HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5761  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 12:27 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by VIce View Post
I'd be curious to understand the positives of banning tubas.
Please provide statistics of how many people are killed by tubas in north America every year. This will be a good starting point to understand the relevance of your certainly well intended but likely asinine suggestion.

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/15BEB/production/_85876098_us_gun_terrorism_624_v4.png
     
     
  #5762  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 12:52 AM
Suburgatory's Avatar
Suburgatory Suburgatory is offline
No man's land
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 763
I'd be curious to understand the positives of banning passengers.
     
     
  #5763  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 3:53 AM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburgatory View Post
I'd be curious to understand the positives of banning passengers.
Banning passengers is a no go. Placing them under anesthesia may have economic benefits. Key benefits: reduced need for entertainment, food and creature comforts. They can be stacked providing better use of on board space. Less time spent putting things in and them pulling them out from overhead bins.

However it would never fly. WestJet is the only airline that would ever propose such a move and it always waiting for April 1st to launch those types of trial balloons.
     
     
  #5764  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:16 AM
outoftheice outoftheice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 914
Having now operated 3 flights from the new international terminal in YYC I think I'm ready to give it a solid C+ grade. My thoughts:

Design Aesthetics: The ground-side portion of the terminal is, for the most part, really well done. The new check-in hall is big and gives a sense of grandeur. The arrival area incorporates some nice public art and the waterfalls and frosted glass mountains add to the sense that you have officially arrived in the city that serves as the gateway to the rocky mountains. However the ground-side loses points for the corridors on both arrival and departure levels that connect to the original terminal. I find both to be rather dreary as both use multiple shades of greys with essentially no colour. It's the same depressing feeling I get every time I travel through terminal 1 in YYZ.

The air-side portion of the terminal is where I find the design aesthetics dramatically lacking. I can only speak to the International Departures Hall and not the US section however I found the public art lacking and absolutely no effort put into creating a sense of place. In comparison to YVR's international wing that features a stream that runs throughout the area complete with tiny waterfalls, an aquarium, high ceilings and beautiful public art, Calgary's new international departure hall feels more like a reno of an older building instead of a new facility designed to make a statement to international travellers.

The gate areas are just plain awful. Grey vinyl floors with accent colours that give off that cheap, institutional feel. One of my colleagues summed it up best when they said "I feel like I just walked into a more depressing version of Foothills Hospital". No art, no colour and of course limited seating (more on this later).

The arrivals corridor/customs hall is equally dreary with some randomly placed artwork (art is obviously very subjective but the paintings chosen remind me of the paintings done by school children at some of the southern destinations we operate in to) and some maple-leaf wallpaper to denote that you're getting close to Canada Customs. This is accentuated by low ceilings and the same grey vinyl floors to add to the depressing feel. Again it reminds me of arriving at both YYZ terminals 1 & 3 which is not a compliment.

Call to Gate: The system definitely is not working as it should and I think a large part of that is the poor design of the terminal building. As I mentioned previously, there is absolutely no effort put into creating a 'sense of place' to encourage passengers to stay in the main holding area. Once you pass through security you go through a duty free shop. I was actually surprised at how small and cramped the duty free shop felt and I couldn't imagine how busy it will get if there are several wide-body departures leaving close together.

Travellers then exit the duty-free and come face to face with the info desk with the flight info boards. To your right you can see gates 70/71 that have a few seats and some public art as well as the hallway that leads to gates 76/77/78/70. To your left is the food court area. It features a low ceiling and no public art... essentially absolutely nothing to draw you in. I can easily see why people look left, then right and shrug and just head out towards the gate area to see if they come across their flight.

For people that make the decision to head left towards the food court and the shopping area, the building design still doesn't make it intuitive that this area serves as the main holding room where you're supposed to spend your time. Again the hallway features a low ceiling with food options on your left and shops on your right. The seating area is actually in behind the shops and feels more like some seats have been placed along the glass instead of being the main hold room seating area for the terminal. From security onwards the whole area feels like the airport was trying to cram things in to a limited space which is quite odd considering it's a brand new building.

In my opinion if the airport wanted to increase the odds of call to gate working, passengers should have exited the duty free shop and walked right into a large seating hall with higher ceilings, public art and place-making items such as water features and windows. The food and shopping should have then been laid out along the perimeter of this space with the corridors to the gate areas requiring you to pass beyond the natural boundaries created by the shops. This is the layout that seems to be adopted by every major European airport I've travelled to that makes use of the call to gate system and I think plays a large role in encouraging people not to venture beyond the main holding area. Calgary has definitely missed the mark in this aspect and it virtually impossible to change at this point.

Even if people followed the call to gate system as they're meant to, I feel the gate areas are still severely lacking in seating and I can see where the passenger complaints come from. All three flights I've operated out of the new terminal building left from the 76/77/78/78 gate areas. Map for Reference: http://www.yyc.com/en-us/travellerinfo/maps.aspx At the time of our departure there were 2 other flights leaving around the same time. Three 737-800s mean approximately 450 people waiting to board the flights from an area that has seating for maybe 60.

Even if a traveller arrives at the gate area at the time they're meant to, by the time the pre-boarding announcements are made followed by priority boarding and assisted boarding I would guess that the average traveller is faced with a ten minute wait at the gate area prior to boarding. If the traveller is seated in one of the last zones to board this wait is probably closer to twenty minutes. Now twenty minutes of standing around might not seem like much but the crowds of people who are sprawled out on the floor every day at the airport seem to suggest otherwise. The kicker and what I think leads to the complaints is that these gate areas could easily accommodate more seating... the space is there... however the airport has evidently decided not to put the seats there.

CATSA Plus: I have to say that I was very critical of the airport adopting the CATSA Plus system for the international terminal after having very poor experiences with it as it was trialed at Terminal 3 in YYZ. I have to take it back as the way as it's been implemented in YYC has addressed most of the issues that I had with the system and security has been a breeze each time I've used it. The one issue that I still have with the system is that your personal possessions can easily end up on the opposite side of security while you're still loading up trays and that can cause some anxiety but that can easily be mitigated by simply making sure your laptop and possessions are in the very last bin you send through.

Canada Customs Hall: This is another area of the new terminal that gets a failing grade. The customs hall actually feels smaller than the previous one however that may just be a perception thing. Either way I can't see how the area will handle the passenger loads if the international terminal gets anywhere close to capacity. The three times I've arrived has been at off-peak times with only a few flights arriving around the same time, none of which were wide-body aircraft. Upon approaching the customs hall, passengers were confronted with a blob of people. I say a blob because it sort of resembled a line but because of the lack of signs directing travellers on where to enter the customs hall people were just kind of congregating together in the hall.

The fact that the custom hall lacks depth and forces people to form lines in the long hallways that serve as approaches to the hall leads me to believe that that is the way the new terminal was designed to be used. But the lack of signage and the fact that the customs hall is around a 90 degree corner prevents people from determining where they should be lining up to expedite their processing through customs. Creating stanchions that run the length of the hall approaching customs will help with this problem provided they are combined with proper signage so that connecting/nexus/crew/and regular arriving passengers can form separate lines early on. That being said, I don't think this will do anything to curb the human perception that if you're standing in a hallway outside of the room you want to be in, you perceive that the room is over capacity and you feel like you're in for a long wait. If you're waiting inside the room you want to be in, even if the line is identical to the one in the hall, you feel as if you're closer to your destination and you can see the progress you're making which seems to lower the anxiety/frustration felt.

Water Fountains: The lack of water fountains in the departures area has already been well discussed and I think the fact that the airport authority's "solution" still requires people to have an empty bottle with them to fill up shows just how little the airport authority cares about the passengers passing through YYC. The one thing that I feel has been over-looked so far in this debate is the fact that the no water fountain issue also applies to the international arrivals area.

In my mind this is even worse as unlike the departures area where passengers can at least purchase a drink if they feel they need one, there is absolutely no alternative for arriving passengers to turn to if they are thirsty. This is compounded by the fact that drink service on flights typically ends 30 minutes prior to landing. This is followed by 10 minutes taxi time, 10 minutes to deplane, 15 minutes to get through customs, and a potential wait for baggage meaning that the average arriving passenger will have to go over an hour without any access to drinking water. To me this is completely unacceptable and not the welcome to Canada we should be showing people. Hopefully the airport authority comes to their senses with this and installs water fountains in the approach to the customs hall and in the international baggage hall.

Overall I'm obviously rather disappointed with the new terminal, especially given the potential of what it could have been. What disappoints me even more is that I think a lot of these issues are designed in to the building and can't be easily fixed. Hopefully the improvements that can be made are made quickly but I'm not going to hold my breath.
     
     
  #5765  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:44 AM
VIce VIce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
Please provide statistics of how many people are killed by tubas in north America every year. This will be a good starting point to understand the relevance of your certainly well intended but likely asinine suggestion.

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/15BEB/production/_85876098_us_gun_terrorism_624_v4.png
Probably about as many as unloaded, locked, checked rifles. If your argument is about a reduction of gun ownership generally in society, then make that argument. But don't make it here because it doesn't belong in this thread. If weapons are legal generally, and people are allowed to transport them generally, then the risk of allowing people to check an unloaded and inoperable rifle or shotgun that they will have no physical access to during their trip is essentially zero. If those two conditions are not met, you're talking about societal issues that have nothing to do with aviation that you can take elsewhere.
     
     
  #5766  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 6:33 AM
Tobuz Tobuz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 243
Outstanding review, outoftheice. Well said! Agreed on pretty much all points.
     
     
  #5767  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 11:23 AM
b31den b31den is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
My prior post was partially to see the thought process of those that respond, so I'm not ridiculously stuck to my thought on this one.

Your post does raise the question, how much does it really support the economy?

Regarding history, well, the belief that the earth being flat is part of European history till not that long ago, and is still the case with some Trump voters. Leaving things in history is fine in many cases.

It would be interesting to understand what positives would result from banning guns on all flights, period.
I dont see what a ban would accomplish other than causing a lot of inconvenience. It would also probably be illegal as far as international treaties go. I am pro gun control actually and think the current system works well and thought the long gun registry was fine (other than cost). I know owning a firearm is a privilege and not a right, just like driving.

I am not a hunter so can't really speak to what it's economic impact is. I will probably eventually get into hunting though. I've heard Americans and Europeans pay insane money to go on trips. I am generally not supportive of foreigners trophy hunting in Canada, although I'm sure it provides a big boost to some remote northern communities.

Transporting firearms by air is probably the most secure and safest way. Most people don't render their firearms inoperable in locked cases while transporting them in private vehicles. Perhaps they throw a trigger lock on them, with ammunition obviously easily accessible in the same vehicle. One thing I dislike is air canadas policy that I must put a copy of their declaration inside the rifle case. That means it has to opened in the airport with the general public around. Ive always felt a little uncomfortable doing that.
     
     
  #5768  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:20 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburgatory View Post
I'd be curious to understand the positives of banning passengers.
Already exists. It is called Canada Post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by b31den View Post
It would also probably be illegal as far as international treaties go.
What international treaty requires all forms of travel to accept carrying guns? Did we have to update international treaties when smoking was banned, or when certain Samsung phones were banned?

This is not something that has "consumed" me, and I hadn't thought of it till very recent when someone posted the extensive extra steps, time and "systems cost" of having to carry a gun onto a plane. Just something to think about at a societal level IE would it be better for society in a hundred years time, would it be the same, or would it be worse. I'd think this type of messaging and policy would be positive.
     
     
  #5769  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:58 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by outoftheice View Post
The air-side portion of the terminal is where I find the design aesthetics dramatically lacking. I can only speak to the International Departures Hall and not the US section however I found the public art lacking and absolutely no effort put into creating a sense of place.
I was wondering about this when I sat in the US level because I could look down and see that the international area below must not be quite as nice since they probably had to limit how high up the US section was. I felt the US portion was pretty nice aesthetically, if not a little plain, but the really high ceilings were appreciated. Looking at the map you linked, the international area definitely looks a bit more cramped.

One thing that I was surprised by at the gate area on the US level is that there were large panels blocking the view out of the windows almost everywhere, which meant you really didn't get to see what was happening on the tarmac. The automated opening and closing of the blinds when the sun rose was interesting, though.

     
     
  #5770  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 6:16 PM
yyc_engineer's Avatar
yyc_engineer yyc_engineer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Somewhere between OOL and MCY
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
One thing that I was surprised by at the gate area on the US level is that there were large panels blocking the view out of the windows almost everywhere, which meant you really didn't get to see what was happening on the tarmac. The automated opening and closing of the blinds when the sun rose was interesting, though.
Those have bothered me everyday for the last 3 years. Apparently the architects did a "sunlight analysis" on the piers and determined it would be too sunny causing a greenhouse effect and would necessitate increasing the cooling load so they put in these panels to control the amount of light coming in...what they failed to account for was the obvious obstruction of views
     
     
  #5771  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 7:23 PM
MichaelS's Avatar
MichaelS MichaelS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyc_engineer View Post
Those have bothered me everyday for the last 3 years. Apparently the architects did a "sunlight analysis" on the piers and determined it would be too sunny causing a greenhouse effect and would necessitate increasing the cooling load so they put in these panels to control the amount of light coming in...what they failed to account for was the obvious obstruction of views
Couldn't they have just tinted the windows?
     
     
  #5772  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 7:54 PM
yyc_engineer's Avatar
yyc_engineer yyc_engineer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Somewhere between OOL and MCY
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelS View Post
Couldn't they have just tinted the windows?
Apparently it was also cheaper than full glazing.

In other exciting news, after three years of hard work, I will finally be getting to enjoy the fruits of my labour when I fly out of the International Terminal next Monday am. I'll have to be sure to drink two full glasses of water before going to through security (or bring an empty bottle with me) and hopefully I can figure out this whole Call To Gate thing..maybe I should watch the youtube video.
     
     
  #5773  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 8:21 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyc_engineer View Post
Apparently the architects did a "sunlight analysis" on the piers and determined it would be too sunny causing a greenhouse effect and would necessitate increasing the cooling load so they put in these panels to control the amount of light coming in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelS View Post
Couldn't they have just tinted the windows?
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyc_engineer View Post
Apparently it was also cheaper than full glazing.
Boggles my mind that infrastructure worth "billions" would skimp out on something like this. They should have either tinted, or implemented a mechanism that created a shading effect as and when required. In this fashion, there would have been a counter savings during winter months when the "greenhouse effect" of sun coming in the windows would actually reduce the heating load.
     
     
  #5774  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 10:11 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,407
I should probably add that despite all the negativity, there's still plenty of reasons to like the new terminal. When the sun was rising it was pretty nice looking in there. Note the automatic blinds screening the lower half where the passengers would be.

     
     
  #5775  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 10:29 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 5,047
I don't recall hearing this before so maybe this has been answered already. Is there any reason a person cannot clear security at one of the other checkpoints and then take the YYC Link or whatever it's called to the international hall? I understand transborder would likely not be possible but a friend was told by CATSA that it would not be an issue to clear in A for example and then head over to the E/International gates.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
     
     
  #5776  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 11:19 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon View Post
Is there any reason a person cannot clear security at one of the other checkpoints and then take the YYC Link or whatever it's called to the international hall?
As of 14 days ago, anyone can with a BP for D or E departure can use the D/E link connections desk located airside.

CATSA has never had a problem with allowing pax to clear A or C with a D BP. If the agent did have a problem it was likely just an information warning that you are clearing security at a suboptimal location.

For 10 days, the airport authority instituted a ban on YYC origin pax go through the connecting door between C and D located just beyond the D/E link terminus station. No official reason was given for the ban but this has now been removed.

There are three wild rumors regarding the reason for the ban.
(1) CATSA or Commissionaire workforce planning was out of alignment and the easiest solution was to force people to clear at their intended checkpoint.
(2) A computer system used by the commissionaires to prove that pax could gain access to D and E airside areas did not included YYC origin pax, so the commissionaires refused entry.
(3) YYC Airport signed a head lease agreement with Nuance Duty Free that required all YYC origin pax to walk through their facilities. When Nuance duty free saw that a material number of pax were not going through their shop as the pax cleared security elsewhere in the terminal, Nuance enforced the contract language with YYCAA.

My money is on door 3 being the cause for the temporary ban.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.
     
     
  #5777  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2016, 12:32 AM
Bokimon's Avatar
Bokimon Bokimon is offline
Master and Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: CALGARY
Posts: 1,887
That was a very good read and observations. Though the public ground side does look pretty nice I guess there's some lessons learned session that yycaa needs to hear. Especially in the coming months after some data is collected and things are more or less running hum and most of the pax have hopefully gotten used to the facility.

I'm pretty supportive with call to gate and I am not bothered with the water fountain issue as I don't personally use this myself but for many others it's a big deal and for the airport authority to come out as cleverly scheming something to get some money out of the travelling public, wouldn't this be considered unethical? If something like this even exist or is acknowledged in a business environment at this kind of scale.

If also alot of the gate seating complaints stem from the sterile way that post security was designed including the central node, with limited or blocked viewing opportunities & other amenities for example, I could see how people would ignore or not even realize what yyc thought was a great design of public space and they would not be drawn to the experience this new yyc is supposed to provide and thus resulting in a flawed or failed design or a poorly executed interpretation of what they thought their vision was supposed to be. I think a few of you have already hinted at this pages back.
A 1 billion dollars+ worth of design vision missing the mark? I sincerely hope that YYCAA isn't just twaddling their thumbs scheming the next clever move to indiscreetly get more $$ of the public and actually tweak this properly so these flaws can be fixed.
On a bottom of the list spotters standpoint, hurry up and build a new official spotting area!

The YVR comparison is pretty good with all the organic elements in play to really create an oasis of sorts in their international terminal. It is truly beautiful in there and the accolades they earn from the likes of skytrax and condenast etc is well deserved. The next step up would be the likes of SIN or even DEL (who also opened their huge new terminal in the last few years designed by SOM) but we can only wish for that kind of vision for the next airport that undergoes a massive expansion someday.. YOW, YHZ or YUL perhaps?

On another topic, next year is the 150th birthday for our country which most of you will know park admission will be waived. Could we expect a surge of asian tourism coming to our city like in past years? Those of you who remember may recall visits from ANA, JAL and KE. On some occasions two flights happening on the same day.
The japanese have even brought in their loaded 747's in the past, KE now has both the 748 and the A388 and I actually would dare to believe that a possibility does exist that under summer charter circumstances, they cold potentially deploy a whalejet to yyc. (Besides the long hoped for diversion like a BA that was oh soo close a few weeks back)
Hopefully there is some aggressive marketing being planned directed at Asia and of course Europe too.
__________________
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram &
Bokimon- on Flickr for SSP local & Travel coverage.
Architecture, Aviation, Scenery, Skylines
     
     
  #5778  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2016, 1:27 AM
Johnny Aussie's Avatar
Johnny Aussie Johnny Aussie is offline
G'day
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 4,467
October stats

http://www.yyc.com/en-us/media/factsfigures/passengerstatistics.aspx

Positive growth for October in all categories except transborder:

Overall up 1.1% YTD up 1.4%
Domestic up 1.2% YTD up 2.0%
Transborder down 1.8% YTD down 3.6%
International up 8.2% YTD up 7.7%
     
     
  #5779  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2016, 2:09 PM
Bigtime's Avatar
Bigtime Bigtime is offline
Very tall. Such Scrape.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 17,727
Hainan switching to the A332 effective September 2, 2017 (am I reading that effective date right?).

9 more seats than the 788.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airl...hanges-as-of-30nov16/?platform=hootsuite
     
     
  #5780  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2016, 2:49 PM
H.E.Pennypacker's Avatar
H.E.Pennypacker H.E.Pennypacker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,941
Used the new terminal a week and a half ago travelling to/from Mexico.

The lack of a Tim Hortons after you get through security is unCanadian and disappointing.

Seriously though, looks really nice but I didn't like that there wasn't a water fountain either as I usually bring my own empty bottle to fill up. A minor inconvenience. The seating scheme is a bit weird too. I did like the shuttle service. Coming back I was a fan of the set up to get through customs.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:12 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.