Calgary International Airport II

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

This is the risk you take when you lease 21-24 year old planes in the first place, especially ones that are being used domestically with no ETOPS (at least not ETOPS 180). WestJet should have done its due diligence on this.

Maybe they should just dump these frames and try and get their hands on some Transaero 763s, now that the airline is going bankrupt. Some of those frames are only 15 years old and are ETOPS certified, as they often use them on North American runs.

One correction here, WS has flat out purchased the 763's. They are not leased.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Cage

Westjet has some bigger struggles than Calgary Herald reporter waxing eloquently about the problems associated with growth.

Heard over the weekend there are major problems with the 763 aircraft WS has yet to take ownership of and import into Canada. The hold up appears to be maintenance log issues over some mods done while the aircraft were with QF in Australia. Transport Canada has withheld final approval for Canadian operating certificate for the initial airplane pending maintenance records the Aussies don't have.

What is known is that WS will be looking at continued major delay for introduction of the 763. They will have to get temporary lift for the AB-Hawaii program for at least December period and probably into January.

At some point this is going to get into the media and WS will have egg all over their face. This is same maintenance paperwork issue was at the heart of WS September 1996 shut down. at that time, several maintenance requirements were reperformed to get the aircraft paperwork up to grade.

Seat Belts lights on, everyone get strapped into your seat its going to be a bumpy ride.

Guessing game time, where will WS get the lift from? My guesses:

-National (USA)
-HiFly (Brit)
-LOT 787's (Awesome option)

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

One correction here, WS has flat out purchased the 763's. They are not leased.

Wow. Even worse. They're stuck with lemons !

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Guessing game time, where will WS get the lift from? My guesses:

-National (USA)
-HiFly (Brit)
-LOT 787's (Awesome option)

Maybe TS ?

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

-LOT 787's (Awesome option)

I'm actually not sure the 787 is all its cracked up to be based on flight reviews whether it be on LO or AC or any other 787 operator. The vast majority of people are saying the seats in economy are narrow, thin, hard and uncomfortable. I may have the pleasure or unfortunate default choice of flying the 787 next year. Anyone fly the 787 in economy internationally yet? Domestic 4 hour flights are one thing but 8-10 hours i don't know.

LO 787 - Seat Width =16.9, Seat Pitch = 32
AC 787 - Seat Width = 17.3, Seat Pitch = 31
AC Rouge 767 - Seat Width = 17.5, Seat Pitch = 30
WestJet 767 - Seat Width = ?, Seat Pitch = ?

[Bigtime]

Note when I list the LOT 787 as the "awesome option" I mean purely from a spotting perspective.

[tuffyy]

And the Inflight announcements if LOT did operate the flights...

"I trust you enjoyed this flight as much as you enjoyed this accent".

Wait for it in this amazing video...

http://youtu.be/gWOzUzJd6wM

[yyc_engineer]

Too bad about the 767 woes, what started as such an exciting project is losing some steam. Hope it all turns around though.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

One correction here, WS has flat out purchased the 763's. They are not leased.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Wow. Even worse. They're stuck with lemons !

The purchase aspect may work out into WS favour, Boeing Capital has to be able to deliver the goods/airplane to WS. Currently delivery cannot occur as Transport Canada will not allow the importation due to the deficient maintenance logs not meeting Canadian regulations. If Transport sticks to their guns then WS will not have to pay for the aircraft.

[B-side]

Originally Posted by LO 044

I'm actually not sure the 787 is all its cracked up to be based on flight reviews whether it be on LO or AC or any other 787 operator. The vast majority of people are saying the seats in economy are narrow, thin, hard and uncomfortable. I may have the pleasure or unfortunate default choice of flying the 787 next year. Anyone fly the 787 in economy internationally yet? Domestic 4 hour flights are one thing but 8-10 hours i don't know.

LO 787 - Seat Width =16.9, Seat Pitch = 32
AC 787 - Seat Width = 17.3, Seat Pitch = 31
AC Rouge 767 - Seat Width = 17.5, Seat Pitch = 30
WestJet 767 - Seat Width = ?, Seat Pitch = ?

Yes, flew YVR - ICN last spring. Didn't notice any discomfort despite my own lack of padding on the undercarriage. Although, it was row 18 (bulkhead).

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Guessing game time, where will WS get the lift from? My guesses:

-National (USA)
-HiFly (Brit)
-LOT 787's (Awesome option)

4th option. Didn't they run load restricted 737's a few years ago? If so then that would be an (expensive) option if they wanted to keep it internal and minimize the negative publicity.

I've heard the hold up is paperwork for some maintenance / internal work on the planes that is required by Transport Canada and QANTAS cannot find it.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by lubicon

4th option. Didn't they run load restricted 737's a few years ago? If so then that would be an (expensive) option if they wanted to keep it internal and minimize the negative publicity.

Yes they did! Forgot about that, I believe they blocked off the middle seats on those flights so they could make the flight non-stop. Pretty sweet setup as a passenger.

I guess they could go out unrestricted and stop in EUG, SEA, or PDX as required.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Yes they did! Forgot about that, I believe they blocked off the middle seats on those flights so they could make the flight non-stop. Pretty sweet setup as a passenger.

Effective seat cap was around 110 pax and it didn't matter between 73G or 738 equipment. At 110 seat cap, WS would need a minimum of 2 73Gs to fly the mission and that assumes a 40 seat spill over from the 763 seat capacity (so the airline would have to count on either not selling the AB-Hawaii runs above 220 seats or finding alternate transportation for the 1-40 remaining pax).

Anyway this goes down, Westjet is in for some major turbulence while the kinks are ironed out.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Bokimon

^ That sucks with the WJ 763 deal. Sounds like they are in the middle of this though it doesn't seem to be their fault. How would they know these used 763's may of been 'tinkered' to a point where our country's transport ministry deems basically unacceptable to fly based on canadian air laws? I feel their planes are very much airworthy to be flying for revenue use and made a smart choice taking QF birds, but is our country just being super anal with the approvals? They almost sound just like how the City of Calgary planning and approvals work! Basically not trust the authenticity & record keeping of the previous users professional logs and demanding proof to items that would of been grandfathered from previous instances. If QF doesn't have the answers to what Transport Canada is demanding, what next?

I have no first hand knowledge of the situation. QF has a solid reputation for being a quality and safety focused operation.

There is probably nothing wrong with the aircraft. Sounds like the case of switching from regulator to another and having to go back to square one and review everything again. Sounds like they found some missing records.

This does explain why these birds have not taken to sky yet.

[casper]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

Would WS even be in the running for a YYC-PEK route with the 763?

I have been on the AC 763 ER between YVR and China. I don't remember if it was Hong Kong of Shanghai. Departing Vancouver it cruses at a lower altitude for a while until it burns off enough fuel to get up to full cruising altitude.

If the WS 763 the ER version?

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by casper

Is the WS 763 the ER version?

Yes, it is. All three subsequent deliveries are also the -ER version. The non-ER 763 can't even go 8000 km.

AC's B763s are younger birds, with newer and more powerful engines compared to the old QF 763s. Not to mention AC's planes carry around 211 passengers compared to WestJet's 262. All of these factors combined weigh in against WS operating the 763 to China from YYC. Any China service (if any) by WS will surely be from YVR. Japan, on the other hand, is attainable from Alberta.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Let's get this bird airborne first and operating YYC-YYZ-YYC !

[Cage]

Originally Posted by casper

I have been on the AC 763 ER between YVR and China. I don't remember if it was Hong Kong of Shanghai. Departing Vancouver it cruses at a lower altitude for a while until it burns off enough fuel to get up to full cruising altitude.

If the WS 763 the ER version?

Only 6 out of 30 AC 763 could make the yvr-PEK run, also the same restriction on YYZ-TLV. These airplanes also had pilot bunks on the main level and were consequently fewer pax numbers in the economy cabin (about 20 fewer seats). AC mainline pax complement is 212 seats. WS 763 has 262 seats, so I don't think there is a chance for WS airplanes to have long enough legs to make the trip. Finally the 6 AC 763er were delivered in 1998/99, the WS airplanes are 8-10 years older.

[holhm22]

Originally Posted by casper

I have been on the AC 763 ER between YVR and China. I don't remember if it was Hong Kong of Shanghai. Departing Vancouver it cruses at a lower altitude for a while until it burns off enough fuel to get up to full cruising altitude.

If the WS 763 the ER version?

I know it wouldn't be HK because they only use 77Ws or A340s in the past.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

AC's B763s are younger birds, with newer and more powerful engines compared to the old QF 763s.

To clarify, some are. 10 of the 17 frames currently active with mainline are older than WS' oldest incoming bird... and for what it's worth, this chart says the CF6's on AC's newest 1999 frame and those on the WS frames are rated the same.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by Acey

To clarify, some are. 10 of the 17 frames currently active with mainline are older than WS' oldest incoming bird... and for what it's worth, this chart says the CF6's on AC's newest 1999 frame and those on the WS frames are rated the same.

Indeed, in terms of max thrust rating, you are correct.

However that little F at the end of the second engine (which AC has and WS doesn't) stands for FADEC, Full Authority Digital Engine Control. Basically, engines equipped with FADEC (all of them nowadays) place full authority of the control/operating parameters of the engine in the hands of the computer. This provides for several benefits, the most important of which for this discussion is better fuel efficiency and lower weight, due to the removal of hydromechanical, analogue or manual control systems. Now the -2B6 still has a power management control (PMC), so it's not just antiquated cables, rods and hydromechanical systems, but this isn't as advanced as the engine control unit on a FADEC engine.

Dont know if an upgrade to FADEC is at all possible without changing the engines.