YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[casper]

Originally Posted by CareerShow

Does anyone know how many flight attendants AC have on their CRA 700's? I would guess three but by law they only have to have 2 right? But my thinking has been with only 2 flight attendants it would be hard to manage Transport Canada's new regulation of having 2 people in the flight deck at all times.

They are 705 (being converted to 900). The 705 is actually a 900 that was decorated on paper.

When I have been on them it has been 2.

[Gordon]

It looks that the next terminal expansion the centralized option which adds gates to every pier there is a discussion guide linked to the latest Craig's corner on the Yvr blog.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by casper

They are 705 (being converted to 900). The 705 is actually a 900 that was decorated on paper.

When I have been on them it has been 2.

Decorated on paper?

It is two, due first to regulations and also the fact they have a sizable J cabin would require it.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Gordon

It looks that the next terminal expansion the centralized option which adds gates to every pier there is a discussion guide linked to the latest Craig's corner on the Yvr blog.

The discussion paper is the link I pasted in my last post. Centralised option was definitely the option selected.

[Johnny Aussie]

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/9/august-was-busiest-ever-month-yvr-visualization/

Business in Vancouver has published an article about August 2016 numbers. Unfortunately it gives two different % increases. It says the increase was 9.8% then later in the article it says 9.1%.

I recall BIV posted an article about July numbers before the official numbers were released and the article said the increase was 9.8% only to be actually 11.0% once YVR posted their numbers. In addition the July figure in BIV was also lower than the YVR official count. Most likely the final figure was revised before YVR published their official stats.

In any event, I would expect August to be in the 10% range anyway.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/9/august-was-busiest-ever-month-yvr-visualization/

Business in Vancouver has published an article about August 2016 numbers. Unfortunately it gives two different % increases. It says the increase was 9.8% then later in the article it says 9.1%.

I recall BIV posted an article about July numbers before the official numbers were released and the article said the increase was 9.8% only to be actually 11.0% once YVR posted their numbers. In addition the July figure in BIV was also lower than the YVR official count. Most likely the final figure was revised before YVR published their official stats.

In any event, I would expect August to be in the 10% range anyway.

Great thanks

I wonder where BIV get their numbers from?

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Philippine Airlines: MNL increases from 7 weekly to 10 weekly with the re-introduction of twice weekly standalone YVR-MNL flights and an additional weekly YYZ-YVR-MNL flight. All services continue to be on 77Ws.

Thanks for posting this and the AC summary as well. According to the BIV article you quoted today the Phillippine Airlines 10PW frequency is going to continue into the summer in 2017, unlike 16' where it dropped off to daily again once the sun flying stopped. Havent heard anything official but 3 more 777s per week is a nice bump in capacity.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Numbers don't lie though, there are very few unserved YVR-USA markets left that are viable. Also, there are very few unserved domestic routes that would be big enough to have nonstop service.

Sure but that's straight O&D right? If AC is seriousl about turning YVR into a true second hub it needs to take a plunge on some of the thinner routes with hopes that it can funnel them to Asia/Europe on AC and other *A metal.

I was on a flight from KC to YYZ this week and I got stuck at check in for a while which gave me the opportunity to listen to where everyone else checking into the flight were going. On the little CRJ I was on nearly a dozen of them checked in to Delhi, and none of the groups were traveling together. If it weren't for transfer PAX like that I really dont think YYZ could support a daily to Kansas City or many of the other smaller US destinations they serve.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I have been made aware that between about 10:00 and 14:00 there will be no available international gates. So until an expansion is completed any further additions to International flights will have to be outside these hours. Still plenty of opportunities for late night flights to Asia and South Pacific.

Hmm puts a cap on Europe flying right? Is this including using the swing gates though? Could squeeze another 1-2 widebodies in there if needed.

Maybe we will be seeing some bigger birds from Lufthansa/KLM etc...

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sure but that's straight O&D right? If AC is seriousl about turning YVR into a true second hub it needs to take a plunge on some of the thinner routes with hopes that it can funnel them to Asia/Europe on AC and other *A metal.

I was on a flight from KC to YYZ this week and I got stuck at check in for a while which gave me the opportunity to listen to where everyone else checking into the flight were going. On the little CRJ I was on nearly a dozen of them checked in to Delhi, and none of the groups were traveling together. If it weren't for transfer PAX like that I really dont think YYZ could support a daily to Kansas City or many of the other smaller US destinations they serve.

Hmm puts a cap on Europe flying right? Is this including using the swing gates though? Could squeeze another 1-2 widebodies in there if needed.

Maybe we will be seeing some bigger birds from Lufthansa/KLM etc...

If we have to bring this up again.... YYZ-Transborder is just a league of its own. Many routes can survive on O&D alone. But YYZ's AC hub is conducive to connections from many US markets to both Asia and Europe. YVR is limited to mainly Asian Destinations except for the most western cities to Europe. Hence why YVR - Europe on AC is limited to LHR (and DUB for summer seasonal) for now at least

Those secondary markets that some are so keen to connect to are just too small. To make any further AC - Transborder routes work would depend primarily on O&D and Asian traffic. Without decent O&D they just won't work. We've seen and discussed the numbers over an over. Other than BOS, IAD and MIA area that's about all folks. Just too much competition to Asia from DL, AA and UA from the fortress hubs in the USA. O&D is going to be king for future Transborder expansion on AC. Hence why DFW is starting up. You pretty much said it yourself here if MCI-YYZ probably wouldn't work on O&D alone how would a YVR-MCI route work?

As for Europe, any future growth will have to be later afternoon departures. That will be fine for some destinations but not all.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I have been made aware that between about 10:00 and 14:00 there will be no available international gates. So until an expansion is completed any further additions to International flights will have to be outside these hours. Still plenty of opportunities for late night flights to Asia and South Pacific.

It definitely is starting to show in terms of the passenger experience. On my last flight to HKG on CX's afternoon flight, security wasn't too bad, but the food court and many of the gate areas were jam packed.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

If we have to bring this up again.... YYZ-Transborder is just a league of its own. Many routes can survive on O&D alone. But YYZ's AC hub is conducive to connections from many US markets to both Asia and Europe. YVR is limited to mainly Asian Destinations except for the most western cities to Europe. Hence why YVR - Europe on AC is limited to LHR (and DUB for summer seasonal) for now at least

Those secondary markets that some are so keen to connect to are just too small. To make any further AC - Transborder routes work would depend primarily on O&D and Asian traffic. Without decent O&D they just won't work. We've seen and discussed the numbers over an over. Other than BOS, IAD and MIA area that's about all folks. Just too much competition to Asia from DL, AA and UA from the fortress hubs in the USA. O&D is going to be king for future Transborder expansion on AC. Hence why DFW is starting up. You pretty much said it yourself here if MCI-YYZ probably wouldn't work on O&D alone how would a YVR-MCI route work?

As for Europe, any future growth will have to be later afternoon departures. That will be fine for some destinations but not all.

I think that your explanation illustrates why many see AC as favouring YYZ at the expense of YVR. It's a not only a combination of O&D/market size, but simple geography.
YYZ pokes down into the Midwest & Eastern USA, where most of the large cities are; Vancouver is good for the West Coast, which has big cities but fewer of them.
And which city, YYZ or YVR, is closer for conections to Europe. The answer is all too obvious. Hence the dominance of YYZ and the limitations for YVR, IMO

[Gordon]

could they not expand the Asian departure block by an hour and A half, because the airport is much quieter between 2PM & 4PM ? there is some gate capacity there.

How about using swing gates C\D 48 & 49?

[nname]

Now that gets me interested, so I track all the gate usage tomorrow from approx 10am to 2pm...

=> arrive at gate
<= depart from gate

Gate 48
=> 09:40 AC535	ORD
<= 10:40 AC208	YYC
=> 11:44 AC211	YYC
<= 13:00 AC132	YYZ
=> 14:20 AC563	SFO
<= 15:15 AC252	YEG

Gate 49
=> 10:07 AC551	LAX
<= 11:00 AC210	YYC
=> 11:50 AC64	ICN
<= 13:30 AC1136	YYZ
=> 15:34 AC219	YYC
<= 17:50 AC296	YWG

Gate 50
=> 10:07 WS1777	SFO
<= 12:15 WS712	YYZ
=> 12:45 AC26	PVG
<= 14:30 AC1108	YYZ

Gate 51
=> 08:58 AC1173	YYZ
<= 11:10 AC63	ICN
=> 11:43 AC1179	YYZ
<= 13:25 AC3	NRT

Gate 52
=> 09:55 AC105	YYZ
<= 12:10 AC29	PEK
=> 13:00 WS23	LGW
<= 18:10 WS22	LGW

Gate 53
=> 11:10 TS409	CDG
<= 13:25 TS544	LGW
=> 14:10 NZ24	AKL
<= 19:15 NZ23	AKL

Gate 54
=> 09:25 3U8579 SHE
<= 11:25 3U8580	SHE
=> 11:50 TS495	LGW
<= 16:30 TS372	AMS

Gate 55
=> 11:05 CZ329	CAN
<= 13:10 CZ330	CAN
=> 14:25 LH492	FRA
<= 16:20 LH493	FRA

Gate 58
=> 11:20 AC30	PEK
<= 13:20 AC7	HKG
=> 13:35 AC1941 DUB
<= 15:05 AC1940	DUB

Gate 64
=> 09:35 AC4	NRT
<= 11:25 AC25	PVG
=> 12:30 KE71	ICN
<= 14:20 KE72	ICN

Gate 65
=> 09:55 AC1952	KIX
<= 12:05 AC1951	KIX
=> 13:15 CX838	HKG
<= 14:45 CX837	HKG

Gate 66
=> 08:30 CA997	PEK
<= 10:40 CA998	PEK
=> 11:10 CA991	PEK
<= 13:50 CA992	PEK
=> 14:55 NH116	HND
<= 16:20 NH115	HND

Gate 67
=> 09:10 MU581	PVG
<= 13:20 MU582	PVG
=> 13:55 KL681	AMS
<= 15:45 KL682	AMS

Gate 70
=> 11:25 JL18	NRT
<= 14:15 JL17	NRT

Gate 71
=> 11:40 AF374	CDG
<= 14:00 AF479	CDG

Gate 73
=> 12:20 PR118	MNL
<= 13:50 PR118	YYZ

Gate 75
=> 11:35 AC855	LHR
<= ???

Gate 76
=> 13:00 UA5419	LAX
<= 13:40 UA5547 LAX
=> 15:15 AC1833 LAS
<= 17:45 AC1831 HNL

Gate 77
=> 12:00 UA1139	IAH
<= 13:00 UA595	SFO
=> 13:45 UA323	DEN
=> 15:10 UA381	DEN

They are indeed pretty full... but I'm sure couple of more flights can be squeezed in by moving things around... like, there should be some room in the E pier to put those United Express flights from gate 76, right? And AC seems to just park an aircraft at gate 75 for an entire day...

There seems to be a few more slots for 11am departure though...

EDIT: Forgot about Beijing Capital! They are also going to operate next summer on Fridays... Hmm, where can they squeeze another plane from 13:15 to 16:30....

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by nname

Now that gets me interested, so I track all the gate usage tomorrow from approx 10am to 2pm...

They are indeed pretty full... but I'm sure couple of more flights can be squeezed in by moving things around... like, there should be some room in the E pier to put those United Express flights from gate 76, right? And AC seems to just park an aircraft at gate 75 for an entire day...

There seems to be a few more slots for 11am departure though...

EDIT: Forgot about Beijing Capital! They are also going to operate next summer on Fridays... Hmm, where can they squeeze another plane from 13:15 to 16:30....

Love the work and love the effort! I love other avgeeks!

Who knows maybe there is more coming!?

Anyway, also have to base it on perfect ops too no buffer for even the slightest irrop sometimes.

Certainly indicates though if expansion doesn't come quickly there will be stagnant growth or will have to start doing bus loading ops like here in Melbourne.

[Gordon]

They could also have some of the D\E swing gates revert back to [I]nt's and push some transboarder traffic over to gates 90-92 which are basically un used.

[nname]

They would need to demolish gate 90-96 for the new gates behind US checkin area (and the F pier??), so they might need to start moving flights away rather than relying on those gates.

Similarly, gate 58 and 64 might need to be closed for D pier expansion...

I wonder which should be done first...

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by nname

They would need to demolish gate 90-96 for the new gates behind US checkin area (and the F pier??), so they might need to start moving flights away rather than relying on those gates.

Similarly, gate 58 and 64 might need to be closed for D pier expansion...

I wonder which should be done first...

I guess we should be finding out some definitive plans soon! Should be pretty exciting times ahead.

[Gordon]

There is still the 2ns phase of the west Chevron which can be added wiht those gates in use.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Gordon

There is still the 2ns phase of the west Chevron which can be added wiht those gates in use.

I'm unfamiliar with this. What is this 2nd phase of the west chevron?

[Gordon]

the plans were to add 6 more gates at the end f the West Chevron?

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

I'm unfamiliar with this. What is this 2nd phase of the west chevron?

An extension of the western end of D concourse.

The plan would be adding up to approx 8 gates to the west of gates 58 and 64.