Calgary International Airport II

[Johnny Aussie]

AA (US Airways) just flipped their YYC-PHX and YEG-PHX services.

Both routes to operate once daily this summer as per normal.

But YYC is now a morning departure and YEG is an afternoon departure.

It used to be the other way around.

The YYC flight is being upgauged to a 320 though... so let's take the extra 26 seats per day!

[suburbia]

I was recently at YYC and noticed a line up at one of the arrival level counters. When I looked properly, it was people lining up to pay $15 for a shuttle to DT. When I looked around for the CT marketing, there was nothing in site. CT needs to do better else will guarantee their own failure.

[Bigtime]

I believe that may be an issue that the airport authority is not advertising the transit line that serves the airport to downtown. I remember this coming up in the past too.

It's like they'd rather have people spend on that shuttle service, sedans, or taxis.

Wonder why...

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

AA (US Airways) just flipped their YYC-PHX and YEG-PHX services.

Next question about AA is definitely the DFW downguage. Hopefully the 738 comes back sooner rather than later.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

Next question about AA is definitely the DFW downguage. Hopefully the 738 comes back sooner rather than later.

Well, the good news it is, as it stands now, back to double daily next winter... This winter it was down to only one daily.

The 738 maybe proved just a tad too big a replacement for the MD83s so perhaps the 319s a better fit capacity wise.

[cyeg66]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Well, the good news it is, as it stands now, back to double daily next winter... This winter it was down to only one daily.

The 738 maybe proved just a tad too big a replacement for the MD83s so perhaps the 319s a better fit capacity wise.

Agreed, they have 22 (or more) seats than the 'Dogs. In a couple of years, I can see them returning but for now, the -319's probably represent the best fit capacity- and yield-wise.. Let's not forget that YEG didn't have DFW when the 738's were being flown so that would've probably had a bit of an impact, too. Hopefully, AA's still content with their Alberta strategy.

[Cage]

The Annual Public Meeting of The Calgary Airport Authority will be held on Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 11 a.m. at the Calgary Aero Space Museum, 4629 McCall Way NE.

At the meeting, the Authority’s Board of Directors and Administration will report on the year 2014, including operations, development and construction, marketing, and financial results. An outlook for 2015 will also be presented.

Members of the public who are interested in the Airports are invited to attend and participate.

I will be at the event.

Based on last years' event, we need to get more normal people to ask questions at the AGM. Last year the questions came primarily from the city hall bar flies (Oscar Fech with incoherent statements, John Schmal - Frmr alderman - with rant about closing McCall golf course, I even half remember Larry a Heather in attendance). Media will be attendance and they are looking for reports that appeal to wide audience.

[Bigtime]

I put it in my calendar and will try to make it over from work.

I don't think anyone's mentioned it... major change since the end of March to AC's Europe scheduling. YYC-FRA has gone from an 18:45 to a 14:55 departure. The aircraft now route LHR-YYC-FRA and FRA-YYC-LHR. Interesting result is AC844 and AC845 being active on the field at the same time, if both are on time as they are today.



New timings for the 333's then:

Aircraft 1:
LHR 1005 1215 YYC 1455 0820+1 FRA

Aircraft 2:
FRA 1330 1510 YYC 1815 1000+1 LHR

[MrBigStuff]

Originally Posted by Pegasus

Today’s news headlines: Air passengers could soon find themselves with even less room on board passenger jets after it was revealed manufacturers are plotting to squeeze more seats in cabins.

Boeing and Airbus, the two main plane manufacturers, are currently working on their new ranges of aircrafts - which are reported to include completely reconfigured cabins containing a greater number of seats.

And Maclean’s magazine headline: “The evil genius of airlines – it takes work to make flying this miserable. But it pays”.

Why are they doing this? Do they think that people who fly are getting smaller??

[Cage]

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

Why are they doing this? Do they think that people who fly are getting smaller??

Less legroom and smaller seats incentivized frequent flyers to buy up to economy plus or business class. Also mainline transAtlantic airlines have found they can compete very effectively with Charter airlines if the seats are slightly larger and slightly more pitch than charter. As charter configuration gets smaller, so does the mainline basic economy configuration.

Example is flying with the family to Disneyland. My infrequent flying neighbour took Rouge for the first time and loved it. Dad is taller and about the same jacket size as me. Reports came back that while seating was tight, he could handle it for the 3 hour flight at the price offered by rouge was better than Westjet.

One month later took the family to Disneyland, being a frequent flyer I bought up to rouge plus for an extra $40 per seat. Loved the flight and would definitely do rouge again, however only if rouge plus was available.

[evolv]

I fly BA to Europe for their economy plus seating. Its great. For an extra $200 it's a great deal. Once AC goes 787 with YYC - Europe they will have an equivalent offering. Until then I'm flying BA.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

Why are they doing this? Do they think that people who fly are getting smaller??

I am a small guy and fit in the seats but they had better understand that customers are paying for their seat; no less and no more than that. If I am sitting in my micro-seat on the next generation aircraft and the 250 pound guy sitting next to me cannot fit into his seat and is overflowing into the seat that I paid for than I expect to be compensated to the percentage of MY seat that I paid for and expect to be able to use 100% of.

If airlines get too idiotic about this micro-sizing everything to the point where the average person+ 1 standard deviation no longer fits in the seats they provide they are going to be asking for a class action lawsuit. I have already had to sacrifice a portion of my seat for people beside me who are unable to fit into theirs. I am not going to be silent about it getting even more stupid with even smaller seats that a huge portion of their customers don't even fit into.

They want to charge $75 for a piece of luggage 5 pounds over the limit? Fine, but I am going to start to expect to get what I am paying for and if they cannot folliw through with their end of things they can start paying back for not being able to provide what the customer has already paid for. Fair is fair after all.

[Cage]

Tropics,

I'm an big guy and definitely on your side. Unfortunately our viewpoint is not shared by the Canadian Tranportation Agency or the courts in Canada.

The current domestic Canada position is that extreme obesity is a disability that deserves protection. The relevant cases have been brought forward by a Calgarian, Linda McKay Panos. To break it down, if an obese person doesn't fit the seat and the seat mate complains, the airline is obligated to provide the obese person with the room they require. Concept is "one person, one fare". Second seat cannot be charged to the obese customer. The problem is the complainer who appropriately wants to use the full seat will get punted to he next flight without compensation. So complainer be aware.

The U.S. and rest of the wirks is different, as is international travel from canada. In these instances, the extreme obese must be able to fit between arm rests and the arm rests must have ability to lower. If the obese cannot fit the seat, they get punted.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by Cage

Tropics,

I'm an big guy and definitely on your side. Unfortunately our viewpoint is not shared by the Canadian Tranportation Agency or the courts in Canada.

The current domestic Canada position is that extreme obesity is a disability that deserves protection. The relevant cases have been brought forward by a Calgarian, Linda McKay Panos. To break it down, if an obese person doesn't fit the seat and the seat mate complains, the airline is obligated to provide the obese person with the room they require. Concept is "one person, one fare". Second seat cannot be charged to the obese customer. The problem is the complainer who appropriately wants to use the full seat will get punted to he next flight without compensation. So complainer be aware.

The U.S. and rest of the wirks is different, as is international travel from canada. In these instances, the extreme obese must be able to fit between arm rests and the arm rests must have ability to lower. If the obese cannot fit the seat, they get punted.

I am not even talking about obese people. I live and work in Fort McMurray and commute between here and Calgary often and the 250 pound guys are not obese, they are 6 foot 2 drillers who are simply big dudes and those guys are a large percentage of the people on that flight.

I am not blaming those guys either. I am blaming the airlines for not providing adequate sized seats on their aircraft when they are absolutely easily able to obtain data on the average size of a grown adult Canadian, who is obviously their customer base.

The airlines trying to spin this onto people who complain that the micro-seats no longer fit the passengers are spewing pure BS. This is not the customers fault, not the 250 pound guy who no longer fits in a seat on an aircraft, and not the person sitting beside that person who is now wedged against the window or who has their shoulder hit by a drink trolly because they are being forced into hanging into the aisle due to a lack of room.

Any court that does not see the fault the airlines have in this by providing seating that no longer provides enough room for a reasonable range for their expected customer base needs to get their freaking heads checked. This is not an attack on large people, this is about airlines providing child sized seats and then having the gall to blame the customer who complains that they have no room to move.

The airlines do "not" get to spin this like that. THEY are causing this issue to begin with by trying to cram people into planes like sardines and trying to squeeze people to pay premiums for what should be, and once was the standard amount of room.

[dazzlingdave88]

Originally Posted by Tropics

I am a small guy and fit in the seats but they had better understand that customers are paying for their seat; no less and no more than that. If I am sitting in my micro-seat on the next generation aircraft and the 250 pound guy sitting next to me cannot fit into his seat and is overflowing into the seat that I paid for than I expect to be compensated to the percentage of MY seat that I paid for and expect to be able to use 100% of.

If airlines get too idiotic about this micro-sizing everything to the point where the average person+ 1 standard deviation no longer fits in the seats they provide they are going to be asking for a class action lawsuit. I have already had to sacrifice a portion of my seat for people beside me who are unable to fit into theirs. I am not going to be silent about it getting even more stupid with even smaller seats that a huge portion of their customers don't even fit into.

They want to charge $75 for a piece of luggage 5 pounds over the limit? Fine, but I am going to start to expect to get what I am paying for and if they cannot folliw through with their end of things they can start paying back for not being able to provide what the customer has already paid for. Fair is fair after all.

You are forgetting that they pretty much run collusion or monopolies. So your complaining is going to do nothing when they already have high demand for tickets. You can't really take your business many other places. If you want to be treated the way you expect, you are going to have to pay extra and book a plus seat. Flying has replaced greyhound travel as the norm. It is now accessible to everyone, so airlines aren't going to have to work as hard to draw business.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by dazzlingdave88

You are forgetting that they pretty much run collusion or monopolies. So your complaining is going to do nothing when they already have high demand for tickets. You can't really take your business many other places. If you want to be treated the way you expect, you are going to have to pay extra and book a plus seat. Flying has replaced greyhound travel as the norm. It is now accessible to everyone, so airlines aren't going to have to work as hard to draw business.

They "do" have to provide what you actually paid for though. If you pay for a seat you are entitled to your seat, not just 3/4 of it.

[skyhigh953]

Does anyone know the logic behind WestJet's logic for timing flights to Hawaii with their new 767? Being from Saskatoon, we have to connect through YYC to get most places, and their early morning timing of Hawaii flights for the upcoming season baffles me. There is not enough time to connect, so options through both YYC and YEG involve staying overnight; or flying to YYC then YVR. Not an issue with Air Canada - great timed connection through YYC.

Is Westjet's early morning Hawaii scheduling out of necessity, or will the planes be full anyway so they don't care about connections? Just curious if anyone knows.

Maybe Cage will give you an actual answer, but I can see that AC43/44 YYC-OGG can swing the 763 onto AC9/10 YYC-NRT and vice versa, allowing for high utilization. WS' frames aren't really doing anything else so they don't need to fly overnight. Pushing departure back an hour would result in the return flight landing in Calgary well after midnight. Crew scheduling (which I don't fully understand) may also be a factor as it's probably fair to assume WS won't have a ton of 763 crew initially unlike AC who have had the type longer than I've been alive.

I do recall last winter some poor utilization for AC when OGG would arrive in YYC before dawn and sit around all day before turning to LHR as AC850 ~10 hours later on days NRT wasn't flying.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

Maybe Cage will give you an actual answer, but I can see that AC43/44 YYC-OGG can swing the 763 onto AC9/10 YYC-NRT and vice versa, allowing for high utilization. WS' frames aren't really doing anything else so they don't need to fly overnight. Pushing departure back an hour would result in the return flight landing in Calgary well after midnight. Crew scheduling (which I don't fully understand) may also be a factor as it's probably fair to assume WS won't have a ton of 763 crew initially unlike AC who have had the type longer than I've been alive.

I do recall last winter some poor utilization for AC when OGG would arrive in YYC before dawn and sit around all day before turning to LHR as AC850 ~10 hours later on days NRT wasn't flying.

I am thinking YYC-OGG will be handed over to rouge and YYC-NRT will go 788 sooner than later anyway. Probably the only reason YYC-OGG hasn't been rouged yet is YYC-NRT. YVR-KOA is the only other Hawaiian route operated by mainline 763.