downturn in AB leads to the PEK flight getting put on hold for now?

The Chances are -273.15 C

AC has been awaiting commercially viable slots for the past 4 years. The slots are one of the main reasons AC has entered into joint venture with CA.

Also remember back to the first 18 months of YYC-NRT. Route lost money and there was Japan Tsunami and nuclear meltdown that depressed the market. AC hung into the market and now its profitable with good frequency.

[Bigtime]

Without googling it I'm going to assume that -273.15 C is absolute zero.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by cyeg66

Huge headwinds across the country yesterday. ACA189 (A320) YOW-YVR got almost as far as Kelowna then turned back to get fuel at YYC. It's not often you'll see that but that's what a 140kt headwind (literally, all across Canada) will do. They probably had the tanks brimmed in YOW, too. When your ground speed is approx 300 kts, ouch!

Opposite is true too. Had friends over for dinner recently and he showed me a picture from a recent YVR-YYZ flight showing a ridiculously high groundspeed coming out of Vancouver going east. It was fast enough that he thought it worthy of grabbing a picture.

[DDP]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

What are the odds that this potential economic downturn in AB leads to the PEK flight getting put on hold for now?

Montreal authority was offering a large incentive for a flight to PEK, the quebec business community and various boards of trades have been involved for sometime to get a direct flight for some time.

I know YYC was offering something as well - so as long as it stands they should get it, but will be interesting to see what happens - could AC use the new slots into having more flights out of YYZ OR YVR sure but If China is involved there government would also have some say.

[hoboman27]

Originally Posted by DDP

Montreal authority was offering a large incentive for a flight to PEK, the quebec business community and various boards of trades have been involved for sometime to get a direct flight for some time.

I know YYC was offering something as well - so as long as it stands they should get it, but will be interesting to see what happens - could AC use the new slots into having more flights out of YYZ OR YVR sure but If China is involved there government would also have some say.

these incentives seem normal business practices these days, does anyone know just how effective they really are at starting and or keeping a service?

I mean airlines have way better data and understanding of the potential markets than airport authorities, they could easily present a route with high potentials to the authorities as problematic, and see how much money the authorities are willing to offer them on the route, and the authorities wouldn't even know the truth.

AA's RDU-LHR and Delta's PDX-AMS are routes I've read were established on the basis of subsidies, and if A.net is to be believed, the former may have worked up enough J traffic to be self-sustaining. Isn't what your describing some kind of bribery or anti-trust?

Originally Posted by cyeg66

Huge headwinds across the country yesterday. ACA189 (A320) YOW-YVR got almost as far as Kelowna then turned back to get fuel at YYC. It's not often you'll see that but that's what a 140kt headwind (literally, all across Canada) will do. They probably had the tanks brimmed in YOW, too. When your ground speed is approx 300 kts, ouch!

Another one getting hammered is AC's EWR-YVR on the 319. Took 6 hours and 18 minutes on Friday.

They've been flying EWR-YWG-YVR every day since then. You know the winds are bad when a 319 is feeling the pain.

Originally Posted by Cage

When CA does officially announce YUL-PEK there will be a cross announcement from AC for the codeshare and JV.

I guess one of the few remaining questions is the timing of the slot. Will it be such that YVR-PEK and our flight can share the same frames (like NRT on non-OGG days before AC3 went 788), or will the plane originate in Toronto and we get a 788 YYZ-YYC leg on every PEK day?

[ItsALondonThing]

BA 103 declared emergency and had to turn back to Heathrow this afternoon, engine failure on the 787.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by ItsALondonThing

BA 103 declared emergency and had to turn back to Heathrow this afternoon, engine failure on the 787.

How common an occurrence is this? Sounds pretty major to me, but I'm not seeing any news on it.

[ItsALondonThing]

Originally Posted by suburbia

How common an occurrence is this? Sounds pretty major to me, but I'm not seeing any news on it.

The 787 has had teething problems but its the first incident with one of BA's.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news...ing-urgent-safety-condition-9966191.html

[Bigtime]

Yes the 787 has had teething issues, however keep in mind this is an engine issue in this case. Boeing doesn't make the engines (Rolls Royce in the case of the BA 787's).

http://avherald.com/h?article=47ff7a0a&opt=1

Interesting fact from that Independent article, it states the flight had 213 passengers on board. Seatguru shows the BA 787's have 214 seats in total. One empty seat, that's a nice full flight.

LOL I love your post, Bigtime. The rest of the internet be like, "OMG, more 787 problems. That airplane suxxorz"

Bigtime: "BA LHR-YYC full. Excellent."

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by ItsALondonThing

The 787 has had teething problems but its the first incident with one of BA's.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news...ing-urgent-safety-condition-9966191.html

Also should be noted the vast majority of the issues with the Dreamliner to date are battery issues not engine issues.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by ItsALondonThing

engine failure on the 787.

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Boeing doesn't make the engines (Rolls Royce in the case of the BA 787's).

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

vast majority of the issues with the Dreamliner to date are battery issues not engine issues.

I think irrespective of the part or the actual folks who made that part, the plane is purchased from Boeing, and thus it doesn't matter.

I suspect the phones in most of your pockets have assemblies made by Flextronics or some other contract manufacturer, and maybe a chip from Qualcomm, perhaps something like a processor from Mitsubishi, and glass from someone else. Still, if something goes wrong, it is Apple, or Nokia, or Motorola, or whomever's name is on the product that needs to respond, stand up for their product, and the components from others that they approved for this purpose. Just sayin'.

[yyc_engineer]

Originally Posted by Acey

LOL I love your post, Bigtime. The rest of the internet be like, "OMG, more 787 problems. That airplane suxxorz"

Bigtime: "BA LHR-YYC full. Excellent."

+1

I also like their choice of words in the article: "Flight BA103, a routine service to Calgary"

Like the sounds of that "routine", makes it sound like it's just something that happens all the time and is here to stay

Side note, wonder if the average BA passenger/Londoner knows where/what a Calgary is?..

[Riise]

Originally Posted by yyc_engineer

Side note, wonder if the average BA passenger/Londoner knows where/what a Calgary is?..

You would be surprised. While Calgary isn't as well known as Toronto or Vancouver, there is a constantly growing amount of reasons to know about it in the UK.

[Bokimon]

Interesting, that is 2 flights involving our city in the past 2 weeks requiring an return back to a home base or a diversion.
Amazingly none of these related with our weather in the past few days.
Hurricane headwinds over our airspace? That is definitely gross..I feel for the poor folks straining to go coast to coast.
Are jetstreams that bad up in the high levels or are they usually above the cruising alt realms..Maybe these headwinds are related to the jetstream perhaps.

[CTrainDude]

WestJet's first two 767s are currently in for refurb now, according to the Herald:

http://calgaryherald.com/business/local-business/westjet-eyes-new-horizons

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

WestJet's first two 767s are currently in for refurb now, according to the Herald:

http://calgaryherald.com/business/local-business/westjet-eyes-new-horizons

Chief Pilot and the Sim instructor guys are the first ones that will go for training, those are the ones mentioned in the article. Line pilots won't go for awhile yet. There was apparently some delay with Transport Canada and all the paperwork from Qantas which held up delivery of the planes for a bit so I think they may be slightly behind schedule vs. where they had hoped to be. But looks like things are starting to come together now.

Originally Posted by Bokimon

Are jetstreams that bad up in the high levels or are they usually above the cruising alt realms..Maybe these headwinds are related to the jetstream perhaps.

Yes the cruising altitude of jets is right in the sweet spot for the jet stream, but it's only sweet if it's on your tail. 25,000 feet to 50,000 feet is about where it's strongest. When the polar jet sinks down to around the US border and it likes to put 150 knots right on the nose of everybody at 30-40,000 feet it means there's diversions all over the place because if you're cruising at 400-500 knots you can lose up to 40% of your speed (and thus 40% of your range had the air been still)