YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by teriyaki

My completely amateur guess at this is that only 2 runways are used at each time at sfo. Ideally the pair that had the favourable winds would be used. Using a north south runway when winds are blowing east west wouldn't make sense...?

Thanks. That's what I might have guessed, also. That being the case, they wouldn't have too much more active runway capacity than YVR.
And as impied, San Fran is a really windy place very often.

Originally Posted by Gordon

They do sometimes use the intersecting runways simultaneously but it takes much more co-ordination between the tower & approach control normally they use the 2 longer North south runways. They also have a capacity control program that may cause regional short haul traffic to be delayed.
somey times of the day Yvr SFO flights will be held at the gate(gate hold) to allow backlogged international traffic to clear and smetimes this happens for fog as well.

Thank you, also. It does seem that the "criss-cross" design has its limitations

Originally Posted by Klazu

My only question with ME3 eating Australian airlines is why is Australian government doing nothing to protect their business? They could easily set quotas for Emirates et al and shrink their business and benefit Qantas.

Middle East countries are just transit points and not a destination for many, so setting unfair quotas shouldn't be a problem. It would be a problem when dealing with destination countries like China or the US.

I don't think a large presence of the M3 in Canada would hurt us, too much, except for transfer flights to India, where there is a large, but rather low-yield market, as I understand.
I used to be annoyed that the M3 had such restricted access to Canada; I have second thoughts on that now.
Maybe it's better that they don't have a strong presence here.
Also, although nobody openly admits it, I think perhaps the presence of EK or QR is sort of a "status" thing for an airport.

[Klazu]

We went for a late dinner at Flying Beaver and happened to catch the QF 747 taking off. Such a nice sight.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Below are images for the runways at SFO and ATL, respectively.
My question is, how are the intersecting runways at SFO used simultaneously without danger of collision, as they intersect in the middle? Or are they long enough to be used at each end?

At ATL, they are parallel, with diagonal runways at the periphery.
This seems more logical for simultaneous takeoffs and landings.

Pardon my ignorance, but this intrigues me. Thank you for your understanding.

You are looking for closely spaced visual approach procedures. SFO also has procedures for closely spaced instrument approaches.

Second, your diagrams are for DFW but you mention ATL. DFW has their runway configuration because the airport was granted lots of land for the airport. IIRC DFW is the second newest large airport in the USA, with DEN being the newest. Other airports have significantly more space constraints due to their age.

Specifically for SFO, two aircraft arrive in staggered 500' separation on the 28s. Separately two aircraft line up and wait on the 1s (shorter runways). When the arrival aircraft have crossed runway intersection, the departure aircraft are both released for a full power takeoff. Once airborne, the lead airplane turns 20-40 degrees away from the runway headings. The process repeats itself with aircraft arriving on the 28s.

If you happen to be in the SFO area on a good weather day, it's worth the trip to stop by the SFO airport Marriott for great views of the action.

[Canadian74]

Originally Posted by casper

Air Canada operates the 777-200ER with 228+48 = 276 (lets assume after the "upgrades to 3-4-3 and PE) it is something like 300. That is 2,100 seats. They still have room for a second service 3 tines a week.

Air Canada doesn't have the 777-200ER. They have the 777-200LR and it has 42 J seats, not 48. Total 270 seats. After the refurb and move to 3-4-3, it will have 300 seats total. 777-300ERs will have 400 seats total (currently 349).

[Large Cat]

McArthurGlen opens July 9!!! Says so on the website.

[Hourglass]

Interesting article that provides a bit more info on Hainan Airline's proposed Tianjin-Vancouver route first mentioned by Johnny Aussie a while back: http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ha...-routes-to-new-york-and-vancouver-232131

Of note:
- YVR will be the only N American airport to be served by all 5 of China's long-haul airlines when this route launches
- YVR is the 3rd-largest N American gateway for Chinese airlines by seat capacity after JFK and LAX -- and well ahead of 4th place SFO.

Not too shabby at all!

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Interesting article that provides a bit more info on Hainan Airline's proposed Tianjin-Vancouver route first mentioned by Johnny Aussie a while back: http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ha...-routes-to-new-york-and-vancouver-232131

Of note:
- YVR will be the only N American airport to be served by all 5 of China's long-haul airlines when this route launches
- YVR is the 3rd-largest N American gateway for Chinese airlines by seat capacity after JFK and LAX -- and well ahead of 4th place SFO.

Not too shabby at all!

Yes it is. A very impressive position to be in and more growth to come over the winter scheds and into next year as well. What will AC's next move into China be.... YYC-PEK? YVR-CAN? YYZ-CAN? ? And will we see Xiamen into YVR in the next few years? Imagine six mainland Chinese carriers into YVR.... five is already impressive of course!

In this article they forget that China Eastern also flies to YYZ. I also wouldn't say Air China had "neglected" Toronto when they were clearly happy code-sharing with Air Canada on the daily YYZ-PEK flight.

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Yes it is. A very impressive position to be in and more growth to come over the winter scheds and into next year as well. What will AC's next move into China be.... YYC-PEK? YVR-CAN? YYZ-CAN? ? And will we see Xiamen into YVR in the next few years? Imagine six mainland Chinese carriers into YVR.... five is already impressive of course!

In this article they forget that China Eastern also flies to YYZ. I also wouldn't say Air China had "neglected" Toronto when they were clearly happy code-sharing with Air Canada on the daily YYZ-PEK flight.

From what I understand, Air China could not fly to YYZ because of Chinese government regulations stating that only one Chinese carrier could fly long haul from each city, in this case PEK. Hainan beat them to the punch. Unless I'm mistaken. Otherwise I'm fairly certain YYZ would already have Air China service and YUL would not have happened at all.

[trofirhen]

deleted

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by ACT7

From what I understand, Air China could not fly to YYZ because of Chinese government regulations stating that only one Chinese carrier could fly long haul from each city, in this case PEK. Hainan beat them to the punch. Unless I'm mistaken. Otherwise I'm fairly certain YYZ would already have Air China service and YUL would not have happened at all.

I don't believe Air China necessarily wanted to start its own PEK-YYZ flights as the route had been earmarked for them. However in 2010 (I think it was 2010) Hainan started the route. So I wouldn't necessarily say Hainan beat them as Air China was code sharing with AC which makes sense as both are Star hubs. However, yes, if Air China wanted to start its own flights with its own metal now, it wouldn't be able to based on the one Chinese airline per route policy subject to tweaks of course. So my point was the article was saying Air China had neglected YYZ. Not really the way I see it.

[Johnny Aussie]

HAPPY CANADA DAY!

http://yvr.ca/Libraries/Aviation_Marketing/Traffic_Update_May_2015.sflb.ashx

Another decent month with all sectors showing positive growth.

Overall up 4.4% YTD up 5.3%
Domestic up 2.1% YTD up 2.4%
Transborder up 8.2% YTD up 12.2%
Asia Pacific up 1.3% YTD up 2.5%
Europe up 9.6% YTD up 8.5%
Misc Int'l up 19.1% YTD up 7.4%
TTL INT'L up 7.0% YTD up 8.4%
Cargo up 5.3% YTD up 11.8%

Total pax count is up over 72,000 compared to May 2014.
YTD pax count is up just shy of 400,000 compared to YTD 2014.

Still on track to hit 20M+ this year.

Looks like both July and August will crack 2 million this year... Last year August was the first month ever to exceed 2 million pax in one month.

People talk that transborder is being affected by our dollar... Sure possibly fewer Canadians travelling down south... But I hear American tourism is going up up up due to the dollar... So it works both ways

[LeftCoaster]

Hmm, positive growth, but still more sluggish than I was anticipating this year given the all around buoyancy in the industry and the solid economic performance of BC. AsiaPac in particular has been a disappointment, don't know where all that growth went. Europe on the other hand has been a very pleasant surprise. Middling domestic numbers are no surprise, but still would like to see them up in the 3s.

Hopefully the WWC and strong tourist season ahead will give some big summer numbers.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Hmm, positive growth, but still more sluggish than I was anticipating this year given the all around buoyancy in the industry and the solid economic performance of BC. AsiaPac in particular has been a disappointment, don't know where all that growth went. Europe on the other hand has been a very pleasant surprise. Middling domestic numbers are no surprise, but still would like to see them up in the 3s.

Hopefully the WWC and strong tourist season ahead will give some big summer numbers.

Relatively speaking, YVR is outperforming all major Canadian airports except YYZ. I think the weakened Alberta travel market also has a trickle effect into BC too.

Yes, Asia Pacific is a bit lower than expected. However, I think this will grow stronger through the summer and into the winter as quite a few airlines are adding capacity over the winter. Certainly seeing quite a bit of interest in YVR from the Chinese carriers.

As for Europe, this is a continuing great result. The full effect of AF is noticeable in May despite VS having pulled out. I expect this to slow down a bit over the summer as capacity is up slightly, however, I also expect planes are flying fuller.

Transborder is just incredible. Rouge certainly had a big role in these numbers. Inbound tourism thanks to the strong USD is also having a big impact.

The cruise ship season has recovered nicely from the 2010 slump. Expecting about 810,000 pax this summer compared to about 815,000 last year. Sailings are down slightly, but some of the ships are bigger.

Vancouver is also attracting quite a few big conventions including a few medical world congresses this year.

I think growth in the 3%-5% range is a healthy rate and this should continue in the short to medium term at least.

Also in the region, SEA is doing very well in pax growth terms. This is a direct result of all the new International flights added by DL plus its continuing domestic expansion needed to help fill those planes. However, they are winding back YVR and YYC over the winter. YVR falls back to 4 daily and YYC to less than twice daily so clearly not filling those planes as much as they had hoped. I think the weaker CAD is having an impact. I think YEG may have fallen off their radar due to the weakening AB travel market (hence the YYC clawback from SEA and SLC too). DL is adding YYJ-SEA next April though which I thought was quite surprising. And AS is not giving up anything to DL with their continued SEA growth too. Although, over winter AS is going back to 6 daily on the YVR-SEA route.

All in all I think YVR is still in an excellent position to continue decent solid growth.... airlines certainly seem confident with all the increases coming online.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

However, I think this will grow stronger through the summer and into the winter as quite a few airlines are adding capacity over the winter.

Speak of the devil... this just in on twitter:

@airlineroute: Air Canada is boosting capacity on Vancouver - Beijing route in winter season, operating 777-300ER from 28JAN16

[Johnny Aussie]

http://airlineroute.net/2015/07/03/ba-yvr-s16/

772ERs replacing 744s. First class will still be offered.

This is a very large decrease in capacity. I'd be surprised if this is left like this.

The inevitable retirement of 744s continues.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

http://airlineroute.net/2015/07/03/ba-yvr-s16/

772ERs replacing 744s. First class will still be offered.

This is a very large decrease in capacity. I'd be surprised if this is left like this.

The inevitable retirement of 744s continues.

Could it have something to do with AF launching YVR and/or AC introducing the 458 seater B77W on YVR-LHR a few years ago?

Originally Posted by ACT7

Otherwise I'm fairly certain YYZ would already have Air China service and YUL would not have happened at all.

One has nothing to do with the other. Even if CA was already serving YYZ, now that AC and CA are joining forces with the JV, YUL was a given.

Even Hainan showed interest in YUL, so it was in CA's interest to launch YUL if it didn't want to get duped twice.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Could it have something to do with AF launching YVR and/or AC introducing the 458 seater B77W on YVR-LHR a few years ago?

WS launching Western Canada - LGW is the likely reason for the loss of seats.

Edit to Add:

History of Westjet expansion is they tend to push out every airline that does not have a Maple Leaf on the tail. Examples:
- Transcontinental expansion pushed out C3 at first (although admittedly this is tenuous position) and the Jetsgo. 3 months after WS transitioned from YHM to YYZ; Jetsgo was gone. Transcon expansion also caused a shift in Sunwing business plan. Sunwing was going to be third player in trascon market during the summer season.
- Atlantic Canada expansion pushed Canjet out of scheduled services.
- Transborder expansion caused AA and DL to pull out some services. AS has shrunk a little in YYC and a lot at YVR.

If history repeats, the foreign airlines will reassess their commitment to Canada and pull out if the profit margins during summer cannot sustain winter low season.

In the specific instance of BA, I can see a future where they pull out of everything that is not YVR and YYZ, with only a single daily flight out of YVR.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

http://airlineroute.net/2015/07/03/ba-yvr-s16/

772ERs replacing 744s. First class will still be offered.

This is a very large decrease in capacity. I'd be surprised if this is left like this.

The inevitable retirement of 744s continues.

I think that this is a case of BA being a bit stuck with its fleet composition. They don't have enough 773ERs to take up the slack from 744 retirements, which is still a decrease in capacity per flight, and the exorbitant cost and capacity increase associated with A388 mean that these won't be used 1-for-1 as a 744 replacement for its former routes. These problems are far from unique to BA, but it gets tricky when an airline has a steady, profitable route like YVR-LHR, which can reliably just about fill a 744, but the route doesn't warrant a A388 and there may not be slots or sufficient demand to go with two flights of a smaller aircraft (773ER, 772ER, 772ER, A333, A358/9/0).

[Cage]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I think that this is a case of BA being a bit stuck with its fleet composition. They don't have enough 773ERs to take up the slack from 744 retirements, which is still a decrease in capacity per flight, and the exorbitant cost and capacity increase associated with A388 mean that these won't be used 1-for-1 as a 744 replacement for its former routes. These problems are far from unique to BA, but it gets tricky when an airline has a steady, profitable route like YVR-LHR, which can reliably just about fill a 744, but the route doesn't warrant a A388 and there may not be slots or sufficient demand to go with two flights of a smaller aircraft (773ER, 772ER, 772ER, A333, A358/9/0).

BA fleet composition is fine. However the impending introduction of WS onto western canada to LGw is going to push down yields on London destined market. Even WS rumoured 3x week YEG-LGW will impact YVR. Toss in the possibility at least 2 other weekly flights might originate in YYC and BA is in a spot of trouble.

BA basically has three choices, fight and depress yields (hoping AC blinks before BA), flight and drop the market, or drop the economy seats and focus on premium end of the market.

For YVR avgeeks, atleast BA has the option of smaller, airplanes. I fear that BA will pull out of YYC market.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by Cage

WS launching Western Canada - LGW is the likely reason for the loss of seats.

Edit to Add:

History of Westjet expansion is they tend to push out every airline that does not have a Maple Leaf on the tail. Examples:
- Transcontinental expansion pushed out C3 at first (although admittedly this is tenuous position) and the Jetsgo. 3 months after WS transitioned from YHM to YYZ; Jetsgo was gone. Transcon expansion also caused a shift in Sunwing business plan. Sunwing was going to be third player in trascon market during the summer season.
- Atlantic Canada expansion pushed Canjet out of scheduled services.
- Transborder expansion caused AA and DL to pull out some services. AS has shrunk a little in YYC and a lot at YVR.

If history repeats, the foreign airlines will reassess their commitment to Canada and pull out if the profit margins during summer cannot sustain winter low season.

In the specific instance of BA, I can see a future where they pull out of everything that is not YVR and YYZ, with only a single daily flight out of YVR.

I have my doubts about this. This is BA we are talking about, not Jetsgo, C6 or another small time Canadian carrier. Why would BA cut seats on a route because of an airline that hasn't even confirmed from where it will fly to LGW. Also, why isn't BA cutting seats at YYZ, where AC just announced YYZ-LGW daily service next summer.

I honestly think AF-KL's increased presence in western Canada has something to do with it, not WS.

Also, I don't think BA will pull out of YUL. WS will more than likely not fly its 767s from there. YYC, on the other hand, who knows.