Calgary International Airport II

[Cage]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Possibly dumb question (because I don't know much about airports) ...

Other than for trans-border where the US customs are housed in Calgary, is there really any major reason why international flights are segregated from domestic travel?

Also, would it not make sense to have international/trans-border in the middle of the airport, instead of on one end? Obviously not easy to change, but just a thought. This is basically how it was, and I think there were benefits that some may not have registered ("you don't realize what you got till it's gone" scenario).

A very good question.

International departures is segregated from domestic departures because of duty free sales. If domestic and international are combined, the duty free proprietor must deliver the goods to your aircraft door. If the whole concourse is international only, the duty free operator can give you the goods like any other establishment. On the odd chance that your international flight gets cancelled after you make duty free purchase, the traveler must see CBSA and potentially pay duty and other taxes on their purchase. In most cases unless CBSA sees a pattern of cancelled flights, pac are sent on their way without further charge.

Putting international and transborder operations in the middle of the terminal complex makes sense until the central processor facilities (checkin, security, pre-clearance, CBSA) need expansion. it is very time consuming to build an new domestic terminal area and then renovate the old terminal to expand the international operations.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Possibly dumb question (because I don't know much about airports) ...

Other than for trans-border where the US customs are housed in Calgary, is there really any major reason why international flights are segregated from domestic travel?

Makes it possible for passengers (hypothetically, at least) to transit from international-to-transborder and vice-versa without going through Canadian customs/immigration, or at least with a "cursory" check. And international-international of course, though the current destinations from Calgary make that awfully unlikely.

e.g., if a passenger from Denver wanted to go to Beijing, there are no non-stop flights (as far as I know). Do they really care if they make a stop in Seattle or Calgary? (ignoring all other complicating factors on that particular question... just saying "on geography alone" )

(This is a pretty weak case in Calgary, but it's there. On a similar note, Air Canada tries to capture US passengers though Toronto for transatlantic and through Vancouver for transpacific flights.)

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Cage

A very good question.

International departures is segregated from domestic departures because of duty free sales. If domestic and international are combined, the duty free proprietor must deliver the goods to your aircraft door. If the whole concourse is international only, the duty free operator can give you the goods like any other establishment. On the odd chance that your international flight gets cancelled after you make duty free purchase, the traveler must see CBSA and potentially pay duty and other taxes on their purchase. In most cases unless CBSA sees a pattern of cancelled flights, pac are sent on their way without further charge.

Putting international and transborder operations in the middle of the terminal complex makes sense until the central processor facilities (checkin, security, pre-clearance, CBSA) need expansion. it is very time consuming to build an new domestic terminal area and then renovate the old terminal to expand the international operations.

Thanks!

I've seen other airports with expansive duty free where in my mind this segregation really makes sense, but in Calgary, I wondering if duty free provides enough of a revenue stream for the additional logistics, direct and indirect costs. The only places I've purchased anything at duty free are Dubai and London UK. While I've not visited the new terminal in Calgary yet, I can't imagine anything of that scale. Additionally, I've always found north American duty free to be a rip job.

[msmariner]

Did anyone else chuckle when he complained about the distance passengers have to walk between domestic and international/US connections in Calgary. He says people might choose other airports (ie.. YVR) over YYC. Has he walked from domestic to US departures in YVR? It's at least as long as YYC and there isn't a shuttle option there.
He seems to be stretching some facts a bit.

[casper]

Originally Posted by msmariner

Did anyone else chuckle when he complained about the distance passengers have to walk between domestic and international/US connections in Calgary. He says people might choose other airports (ie.. YVR) over YYC. Has he walked from domestic to US departures in YVR? It's at least as long as YYC and there isn't a shuttle option there.
He seems to be stretching some facts a bit.

In Vancouver, getting from WestJet domestic to International is accomplished using moving sidewalks for part of the trip. Transboarder is a bit of a stretch. Air Canada has the best domestic location in YVR in this regard.

It has been a couple years since I have transited from domestic to Transboarder or International at YYZ-Terminal 3. Last time I did it in Terminal-1 was a few months ago and it is a very long walk.

YYC is not that bad. You also get to feel like a kid ridding the amusement cart.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by googspecial

Not YYC related, but a question for those who have done a transit through Taipei Taoyuan Airport - I have 2 hours (providing there is no delay) from a flight from YVR to switch Terminals to carry on to SGN with China Airlines. How rushed will I be? I'm assuming I'll have to go through security again, just wondering if I'll have enough time to get some food at least.

(I noticed on another thread there is a poster who said they are there now)

I'm afraid I didn't fly through Taoyuan so I can't tell you. I travelled through Taipei Songshan as it was much more centrally located.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Air Canada 77W arriving on runway 29 thanks to the Chinook winds yesterday, operating YYZ-YYC. Photo credit to Andrew Ganong.


https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.1052936104818108&type=1

Great shot. But what the heck is a 77W doing operating YYZ-YYC? A bit big for this route, isn't it?

[McMurph]

Originally Posted by Acey

It's a regular occurrence, less so now than in the last couple years but still not uncommon. What is somewhat uncommon now is a 77W landing on runway 29, hence this photo.

How often is anything landing on 29 or 11 anymore?

I saw what I suspect was a Nav Can CRJ(?) coming in on 11 the other day before pulling off to the south, as if to exit on Deerfoot. Such fun, particularly given the active traffic on 35L

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by McMurph

How often is anything landing on 29 or 11 anymore?

I saw what I suspect was a Nav Can CRJ(?) coming in on 11 the other day before pulling off to the south, as if to exit on Deerfoot. Such fun, particularly given the active traffic on 35L

29 gets used once the winds start exceeding crosswind components for the parallels. So the chinook winds the last few days have led to ops on 29 and 26.

11 does have a proper ILS now, and I have seen it in use when we get some funky easterly winds but it is much rarer than 29 ops.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Cage

A very good question.

International departures is segregated from domestic departures because of duty free sales. If domestic and international are combined, the duty free proprietor must deliver the goods to your aircraft door. If the whole concourse is international only, the duty free operator can give you the goods like any other establishment. On the odd chance that your international flight gets cancelled after you make duty free purchase, the traveler must see CBSA and potentially pay duty and other taxes on their purchase. In most cases unless CBSA sees a pattern of cancelled flights, pac are sent on their way without further charge.

Putting international and transborder operations in the middle of the terminal complex makes sense until the central processor facilities (checkin, security, pre-clearance, CBSA) need expansion. it is very time consuming to build an new domestic terminal area and then renovate the old terminal to expand the international operations.

That is a good question. However, it's not a great answer. I mean, I think you are mostly right that it is purely for US customs and duty free, but that those aren't really great practices to build our entire air travel infrastructure around, especially duty free which is a bazaar loop hole that makes no sense to me. Would 5% sales tax really deter business-class Americans from parting with their CAD while they are confined to an airport? It sounds like one of those stupid customs that strikes a balance between ubiquity and only seldom effecting our lives, so we normalize it and lack the interest to change it.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

29 gets used once the winds start exceeding crosswind components for the parallels. So the chinook winds the last few days have led to ops on 29 and 26.

11 does have a proper ILS now, and I have seen it in use when we get some funky easterly winds but it is much rarer than 29 ops.

We also use it for arrivals overnight from 11:00PM to 6:00AM. Arriving from the north on the 17s is the first choice, but since we have a north wind most of the time and departing to the north on the 35s is the preference overnight, we end up using the second choice for arrivals, Runway 29. Our normal overnight mode is landing Runway 29, and departing either Runway 35L or Runway 35R from taxiway Sierra intersection (which is north of the arrival path of Runway 29 aircraft).

If the wind is from the south we will be on the 17's overnight in some sort of combination.

[Suburgatory]

So with the comment of perhaps Westjet and Air Canada switch A & C concourses because Westjet has "more" connections, what would be the implications of mixing?

Could you have both airline's flights with high connections at C, and low connections at A?

I assume the first negative would be spreading staffing out and the other would be passenger confusion as to which area to go to. But if A, B & C were all interconnected post security you could enter at C for a flight at A.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

So with the comment of perhaps Westjet and Air Canada switch A & C concourses because Westjet has "more" connections, what would be the implications of mixing?

Could you have both airline's flights with high connections at C, and low connections at A?

I assume the first negative would be spreading staffing out and the other would be passenger confusion as to which area to go to. But if A, B & C were all interconnected post security you could enter at C for a flight at A.

As someone who regularly does connections in Calgary please don't do this.

If I have a tight connection in Calgary it is usually Domestic to Domestic. This makes those worse.

I think WestJet is better off bumping up the Domestic to International minium connection time and leaving domestic cut off alone rather that having to bump both.

[Tobuz]

If the biggest problem for WestJet is getting connecting passengers across the big distance between A and D/E (and the fact that the capacity of the Link transit system is inadequate) ... why not solve it by using those big buses that have been running to/from AC's turboprop flights for the past few years?

Pull gate A17 or one of its immediate neighbours out of use. Pull gate 70 out of use. Make them both bus access bridges, and run those big buses constantly between the two -- directly linking the A hammerhead and the D/E Connections entrance. Fast, direct connections with lots of capacity, all post-security. And it would relieve pressure off of that frequently overtaxed Link system.

It would work exactly like at ORD where there's a frequent bus between the E and C concourses, solely to make connections quick and easy for passengers of one airline (UA). There, it gives passengers a fast and easy option if they don't want to do the long walk plus underground tunnel.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Nick

We also use it for arrivals overnight from 11:00PM to 6:00AM. Arriving from the north on the 17s is the first choice, but since we have a north wind most of the time and departing to the north on the 35s is the preference overnight, we end up using the second choice for arrivals, Runway 29. Our normal overnight mode is landing Runway 29, and departing either Runway 35L or Runway 35R from taxiway Sierra intersection (which is north of the arrival path of Runway 29 aircraft).

If the wind is from the south we will be on the 17's overnight in some sort of combination.

Ah yes I forgot about the overnight ops, I've landed on 29 arriving on the AC red eye back from Maui.

[hoboman27]

http://calgaryherald.com/business/local-...go-down-fighting-to-prevent-unionization
WestJet CEO Saretsky will 'go down fighting' to prevent unionization

The airline is now in the market looking for additional used Boeing 767s to add to its current fleet of four, Saretsky said. Though he did not say how many planes the company is looking for, he said the first could arrive as early as spring and be in service within 8 to 12 months.

In addition, WestJet is in talks with both Boeing and Airbus for the provision of brand-new wide-body aircraft — either 787s or A330s — with a targeted delivery date as early as late 2018

Saretsky said WestJet has grown so much in its 21-year history that there is no more room to expand domestically with its fleet of single-aisle 737s, and only limited opportunities remaining for its regional airline, Encore. He said that is the reason WestJet has its sights set on long-haul flying.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

That is a good question. However, it's not a great answer. I mean, I think you are mostly right that it is purely for US customs and duty free, but that those aren't really great practices to build our entire air travel infrastructure around, especially duty free which is a bazaar loop hole that makes no sense to me. Would 5% sales tax really deter business-class Americans from parting with their CAD while they are confined to an airport? It sounds like one of those stupid customs that strikes a balance between ubiquity and only seldom effecting our lives, so we normalize it and lack the interest to change it.

Separating international and domestic operations is the standard across the world. In many airports, separate terminal buildings are used. In other airports, domestic operations occur on the middle level while international operations occur on the upper level.

In the future, YYC will be able to participate in the Travel With Out Visa program. The hangup is with the federal government. Currently YYZ T1, YYC, and YVR are the only airports with the required terminal configuration to allow for TWOV.

YUL and YYZ T3 lack separation between domestic and international departure passengers. YUL used to have a separating wall, but has since decided to remove the barrier and allow domestic and international departing passengers to mingle. Without greatly reducing the gate utilization, it is not possible to reconfigure YYZ T3 to accommodate TWOV.

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

(1) Could you have both airline's flights with high connections at C, and low connections at A?

(2) So with the comment of perhaps Westjet and Air Canada switch A & C concourses because Westjet has "more" connections, what would be the implications of mixing?

(1) Short answer, no.

Since the terminal opened, AC has the lease for all concourse C gates with the exception of the ground loading gates used by CMA. There is also a court approved Transport Canada process whereby airlines get right of first refusal on their existing gates at the end of the lease. The Transport Canada provision was tested in court in 2004-05. Westjet attempted to get rights to YYZ T1 ahead of AC. The case was heard in federal court as part of the Air Canada CCAA (bankruptcy) proceedings. The GTAA was onside with WestJet, but AC won the day in court.

Here is the best that Westjet and CAA (Calgary Airport Authority) could do:
- fully renovate B concourse and build a regional aircraft operation.
- remove the regional aircraft provisions on C concourse and institute a mainline aircraft only provision into standard operating procedure manual.
- Force the 35 AC mainline domestic flights onto 6 gates at C concourse. (Transport Canada minimum gate utilization is 6 flights per day).
- Transfer four gates on C concourse for Westjet mainline operations.
- Permanently transfer gates 70/71/72/73 to primary domestic operations and assign them to Westjet for their exclusive use.

Even doing the above, both Westjet and CAA would likely windup in court against AC because they are materially negatively affecting AC business. Based on the 2004 YYZ T1 case, WestJet and CAA would be liable for breaking the lease between AC and CAA.

The second option is for Westjet to pay AC in order to get AC out of the Concourse C lease. I would expect any such settlement to be way north of $100 million dollars. How much did Cadillac Fairview pay Sears to get out Chinook Centre? Also consider that Sears Chinook is way less important than AC YYC domestic operations.

(2) Mixing AC and WS domestic operations would mean more walking for all passengers. The checkin counters for each airline would not be moving and neither would the preboard screening. Once airside, all pax would have farther distances to get to their gate unless the pax happen to fly in or out of a close in gate.

Originally Posted by Tobuz

If the biggest problem for WestJet is getting connecting passengers across the big distance between A and D/E (and the fact that the capacity of the Link transit system is inadequate) ... why not solve it by using those big buses that have been running to/from AC's turboprop flights for the past few years?

It would work exactly like at ORD where there's a frequent bus between the E and C concourses, solely to make connections quick and easy for passengers of one airline (UA).

UA operates the ORD bus exclusively for their passengers. I have taken that bus many times and each time the UA agent at the lineup checks for a UA boarding pass. They dont care if the connecting BP if for a gate on the other side of the terminal, just that the connection is for UA. For example, you can ride the bus from E concourse to C concourse with a BP for B concourse (although walking between E and B is much faster and more direct). However you cannot ride the bus to an AC operated flight on E concourse.

westjet could do the same as UA and operate a bus between A and the D/E link station. It would require the CAA to modify an elevator system and add stairs at both stations.

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by Cage

Lengthy thorough helpful response

Thanks for the knowledgeable response! I knew there would be a ton of reasons mixing AC and WestJet would be a bad idea and why I asked the question.

[hoboman27]

Cage do you work for AC, WS, or the Airport? You seem to know a lot about this stuff. Hey you could be Saretsky trolling the forum! That would be funny.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

Thanks for the knowledgeable response! I knew there would be a ton of reasons mixing AC and WestJet would be a bad idea and why I asked the question.

Your welcome.

Originally Posted by hoboman27

Cage do you work for AC, WS, or the Airport? You seem to know a lot about this stuff. Hey you could be Saretsky trolling the forum! That would be funny.

My old man worked for AC, both at the airport and at headquarters. He retired as a network schedule manager.

I have done management consulting and corporate finance projects for three Canadian airlines. But I have never pulled a paycheque from an airline.

Mostly I enjoy flying premium cabin for cheap, that requires an intimate and understanding of tariff regulations and airline systems and operating procedures.

Originally Posted by Acey

Can you expand on this? Just in reference to the transborder gates at YEG that run only 1 or 2 flights a day.

TC minimum gate utilization regulations is a mechanism to deter airlines from sitting on gates to prevent competition. The regulation predates common use equipment and goes back to the days of AC, CP, PWA, Nordair, Calm Air, nationair, etc.

Before Arinc muse and the Sita solution, airlines had to hardwire their gate terminals into the mainframe system. This meant that gates would have one terminal for each airline that used the specific gate. Consequently to save time and money, gates were assigned to each airline.

In YEG, AC had four gates in the north wing and CP had 3 gates in the middle followed by 2-3 gates that were assigned to US airlines. However only the gates assigned to AC and CP would have a terminal to access the Departure Control Systems. The US airline Out stations would not have DCS access.

Let's say a new domestic airline wants to start service out of YEG. Each of CP and AC have 15-18 flights per day, but AC has one more gate. Under the TC formula for gate use, AC would have give up one gate to the new entrant because they were below minimum standards for gate use. Alternately, AC increase the number of daily flights to meet minimum atac standards and thus prevent the new entrant from gain access to prime gate locations.