YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Could the reason for the lack of transcontinental options from YVR be:
1) second-tier US cities are concentrated in the East (Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Nashville, Memphis, Cleveland, and such, and are therefore closer to YYZ?
2) In the Western States, there are fewer second-tier cities and a lower population density (?)
Or .... could it be that YYZ wants to keep most of the action for itself ... OR ... that there is also enough O/D traffic from many US cities to YYZ that does not exist for YVR, thereby justifying flights to YYZ?
*Or, is Air Canada just trying to keep YVR's wings clipped, ever so subtly, (which leads back to YYZ hegemony)?

I think that it is the former, not the latter. Per LeftCoaster's awesome chart [below], 210 weekly Air Canada flights from YVR to 11 US cities is pretty significant. Recognizing the organizational structure of the US airline system, I would love more direct flights (particularly early morning departures) from YVR to key US hub cities, like Denver, Chicago, Charlotte, and Atlanta, plus twice daily direct flights to second tier US cities.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

http://i.imgur.com/U6YFJLT.png

That's a great chart, LeftCoaster. Thank you.

One thought, I think that some of the Air Canada and United flights may be code-shares and not necessarily separate flights. On my IHA-YVR flight this past Sunday, for example, it was United Airlines metal code-shared with Air Canada. It was a brand new B737-900 no less with the fancy Boeing interior with Dreamliner lighting and cavernous B777 overhead bins.


Source: me

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

With that in mind I put together a look at transborder flights, similar to the one I did for widebody international. It's a first crack so I'm sure there are some errors here and there, but it's pretty well researched.

As always love your work!

Just two things:

AC doesn't fly its own a/c to DEN. That's just code share with UA.
WS doesn't fly to MCO in the summer. Seasonal winter only.

I guess it's arguable whether to include all the Hawaii flights or not.

As for the hub debate I think it's been discussed ad nauseum over the last couple of years.

Very interesting info I read about SEA and DL on airliners.net today.
Summer 2016 DL is cutting capacity on: AMS, ICN, PEK and PVG. And of course HND is gone. All other international routes are status quo for capacity compared to summer 2015 those being: CDG, HKG, LHR and NRT. Just a curious observation.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Summer 2016 DL is cutting capacity on: AMS, ICN, PEK and PVG. And of course HND is gone.

Can we perhaps be taking advantage of that? Does YVR offer good connection for people flying out of Seattle? Seattle is a stronghold for Delta (SkyTeam) and Alaska (One World) and unfortunately we are not so strong on that front.

Otherwise the gazillion daily SEA-YVR flights could also work to our advantage when Seattle is seeing reductions.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

As I traveled past 3 different 747s a few 777s and 787s, all different tails, I realized Vancouver has done the more difficult part of becoming a major hub first, attract long haul routes.

Exactly. To lure in so many different long-haul operators is something that no mid-size airport has it easy to accomplish. I definitely agree that we are doing great in this regards and it will continue to play into our advantage.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

...we need more of the bread and butter type flights within North America. The type of flights that dont make headlines, impress no one, but make YVR a more accessible useful gateway.

This is challenging for an airport that doesn't have any airline calling it its base, as there is not that much feeder routes. It is also more difficult to achieve such with the border between us, but you shouldn't forget that on this side of the border we do have connection to pretty much all secondary and tertiary cities in Canada. Unfortunately they are just small in importance.

As I doubt any major airline would be willing to change from their current hub-and-spokes strategy to boost their operations out of Vancouver, but I think we might have a surprising opportunity. If only we could have US budget airlines begin flying to YRV, we might gain access to many secondary cities that these airlines operate from. That would require more code sharing to make it practical for the passangers, but it might work. To have someone like Southwest Airlines fly to Vancouver from all their hubs would be huge.

Our long-haul routes do make us an attractive gateway for airlines to fly to, but it will be challenging to gain more direct flights to Eastern US, which is quite far from us and many airlines will do much better with a hub somewhere in the midway.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Klazu

If only we could have US budget airlines begin flying to YRV, we might gain access to many secondary cities that these airlines operate from. That would require more code sharing to make it practical for the passangers, but it might work. To have someone like Southwest Airlines fly to Vancouver from all their hubs would be huge.

I'd love to see Southwest Airlines into Vancouver. They don't rely on hubs as much as "point-to-point service, providing nonstops to each of their individual destinations. Wowee, imagine Southwest making Vancouver its Western Canada hub, with nonstops to to places like Charlotte, New Orleans, Pittsburg, Memphis, Austin, San Antonio, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, DC, Tucson, Kansas City .... Hey, Southwest might fill a big market niche here, if nobody else is willing to do it. (Too bad they don't serve Miami)

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I'd love to see Southwest Airlines into Vancouver. They don't rely on hubs as much as "point-to-point service, providing nonstops to each of their individual destinations. Wowee, imagine Southwest making Vancouver its Western Canada hub, with nonstops to to places like Charlotte, New Orleans, Pittsburg, Memphis, Austin, San Antonio, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, DC, Tucson, Kansas City .... Hey, Southwest might fill a big market niche here, if nobody else is willing to do it. (Too bad they don't serve Miami)

Southwest flies into FLL which is 25 minutes north w/o traffic.
Plus theres a communter train connecting both airports.

I dont know if Southwest would consider YVR. Where would it fly to? SW in a lot of cities uses secondary airports like Midway, Love Field, Hobby, Islip, Manchester. They do fly into some big markets but concentrate on the smaller airports. For example they wanted to foot the bill and develop Boeing Field into their own terminal in lieu of using Sea Tac.

If SW does fly into YVR, that may open the market for Jetblue or Virgin America.

[Valley_Refugee]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Could the reason for the lack of transcontinental options from YVR be:
1) second-tier US cities are concentrated in the East (Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Nashville, Memphis, Cleveland, and such, and are therefore closer to YYZ?
2) In the Western States, there are fewer second-tier cities and a lower population density (?)
Or .... could it be that YYZ wants to keep most of the action for itself ... OR ... that there is also enough O/D traffic from many US cities to YYZ that does not exist for YVR, thereby justifying flights to YYZ?
*Or, is Air Canada just trying to keep YVR's wings clipped, ever so subtly, (which leads back to YYZ hegemony)?

Air Canada is in the business of making money, not forcing a conspiracy on the Canadian populace to concentrate flights at YYZ against their will.

Plain and simple, Vancouver doesn't have the high-margin O&D traffic required to form the base of a major hub (with the connecting flights that go with it), as YYZ does.

As I've said a million (or so) times before, Vancouver is incredibly well connected for a North American city of 2.8 million, especially considering it is not an economic or political capital.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

AC doesn't fly its own a/c to DEN. That's just code share with UA.

For Summer 2016, AC does have a daily flight YVR-DEN using CRA aircraft. its a mid morning departure and late afternoon arrival. For the summer YVR-DEN is 2x daily UA and daily AC.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Could the reason for the lack of transcontinental options from YVR be:
1) second-tier US cities are concentrated in the East (Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Nashville, Memphis, Cleveland, and such, and are therefore closer to YYZ?
2) In the Western States, there are fewer second-tier cities and a lower population density (?)
Or .... could it be that YYZ wants to keep most of the action for itself ... OR ... that there is also enough O/D traffic from many US cities to YYZ that does not exist for YVR, thereby justifying flights to YYZ?
*Or, is Air Canada just trying to keep YVR's wings clipped, ever so subtly, (which leads back to YYZ hegemony)?

(1 and 2) As stated above, secondary US cities are concentrated in the East, along with most of the US population. I would also put forth that from an aviation perspective there are very few secondary US cities in the West, most cities are actually tertiary cities (Spokane, Reno, Sacremento, Tuscon, etc.).

RE YYZ Hub. There is a master plan to make YYZ into a global super hub. The airport, AC, and citizens of Toronto are all behind the plan. The airport has entered into a master fixed cost agreement with AC (the agreement is nonexclusive however no other airline has also signed up). AC is making YYZ the global super hub and directing the majority of expansion to the airport. Torontonians are supporting AC in large numbers to make the O&D traffic work for AC (AC is the preferred airline, even over airlines).

However one must also temper the AC is gutting/doesn't care about YVR with the fact that CP did not have aircraft to do YYZ-Asia nonstop. The DC10 workhorse could barely make YYZ-NRT work, even then the flight was gas pig that would make the flight uneconomical under the past 10 years. At the end of the day, if CP had made it into the 2000s with enough financial capacity to buy 77Ws, they would have bypassed YVR infavour of YYZ nonstop to Asia.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Valley_Refugee

Air Canada is in the business of making money, not forcing a conspiracy on the Canadian populace to concentrate flights at YYZ against their will.

Plain and simple, Vancouver doesn't have the high-margin O&D traffic required to form the base of a major hub (with the connecting flights that go with it), as YYZ does.

As I've said a million (or so) times before, Vancouver is incredibly well connected for a North American city of 2.8 million, especially considering it is not an economic or political capital.

Or put another way... Not enough industry/head offices/corporations to make flights to smaller airports outside the country. Vancouver is a resources/tourism hub, mostly. And that kind of traffic can be inconsistent.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Valley_Refugee

As I've said a million (or so) times before, Vancouver is incredibly well connected for a North American city of 2.8 million, especially considering it is not an economic or political capital.

Exactly and hence my comments why I said the whole hub debate (or why doesn't YVR have more flights to here or there... Wahhhh) has been discussed ad nauseum... every month it seems the same questions are asked only to be provided the same answers..

Originally Posted by Cage

For Summer 2016, AC does have a daily flight YVR-DEN using CRA aircraft. its a mid morning departure and late afternoon arrival. For the summer YVR-DEN is 2x daily UA and daily AC.

That flight is operated as it always has been by United Express. Believe me AC would have had a press release about it along with SJC, SAN, ORD.

[Orcair]

Originally Posted by Cage

For Summer 2016, AC does have a daily flight YVR-DEN using CRA aircraft. its a mid morning departure and late afternoon arrival. For the summer YVR-DEN is 2x daily UA and daily AC.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

That flight is operated as it always has been by Unitd Exoress. Believe me AC would have had press release about it along with SJC, SAN, ORD.

According to AC.com, it's an UA Express CRJ-700, so a totally different aircraft from the CRJ-705 (which is really a CRJ-900)...

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

That's a great chart, LeftCoaster. Thank you.

One thought, I think that some of the Air Canada and United flights may be code-shares and not necessarily separate flights. On my IHA-YVR flight this past Sunday, for example, it was United Airlines metal code-shared with Air Canada. It was a brand new B737-900 no less with the fancy Boeing interior with Dreamliner lighting and cavernous B777 overhead bins.

No problem, this one was much tougher to do than the intl flights, since there are more flights and less information. Other than the changes pointed out by everyone it's mostly correct I think. Codeshares were definitely the toughest, it took me going onto the airline websites and attempting to book flights. From there the operator is listed. I think I got rid of most of the overlap, but clearly one or two still got through (phantom AC to Denver)

That United 737 looks fantastic, still no TVs in the back it seems though, that's a shame.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

AC doesn't fly its own a/c to DEN. That's just code share with UA.
WS doesn't fly to MCO in the summer. Seasonal winter only.

I guess it's arguable whether to include all the Hawaii flights or not.

As for the hub debate I think it's been discussed ad nauseum over the last couple of years.

Very interesting info I read about SEA and DL on airliners.net today.
Summer 2016 DL is cutting capacity on: AMS, ICN, PEK and PVG. And of course HND is gone. All other international routes are status quo for capacity compared to summer 2015 those being: CDG, HKG, LHR and NRT. Just a curious observation.

The hub debate will continue I'm sure, for as long as we are on the verge of getting into that hub territory it will dominate the psyche.

Fixed the AC into Denver and WS MCO as well. I'm also planning on adding the Hawaii flights, as YVR does act as the closest point for travel between Europe and Hawaii, not that it's a huge market by any means, but every little bit helps!

Very surprising regarding Delta, especially given the growth at SEA this year, seems like a lot of the extra capacity was absorbed. Yields must be suffering.

Originally Posted by Klazu

Can we perhaps be taking advantage of that? Does YVR offer good connection for people flying out of Seattle? Seattle is a stronghold for Delta (SkyTeam) and Alaska (One World) and unfortunately we are not so strong on that front.

Otherwise the gazillion daily SEA-YVR flights could also work to our advantage when Seattle is seeing reductions.

SkyTeam is by far YVRs second biggest alliance, both transborder and internationally. China Eastern double daily, KLM/Airfrance more or less double daily and China Airlines+China Southern really bring in a lot of seats. Couple that with Delta being the largest non-star alliance transborder operator at YVR and the airport is really well served to cover any need from SEA. That said I think delta will add the capacity back to SEA if it is needed.

Originally Posted by Klazu

This is challenging for an airport that doesn't have any airline calling it its base, as there is not that much feeder routes.

That's the crux of it. AC has been good to YVR, but it is still for good reason focused on YYZ. What would do wonders for YVR would be a SkyTeam aligned airline hubbing out of Vancouver.

I do think AC can add more routes out of Vancouver without cannibalizing its YYZ ops, the mid-west particularly is unserved to Asia. Austin, St Louis or KC would be some great regions to connect to, and all are in range of a CRJ700.

Originally Posted by Valley_Refugee

As I've said a million (or so) times before, Vancouver is incredibly well connected for a North American city of 2.8 million, especially considering it is not an economic or political capital.

Couldn't agree more, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be even better. I'm very impressed by what YVR has, but the sights should be set on what it can be. I think the airport is doing a great job at that, and hopefully airlines continue to buy in the way they have been.

Originally Posted by Cage

(1 and 2) As stated above, secondary US cities are concentrated in the East, along with most of the US population. I would also put forth that from an aviation perspective there are very few secondary US cities in the West, most cities are actually tertiary cities (Spokane, Reno, Sacremento, Tuscon, etc.).

RE YYZ Hub. There is a master plan to make YYZ into a global super hub. The airport, AC, and citizens of Toronto are all behind the plan. The airport has entered into a master fixed cost agreement with AC (the agreement is nonexclusive however no other airline has also signed up). AC is making YYZ the global super hub and directing the majority of expansion to the airport. Torontonians are supporting AC in large numbers to make the O&D traffic work for AC (AC is the preferred airline, even over airlines).

However one must also temper the AC is gutting/doesn't care about YVR with the fact that CP did not have aircraft to do YYZ-Asia nonstop. The DC10 workhorse could barely make YYZ-NRT work, even then the flight was gas pig that would make the flight uneconomical under the past 10 years. At the end of the day, if CP had made it into the 2000s with enough financial capacity to buy 77Ws, they would have bypassed YVR infavour of YYZ nonstop to Asia.

I don't think that YYZs hub strategy should have a major effect on YVRs. The two airports are nearly 4,000kms apart and certainly serve different submarkets. While YVR no doubt competes with YYZ, its greater competition is LAX, SEA and SFO, while YYZs greatest competition is ORD and JFK.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No problem, this one was much tougher to do than the intl flights, since there are more flights and less information. Other than the changes pointed out by everyone it's mostly correct I think. Codeshares were definitely the toughest, it took me going onto the airline websites and attempting to book flights. From there the operator is listed.

The hub debate will continue I'm sure, for as long as we are on the verge of getting into that hub territory it will dominate the psyche.

Couldn't agree more, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be even better. I'm very impressed by what YVR has, but the sights should be set on what it can be. I think the airport is doing a great job at that, and hopefully airlines continue to buy in the way they have been.

Point 1) wow you are thorough making dummy bookings - kudos for effort!

Point 2) happy to continue the hub debate but nothing new is ever added it's the same old shit rehashed over and over. Why not? Because of a,b,c... Why not? Because of a,b,c <repeat>

Point 3) but that is exactly what YVR is doing. Nobody at YVRAA is sitting on their laurels... Look back to two to three years ago and see how much has been achieved in a really short time and 2016 is just continuing with that momentum. And the fact that four new Chinese Airlines have applied for YVR flights must tell you that YVR is striving to be better and bigger. All within the constraints as has been pointed out hundreds of times that YVR is still a relatively small city (population and economically) but with a decent geographic advantage.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

That United 737 looks fantastic, still no TVs in the back it seems though, that's a shame.

I have flown United 737 to Chicago and they had screens at every seat. They had live TV with dozens of channels, but unfortunately you have to pay for that to be able to watch anything. So you just end up having the screens loop same pre-programmed clips over and over again.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

That United 737 looks fantastic, still no TVs in the back it seems though, that's a shame.

While I definitely prefer (free) seat-back IFE systems, United's alternative system works pretty well (when it works). One uses their own device (phone or tablet), connects to the in-flight WiFi connection, and opens the United App. While one must pay to use the WiFi for browsing, email, etc., if you go in through the United App, you can access and stream for free a pretty decent variety of current-ish movies and TV shows and they stream instantly and without buffering or resolution oscillation. I used the app to watch some TV between IAH and CLT when I didn't have to work on the plane, but to my disappointment, and the nearly whole cabin's frustration, I found out that the system wasn't working right for the 4.5 hour IAH-YVR flight on the new B739. They rebooted the WiFi a couple of times without success and the IFE never did load through the app.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

One uses their own device (phone or tablet), connects to the in-flight WiFi connection, and opens the United App.

The only down side is that their app doesn't support us lone wolves (Windows Phone users).

[LeftCoaster]

Windows phone eh? Gutsy call!

I've had the wifi before on a flight to the Caymans, and it worked fine. Only issue I have with the Wifi system is draining my devices battery.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Point 2) happy to continue the hub debate but nothing new is ever added it's the same old shit rehashed over and over. Why not? Because of a,b,c... Why not? Because of a,b,c <repeat>

But what else would we talk about otherwise?

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Point 3) but that is exactly what YVR is doing. Nobody at YVRAA is sitting on their laurels... Look back to two to three years ago and see how much has been achieved in a really short time and 2016 is just continuing with that momentum. And the fact that four new Chinese Airlines have applied for YVR flights must tell you that YVR is striving to be better and bigger. All within the constraints as has been pointed out hundreds of times that YVR is still a relatively small city (population and economically) but with a decent geographic advantage.

Ya totally agree, that was the point I was trying to make with my post, saying the airport was doing a great job of it. I was just trying to explain to valley_refugee that I wasn't so much complaining about what we have but dreaming/planning for what could (and should) be.

[Valley_Refugee]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Windows phone eh? Gutsy call!

I've had the wifi before on a flight to the Caymans, and it worked fine. Only issue I have with the Wifi system is draining my devices battery.



But what else would we talk about otherwise?



Ya totally agree, that was the point I was trying to make with my post, saying the airport was doing a great job of it. I was just trying to explain to valley_refugee that I wasn't so much complaining about what we have but dreaming/planning for what could (and should) be.

My comments certainly weren't directed at your productive contributions to this thread!

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Southwest flies into FLL which is 25 minutes north w/o traffic. Plus theres a communter train connecting both airports.

I dont know if Southwest would consider YVR. Where would it fly to? SW in a lot of cities uses secondary airports like Midway, Love Field, Hobby, Islip, Manchester. They....... concentrate on t he smaller airports.

If SW does fly into YVR, that may open the market for Jetblue or Virgin America.

To me, Virgin America is synonymous with SF and a couple of major US airports. It does provide the possibility of a "fan out" to mid-sized airports in the US, pure and simple.
Is Jetblue a possibility? Air Canada won't and Westjet wouldn't.
That's what people in Vancouver and YVR interested folks are looking for. Is there any airline that would fill the gap to just a few more: KC, Philadelphia, Boston, Miami (or FLL) St. Louis, Atlanta, DC, Charlotte and Pittsburgh.[stop]*
Any takers? Jetblue? Westjet? (evidently not Sputhwest).... Delta, Delta connection .... anybody ...?