Calgary International Airport II

[YYCspotter]

Its appears AC has decided to put the 77W on the LHR route from June 1st - September 16th. So for the peak summer season FRA will be the 77L and LHR the 77W.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Sure... and if you're in regular Y, going mainline->rouge is an, ahem, "enhancement".

Agreed on rouge minus (R- or Y-) versus mainline. However I always buy up to the E+, preferred, or R+ seats when sitting in economy. I value the extra space and am willing to pay for it.

Originally Posted by Canadian74

This could still be an issue with the CSeries, didn't BBD say 18-19" wide Y seats?

There are a couple of seating options on the CS100/300. The configuration is always 5 across. There is an option put forward by BBD to have the middle seats at 19.1" while the aisle and window seats are at 17.5" on the D-E-F side of the aircraft. However Swiss and others have chosen to maintain 18.1" for all three seats.

The difference between the E90 and the CS300 is in the potential missions flown by the CS300.

With the explosive growth at YVR, AC has options to further develop the transborder options. The smaller and more economical CS300 is better suited for these missions.

YUL could do the same with CS300 compared to YVR, Connect the dots with a powerful secondary market product.

In YYZ, the CS300 can do larger frequent eastern seaboard markets like BOS, LGA, EWR, ATL, etc.

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Regarding OGG, there are probably not enough 767s at mainline to cover the route anymore. It seems to be coming from the YYZ-DUB route, as it is being transferred to a mainline A330 on October 29th.

With specific reference to the YYC-OGG route, there is enough mainline 763 fleet to operate the route. The trouble is what happens under the scenario where YYC-NRT goes 787.

There is a YYC avgeek dream where AC place 1-2 rouge 763 at YYC to mess with WS' day. CUN, MBJ, LAS, PHX, OGG, and HNL all served couple times per week would really do a number on WS winter time profitability. This is a bigger concern for WS (and opportunity for AC) if the holes have been plugged in YYZ.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

AC operated the longest route of any E190. YYZ-SEA. They also used them regularly from YUL/YOW to the Caribbean. I don't think range was an issue. The E190 is a very capable aircraft.

Funny, but hardly true. Rouge is a huge success for AC. There is no denying it. And there is only one reason why that is. The planes are full, day in, day out ! Passengers keep coming back for more. No one seems to care about any of the issues you mention, as long as the price is competitive. All Canada-Hawaii flights were going to get rouged. It was inevitable.

YYZ-SEA in the E90 was a flying gas can. In the winter the route was frequently seat restricted due to winds. The alternate was to fly pax up to YVR to get to their final destination. However the route was frequently not full enough to worry about load restrictions. The mainline 319 is a good airplane for this route and the CS300 will be fantastic.

Agreed on Rouge being a YYuuuuugggge success for AC. Rouge has impacted the overall north american airline market, especially the TransAt routes. The american investment advisors are start to attribute rouge as contributing to the glut of seats on North America to Europe.

[MMMBeer]

One more thing I noticed about YYC-OGG going Rouge in 17/18: outbound and inbound flights are now both day flights, much, much better than the mainline redeye return.

Have done the redeye twice, and the shortish flight time made for uncomfortable sleep. Even in business class pods (first world problems I know). New day flight return makes that a non-issue.

On another note: CBC is reporting WS YEG-LGW and YWG-LGW are getting cut back for summer?? Surprised no one has commented yet.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Acey

We talked about that so long ago you probably didn't go back far enough. Might not have been in here though, definitely in the YEG thread.

IIRC WS 1/2 were supposed to be daily for May and June, now only 6x/week with Monday service being sent to the bin. Its why there are 2 WS 763s side by side on a facebook YYC spotters page today.

I haven't the chance to look at whether the YWG-LGW or YEG-LGW ops have been pruned as well. September still has WS1/2 going daily for Sept and Oct, but those flights may get pruned closer to flight date.

One thing is for certain, the YYC-LGW flights have low price points $350++ to leave in one week in early June and $588++ to leave in first week of July. June comparables on AC are $785++ and for July $685++. All flights one way, Base fare, and do not include taxes, surcharge, or fuel surcharges.

[MMMBeer]

Originally Posted by Acey

We talked about that so long ago you probably didn't go back far enough. Might not have been in here though, definitely in the YEG thread.

Oh I've been following the discussion, I'm a regular lurker. CBC's story made it sound like these are new cuts though.

[casper]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Oh I've been following the discussion, I'm a regular lurker. CBC's story made it sound like these are new cuts though.

I think this is more of a case of CBC has been to busy covering AC customer complaints. They finally had a short break to go report on WestJet. Now they can go back to reporting on AC bumping or cancelling tickets in the name of fraud protection.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

One more thing I noticed about YYC-OGG going Rouge in 17/18: outbound and inbound flights are now both day flights, much, much better than the mainline redeye return.

Have done the redeye twice, and the shortish flight time made for uncomfortable sleep. Even in business class pods (first world problems I know). New day flight return makes that a non-issue.

I loved the redeye return from Maui, gave you almost one more full day to enjoy before returning to reality. Totally worth a restless overnight flight in my opinion. And I say that after doing the flights with a under 2yo on my lap, and another flight where my wife almost broke her arm before boarding, and the then 1-1/2yo decided to vomit a few times during the flight. Still worth it.

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

I loved the redeye return from Maui, gave you almost one more full day to enjoy before returning to reality. Totally worth a restless overnight flight in my opinion. And I say that after doing the flights with a under 2yo on my lap, and another flight where my wife almost broke her arm before boarding, and the then 1-1/2yo decided to vomit a few times during the flight. Still worth it.

I was thinking the same! I loved the redeye for an extra few hours on the beach.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

W pattern? YVR-OGG-YYC-OGG-YVR. Or Are they going to have a 763 do YVR-YYC-YVR?

I don't think AC is going to do a "W" pattern. The YYC Flight arrives into OGG at 11:55am and departs at 1:15pm while the YVR flight arrives into OGG at 10:05pm and departs at 11:35pm. There would be a lot of down time in order to accomplish a meaningless W pattern.

The AC YYC-OGG schedule is Su, W, F with a full day of flying for the aircraft. This opens up possibilities for AC to base a rouge 763 in YYC for the winter. Way back in the day AC used to operate YYC-MBJ on Mondays. They could do YYC-CUN on Sat and YYC-LAS on Thursday. The aircraft would return to YVR base on Thursday as then both the LAS morning flights from YYC & YVR would be 763 equipment. Tuesdays would be a non flying day for the YYC 763.

Putting one Rouge 763 into YYC for the winter will seriously screw with the competition, all of WS, TS, and WG will be impacted by the above schedule if it were to come to fruition.

The WS schedule YYC-OGG is M, Th, F, Sa. Friday morning both OGG services operate. That's 500 additional pax for CATSA to handle. I'm going to bring a lawn chair, Tim's take 12 coffee thermos and dozen donuts. Sit below the big E and watch the comedy show at Checkpoint E. I might even get a mobile coffee stand and sell small coffee and donut for $5, I will have a captive audience of pax waiting to get through security.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

I loved the redeye return from Maui, gave you almost one more full day to enjoy before returning to reality. Totally worth a restless overnight flight in my opinion.

The new schedule opens up the possibility of doing a single day YYC-OGG-YYC mileage run. If done in Rouge Premium and credited to UA mileage plus the status mile yields would be 9,300 PQM (Premier Qualifying Miles). AC is known to run Rouge Premium discounts to fill the cabin on slower week. Might be possible to get Premium Rouge for $1,200-1,600 all in.

The aircraft will be same plane, probably wont even leave the sterile area of the airport.

[MMMBeer]

Originally Posted by casper

I think this is more of a case of CBC has been to busy covering AC customer complaints. They finally had a short break to go report on WestJet. Now they can go back to reporting on AC bumping or cancelling tickets in the name of fraud protection.

Actually today's punching bag is Air Transat, with a non-story about how wet-leased aircraft from Flair flying to Mexico occasionally had to make fuel stops instead of being non-stop flights. The horror. Gabor Lukacs of course gets asked for his comments.

I know I shouldn't have but I read some of the comments after the CBC article - calls for "fraud" charges to be brought against TS made me finally close the browser window...

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Actually today's punching bag is Air Transat, with a non-story about how wet-leased aircraft from Flair flying to Mexico occasionally had to make fuel stops instead of being non-stop flights. The horror. Gabor Lukacs of course gets asked for his comments.

I know I shouldn't have but I read some of the comments after the CBC article - calls for "fraud" charges to be brought against TS made me finally close the browser window...

It does strike me as weird that they would intentionally file flight plans that they planned NOT to follow. I'd certainly find it very frustrating as a passenger to be sold one thing and get another; I don't think it should be up to the average consumer to check the range of the operating aircraft, the distance of the flight, and say, "Hmm, Martha, that's a heckuva stretch, it's gonna go tech stop, we'd better not buy that flight!"

[Cage]

Originally Posted by casper

I think this is more of a case of CBC has been to busy covering AC customer complaints. They finally had a short break to go report on WestJet. Now they can go back to reporting on AC bumping or cancelling tickets in the name of fraud protection.

My take is that the CBC has discovered their viewers are turned off by the vitriol towards the current world political climate, to the point it was affect the number eyeballs on CBC online. The CBC needed something that drive clicks to their website and found their answer in winter sun destination travel horror stories. Air Canada had a great Q1 and provided a lot of fodder for the CBC journos.

The other tie in for the CBC was the impeding announcement of the pax bill of rights by Min Garneau. However the last March announcement got pushed by
The UA reaccomodation of the good doctor Dao.

The CBC was probably hopeful that continual coverage of air pax rights would push the govt into a regulatory regime like Euro zone EU 261/2004 or even the USA pax bill of rights. However the govt has kept true to form from the CTA administration and will only include as pax rights provisions of the existing AC and WS tariff. So for those watching at home, the new Canadian pax bill of rights will codify lost bag compensation at $800, involuntary denied boarding at 4x base airfare to max of $1200, etc.

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Gabor Lukacs of course gets asked for his comments.

I know I shouldn't have but I read some of the comments after the CBC article - calls for "fraud" charges to be brought against TS made.

Lukacs works for free and doesn't charge for public appearances on CBC. Further he stays true to form and always sides with the customer, so the david vs Goliath story line fits perfectly into his quotes. Other airline industry commentators will take a more balanced approach.

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

It does strike me as weird that they would intentionally file flight plans that they planned NOT to follow. I'd certainly find it very frustrating as a passenger to be sold one thing and get another.

It's the name of the game. A Canadian tradition in the charter biz is to file flight plans and announce routes that don't fit within the flight profile of available aircraft. At least the tech stop was contemplated. Prior to the introduction of an all widebody fleet at Wardair, their 727s would flame out on the taxiway at LGW and require a tow onto the apron and to the gate after attempting a nonstop from YYz.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Acey

Well it's completely legal and filing CUN-MSY-YEG would be refused, as stated.

If allowed, they'd likely have simply filed the stop but deceived the pax in the same manner.

Not that this really matters (deceiving the pax is more what makes me roll my eyes), but CBC says....

As for the Mexican authorities, they told CBC News there was no reason to file false flight plans: It is not against Mexican regulations to make a technical stop in the U.S., so there was no reason to play the original "Mexican game."

[yyc_engineer]

I'm sick and tired of CBC slandering Canadian companies for no reason. Lost a bunch of money on my TD stock after they did the "news" article about their sales practices and now they are going after AT over a non-issue. /rant

I flew back from CUN on a (Air Transat) Canadian North -400 last year and and was actually hoping for a tech stop in MCI or MSY to check out a new airfield. But I'm sure I would be in the minority of people onboard who felt that way.

In positive news, this is happening tonight! ETA 10:20pm.

[rotten42]

Originally Posted by yyc_engineer

I'm sick and tired of CBC slandering Canadian companies for no reason. Lost a bunch of money on my TD stock after they did the "news" article about their sales practices and now they are going after AT over a non-issue. /rant

I flew back from CUN on a (Air Transat) Canadian North -400 last year and and was actually hoping for a tech stop in MCI or MSY to check out a new airfield. But I'm sure I would be in the minority of people onboard who felt that way.

In positive news, this is happening tonight! ETA 10:20pm.

I can't fault people who are upset because they have been sold on the premise of a direct flight and then not ends up having it that way. Clearly AT knows it isn't but don't care enough to inform their passengers. It may not be a non-issue to you but for many it it is rightfully so.

[Fuzz]

It's a bit of false advertising, becuase if you are comparing between them and Westjet, and the flights say they take the same time, but in reality the Air Transat is an hour longer, most people would pick the Westjet one.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's a bit of false advertising, becuase if you are comparing between them and Westjet, and the flights say they take the same time, but in reality the Air Transat is an hour longer, most people would pick the Westjet one.

But if it is weather dependent, 11 times - really, should you have to flag that issue?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

But if it is weather dependent, 11 times - really, should you have to flag that issue?

The article made it sound like it was generally expected they would need to make the stop, unless conditions were ideal. But they weren't to tell passengers until the flight was underway. That sounds deceptive to me.

[rotten42]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The article made it sound like it was generally expected they would need to make the stop, unless conditions were ideal. But they weren't to tell passengers until the flight was underway. That sounds deceptive to me.

Exactly......like anything in business it all comes down to managing the client's expectations. In this case they didn't do that at all.