YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[Max.]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Thanks for the link. Yeah I didn't see anything about flights.

Hopefully get some more info.

I think if the rumour was for daily flights to start that would be overkill on that route. And it was to be on China Southern if it is happening.

The one who post this information is very reliable because he attended the ceremony yesterday. But he was not confirmed it is daily.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Max.

The one who post this information is very reliable because he attended the ceremony yesterday. But he was not confirmed it is daily.

I'm not doubting your source. I'm just questioning exactly what was signed.

Is it just a MOA (memorandum of understanding)? Unfortunately these sometimes just end up in the waste basket.

I'd be curious to get more info on it... I'm sure something will come up in the next few days when the story unfolds.

[Klazu]

Arrived in Santiago de Chile (SCL) today. Turbulent ride from Toronto, but flight was on time and Air Canada got us here. 77W is such a loud airplane compared to the 787 between YVR and YYZ. Fortunately three more 787 flights ahead for us. I think this was now the Air Canada's "tin can" 777, but I didn't find it bad at all. Completely normal seat pitch and 3+3+3 configuration.

What caught my eye at the baggage claim was how there were a lot of luggage coming through YVR and likely even more from YVR. Most bags were transiting at YYZ and not originating from there and I suppose YVR could indeed support its own SCL run, although even from Toronto they have the same plane continue to Buenos Aires.

Neat looking city with TALL mountains right next door. It is quite a different feeling to have Mount Baker height peaks only 10 kilometers from Downtown. Almost three times as tall as North Shore Mountains, but with the same distance. I actually first thought I couldn't see the mountains through the smog, only shortly realizing that I have to look WAY more up. What is crazy is that there are peaks close to 6000 meters tall just behind these front mountains. Makes one's mind boggle.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Arrived in Santiago de Chile (SCL) today. Turbulent ride from Toronto, but flight was on time and Air Canada got us here. 77W is such a loud airplane compared to the 787 between YVR and YYZ. Fortunately three more 787 flights ahead for us. I think this was now the Air Canada's "tin can" 777, but I didn't find it bad at all. Completely normal seat pitch and 3+3+3 configuration.

What caught my eye at the baggage claim was how there were a lot of luggage coming through YVR and likely even more from YVR. Most bags were transiting at YYZ and not originating from there and I suppose YVR could indeed support its own SCL run, although even from Toronto they have the same plane continue to Buenos Aires.

Neat looking city with TALL mountains right next door. It is quite a different feeling to have Mount Baker height peaks only 10 kilometers from Downtown. Almost three times as tall as North Shore Mountains, but with the same distance. I actually first thought I couldn't see the mountains through the smog, only shortly realizing that I have to look WAY more up. What is crazy is that there are peaks close to 6000 meters tall just behind these front mountains. Makes one's mind boggle.

Aconcagua is considered a relatively easy climb, given its height. A whole lot easier (except the need for 'gas') at that altitude than Mt. McKinley, or even Waddington!
There'll be a next time. We'll be waiting.

[Klazu]

Yeah, Aconcagua (6960 meters, tallest mountain outside of Himalayas) is an impressive sight when landing on SCL. We had perfect weather and could see it even though it's located on Argentina's side. It is not as prominent as Baker or Rainier, as the peaks surrounding it are 5500+ meters, but it looks very cool with it's own micro-climate on the top.

Most Andes peaks are technically easy to summit, however their altitude requires plenty of acclimatization. Tours summitting Aconcagua are around 20 days, so not something you will do as a day trip.

[Johnny Aussie]

SkyTeam just keeps motoring along at YVR.

DL updated its summer 2016 schedules this week:

The once daily red eye to JFK is returning and has just been loaded into the scheds this week.

A 6th daily flight to SEA on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Sundays was also added.

MSP's afternoon flight has been upgauged to a 739. Morning stays a 738.

The other routes are the same as last summer right now:

2 daily SLC, 2 daily LAX, 2 weekly ATL and 1 weekly DTW.

So depending on the day of the week there will be between 12 and 14 DL flights per day.

[stiffdeadman]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

SkyTeam just keeps motoring along at YVR.

DL updated its summer 2016 schedules this week:

The once daily red eye to JFK is returning and has just been loaded into the scheds this week.

A 6th daily flight to SEA on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Sundays was also added.

MSP's afternoon flight has been upgauged to a 739. Morning stays a 738.

The other routes are the same as last summer right now:

2 daily SLC, 2 daily LAX, 2 weekly ATL and 1 weekly DTW.

So depending on the day of the week there will be between 12 and 14 DL flights per day.

Still a far cry from the days when DL and NW were separate. MSP was 4-5 times daily, DTW was daily, ATL was daily, SLC was 3-4 times daily, the weekly flight to MEM. There was instances of 3 sometimes 4 757's on Saturdays. Way better for spotting then a plethora of CRJs from SEA.

[trofirhen]

With airlines Stateside gobbling each other up these days, how many US mainline carriers ddoes YVR have now? Three? (AA, UA, DL) ... or more? (No not counting National to Orlando).

[WarrenC12]

BIV article on expansion:

https://www.biv.com/article/2015/11/critics-question-yvrs-400m-terminal-expansion-plan/

Some interesting "post 2020" options in the graphic.

[west1266]

HI guys don't normally post but I read the forum all the time. Saw this in BIV regarding the expansion of YVR. It is the diagram of the upcoming expansion.https://www.biv.com/article/2015/11/critics-question-yvrs-400m-terminal-expansion-plan/ Cheers,

[trofirhen]

Regarding YVR future terminal expansion, Craig Richmond made it pretty clear that he favoured the "green" (or centre) option, rather than a satellite to the west, or a new terminal eastward.
He stated the "western" (blue) as problematic in forcing the removal of the crosswind runway, and the high cost of tunnelling in the spongy soil. The "east" (yellow) terminal, he said, would interfere with YVR-related businesses. So it seems largely decided that the "centre" (green) option will be the one chosen. This was in his Board of Trade speech.

[osirisboy]

So when they talk about expanding the a b terminals as part of this 400 million 2020 expansion this us in addition to the work they are just finishing on those terminals?

[connect2source]

As a frequent traveller through YVR, ( I'm leaving for LHR later today ) I'm always surprised at how dead the international gates are after the midday rush and into the evening. Seems YVR could jostle some slots and have enough capacity for years to come. For 19M - 20M passengers / year the size of the terminal and number of gates seems relatively high compared to other airports handling similar passenger counts.

Also, Bruce Cran's take on Bellingham is totally inaccurate in 2015, Bellingham's Canadian traffic is way down due to the loonie's fall and YVR's are way up. The AIF of $20 is totally in-line with most airports in Canada as well.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by west1266

HI guys don't normally post but I read the forum all the time. Saw this in BIV regarding the expansion of YVR. It is the diagram of the upcoming expansion.https://www.biv.com/article/2015/11/critics-question-yvrs-400m-terminal-expansion-plan/ Cheers,

Hey west1266, congrats to upgrading status to non-lurker! It's always great to have another voice in the mix!

Welcome! And great first post!


EDIT:

source

If they build the yellow terminal to the east, would there be no transborder capacity? How would you transit from one wing to another? Personally, although I'd love to see another terminal to the east, I'm in favor of keeping the airport as compact as you can for as long as possible. Adding that Eastern wing would increase transfers for some passengers. It looks like they'd have to exit the secure zone to change terminals.

[Gordon]

It will be a while before any Per A expansion is needed because the A|B connector gates are not all being used( B12 27 & 28 are barely ever used.)

[nname]

Originally Posted by Gordon

It will be a while before any Per A expansion is needed because the A|B connector gates are not all being used( B12 27 & 28 are barely ever used.)

B12 is now being used as A12, as A8 and B11 are closed for construction.

I think the plan is to move all the Encore, CMA, and Hawkair planes into pier A. Once the construction is done on A, then it would free up most of the B pier for reconstruction/renovation.

Maybe B27 and B28 is waiting for Jetlines if it ever start flying?

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by connect2source

As a frequent traveller through YVR, ( I'm leaving for LHR later today ) I'm always surprised at how dead the international gates are after the midday rush and into the evening. Seems YVR could jostle some slots and have enough capacity for years to come. For 19M - 20M passengers / year the size of the terminal and number of gates seems relatively high compared to other airports handling similar passenger counts.

Also, Bruce Cran's take on Bellingham is totally inaccurate in 2015, Bellingham's Canadian traffic is way down due to the loonie's fall and YVR's are way up. The AIF of $20 is totally in-line with most airports in Canada as well.

Point 1: easier said than done. Flights need to depart from YVR to arrive at their destination to optimise those flights' onward connection capabilities whilst still being able to get some inbound YVR connections as well. That's why you see Asian flights departing late morning to mid afternoon. And then again very late at night into the wee hours of the morning like 1am or 2am. And then for Europe for flights to arrive early mornings they really cannot depart from YVR before 1pm but you will notice flights to Europe are a bit more spread out as for example the second daily AC LHR flight will be departing after 9pm to arrive in LHR after 2pm. And for South Pacific flights they all leave early to late evening only. They really cannot leave earlier or they would be arriving in AKL (for example) before 5am.

Point 2: yeah clearly this guy hasn't kept up to date. I respect people opposing development with accurate and solid evidence but not digging up irrelevant old info to try and sway opinion. Rubbish.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Arrived in Santiago de Chile (SCL) today. Turbulent ride from Toronto, but flight was on time and Air Canada got us here. 77W is such a loud airplane compared to the 787 between YVR and YYZ. Fortunately three more 787 flights ahead for us. I think this was now the Air Canada's "tin can" 777, but I didn't find it bad at all. Completely normal seat pitch and 3+3+3 configuration..

That's the old configuration. The new high density planes are 3-4-3 in Y. I flew to LHR recently on one which was bearable because it was only half full. Even then the (reduced) washrooms were filthy by the end of the flight, can't imaine what it would be like when it is full.

[red-paladin]

The 2020 options make sense to me, especially Pier D, that was expected.
I think that Piers A and B should be improved in the case that their expansions go forward though.
After that I'd rather see the Eastern terminal with the new skytrain station than the Western satellite model. While airports with those kinds of satellite terminals with people movers seem cool, they really suck to use.

[west1266]

I agree I think the eastern expansion makes the most sense...it would give trans-border a dedicated terminal and a skytrain station. The airfield services could easily move to north-side of the north runway. Some form of people mover would be needed between the 3 terminals. The east side taxi-way would need to be apart of this expansion scenario.

I read in another post a few months ago the Pier A expansion was to go ahead beginning of 2016 some architectural firm has some preliminary renderings of it. Sorry I couldn't find the posting to link it.