HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6521  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 1:48 AM
The Chemist's Avatar
The Chemist The Chemist is offline
恭喜发财!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 中国上海/Shanghai
Posts: 8,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoflyzone View Post
Just because TS can't make something work doesn't mean AC can't. TS couldn't make BUD work. AC seems to be doing fine on the route. TS pulled out of IST a few years ago, but that didn't stop AC from launching it soon after. (Now granted IST has been canceled, but that is entirely due to political/economical reasons out of AC's control.)

AC interlines with AF at CDG. That opens up connection possibilities for the route, a privilege TS didn't have.

I agree with you that Sartor could have simply been blowing hot air, but assuming he wasn't, the only logical conclusion is AC. His timeframe of 3-4 years pretty much guarantees it. That's too close to the B789 deliveries for WS to be it.
Are you sure that AC would interline with AF? They're not in the same alliance, after all.
__________________
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature." - Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
     
     
  #6522  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 4:34 AM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Chemist View Post
Are you sure that AC would interline with AF? They're not in the same alliance, after all.
Cross alliance interlining happens all the time.

Scroll down to "non star alliance interline partners". There must be 100 airlines listed there, including AF.

https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home...alliance-and-other-airline-partners.html
     
     
  #6523  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 4:35 AM
Lancaster's Avatar
Lancaster Lancaster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Chemist View Post
Are you sure that AC would interline with AF? They're not in the same alliance, after all.
According to AC's website, they do interline.

Johnny had a good point. It could be all smoke and mirrors for the microphones and cameras. However, if there is some validity in his statement, I would think it would have to be a route that has a high O&D component. If not, AC would just route the flights through one of YYZ, YUL or YVR.
     
     
  #6524  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 5:26 AM
Johnny Aussie's Avatar
Johnny Aussie Johnny Aussie is offline
G'day
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 4,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancaster View Post
According to AC's website, they do interline.

Johnny had a good point. It could be all smoke and mirrors for the microphones and cameras. However, if there is some validity in his statement, I would think it would have to be a route that has a high O&D component. If not, AC would just route the flights through one of YYZ, YUL or YVR.
I don't doubt his statement... it is just obvious that they would be pursuing additional routes... so just don't carried away on speculation.... he used the word pursuing..

YYC-CDG is still a pretty small market. I think we'd see AC rouge on YVR-CDG first.
     
     
  #6525  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 5:31 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie View Post
I don't doubt his statement... it is just obvious that they would be pursuing additional routes... so just don't carried away on speculation.... he used the word pursuing..

YYC-CDG is still a pretty small market. I think we'd see AC rouge on YVR-CDG first.
I thought YYC-CDG was one of the routes on Air Canada's map (the one I can never find)?
     
     
  #6526  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 11:19 AM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
Given the similarities of markets served by AF out of CDG and LH out of FRA,
The only market where AF is clearly ahead is Africa. LH serves 10 or so destinations in Africa from FRA. AF is nearly triple that from CDG. Dont think that has any impact on a potential YYC-CDG though, as the market from YYC to Africa can't be huge, save maybe to oil rich Nigeria, which LH already has covered.
     
     
  #6527  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 6:13 PM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
It is on there, yes... but it's not like there's any kind of firm timeline and one might assume that it's fairly far down the list of int'l expansion that AC is planning.



Yeah but AC already has a joint venture flight to a Europe megahub within their own alliance. Given the similarities of markets served by AF out of CDG and LH out of FRA, the interline connection advantage would be almost entirely negated. A potential YYC-CDG run for AC would be therefore more O&D based (lest it cannibalizes AC844) and face similar challenges to the now failed TS service.
If anything we are more likely to Munich. For Vancouver that was the second European hub served by Lufthansa-Air Canada under the joint venture.

AC already has Heathrow as point to connect onto non-star alliance airlines not served well through Germany. Can't see them adding Paris from Calgary. WestJet on the other hand would be an excellent fit for a flight to Paris.
     
     
  #6528  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 6:39 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoboman27 View Post
http://calgaryherald.com/business/local-...ess-tourist-traffic-to-yyc-say-officials

Sartor said there are a number of other new destinations the airport authority is currently pursuing, including another Asian route, one more to Europe, and a new U.S. destination. He said Calgary-based WestJet’s plans to start flying wide-body jets internationally also bodes well for the future connectivity of YYC.

“One way or another, we will get some amazing routes for our city over the next three or four years,” he said. “Of that I’m certain.”
New Asian Route

My estimation the new Asian route will be Beijing. AC still has plans for YYC-PEK if they can get commercially viable slots at PEK. The new slots would occur with the opening of Daxing Airport. AC's request for more PEK slots is a longstanding issue Chinese authorities and is known to Transport Canada.

WS has also requested China service. This further bolsters the Beijing (BJS is the city code) case in the following ways. WS may file for YYC-BJS. However if WS files for China exclusively through YVR, then AC's application would be seen as more novel and likely to get approved.

WRT the HU YYC-PEK issue. I expect HU to move off the route once Daxing re-arranges the whole China market.

Either with AC or WS, BJS is a lock for new service.

Another new Asian destination possibility is HKG through AC. 3x wk service using the 788. With a number of Dreamliner services graduating to larger equipment (BNE should be going to 789, DXB has gone to 77W). AC is code sharing with CX better than WS. With YVR-HKG becoming a hot mess with three airlines and nearly half dozen daily services.

New Europe

My wish (not so much of a estimate) is for YYC-MUC on LH. The 359 seat configuration is more amenable to Canada flying than the previous 333/343 combination. Alternately LH City Line Service would be an interesting trial.

I agree with nofly that CDG is a longshot.

New USA

A longshot but much needed new USA service is SJC. AC has been getting great results with YVR-SJC, the new route is very complementary to SFO and does not negatively impact services.

From my business friends in the IT industry, highway 101 is the problem with flying into SFO. It can take up to 2 hours in traffic to get to the silicon valley. The normal time is about 1 hour but the traffic can get backed up at anytime of the day. SJC is as 30 minute in peak hour traffic drive away from most of the major players.

If AC and UA are able to link up in a metal neutral comprehensive JV (like the TransAtlantic JV) for transborder and/or pacific; then UA would take back all of YYC-SFO and AC could do YYC-SJC 2x per day on the CR9 (note the AC CRA is being upgraded to CR9 capabilities and additional seats are being added to the existing fleet).

If the new USA destination is not part of Star Alliance, then I would hope for DTW for the international connections into Delta and Skyteam. DTW has double the number of international destinations on DL than MSP.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.
     
     
  #6529  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 7:40 PM
artvandelay's Avatar
artvandelay artvandelay is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The City of Cows
Posts: 1,670
I'd love to see YYC-HKG served by CX. I know YUC isn't a Oneworld Hun but wouldn't CX's codeshare partnerships with AC and WS make up for that? Or do they not have a suitable aircraft for the route?
     
     
  #6530  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 9:04 PM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cage View Post
My wish (not so much of a estimate) is for YYC-MUC on LH. The 359 seat configuration is more amenable to Canada flying than the previous 333/343 combination. Alternately LH City Line Service would be an interesting trial.
I agree with nofly that CDG is a longshot.
Problem with MUC is, you're cannibalizing your FRA flight. Sure, Southern Germany and Bavaria has some tourism draw, but surely the O&D to Paris is larger. So the point is, is YYC a mature enough market to Europe in order to justify service to both FRA and MUC? I don't know. YVR only recently got service to MUC, after all.

Also, if LH couldn't make FRA work, what are the chances they try MUC? One thing is for sure, be it CDG or MUC, this will be a summer seasonal flight only. In the case of CDG, it might even be a Rouge flight.
     
     
  #6531  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 10:34 PM
PPAR's Avatar
PPAR PPAR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 604
One factor that has not been mentioned yet is Brexit. In two years LON will be outside the EU, necessitating customs for onward flights into Europe. We will likely see an adjustment in all European traffic out of Canada. Quite possible MUN and CDG happen at the expense of LHR frequency.
     
     
  #6532  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 1:56 AM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPAR View Post
One factor that has not been mentioned yet is Brexit. In two years LON will be outside the EU, necessitating customs for onward flights into Europe. We will likely see an adjustment in all European traffic out of Canada. Quite possible MUN and CDG happen at the expense of LHR frequency.
The UK already requires customs for flights to the Schengen Area - the UK has independent border controls.
     
     
  #6533  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 2:13 AM
CrossedTheTracks CrossedTheTracks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoflyzone View Post
Problem with MUC is, you're cannibalizing your FRA flight. Sure, Southern Germany and Bavaria has some tourism draw, but surely the O&D to Paris is larger. So the point is, is YYC a mature enough market to Europe in order to justify service to both FRA and MUC? I don't know. YVR only recently got service to MUC, after all.

Also, if LH couldn't make FRA work, what are the chances they try MUC? One thing is for sure, be it CDG or MUC, this will be a summer seasonal flight only. In the case of CDG, it might even be a Rouge flight.
I'd be surprised if CDG didn't have stronger O&D than MUC, however MUC does give additional connections that FRA doesn't have. As a (nearly useless) anecdote, my next two European trips are likely to be Lviv and Trieste, which are both served by LH from MUC but not FRA. Would be nice if I could one-stop those via MUC, rather than 2 stops on the way there.

Of course, my 2 examples are no excuse for a market analysis, but I could imagine how MUC might be more useful to the AC/LH joint venture than AC going it alone to CDG.
__________________
"Skyscraper, skyscraper, scrape me some sky..." - Dennis Lee
     
     
  #6534  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 5:21 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper View Post
AC already has Heathrow as point to connect onto non-star alliance airlines not served well through Germany. Can't see them adding Paris from Calgary. WestJet on the other hand would be an excellent fit for a flight to Paris.
Air Canada has shown YYC-CDG to be a possibility for them. The map with that route on it has had most of the shown routes come to fruition.
     
     
  #6535  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 5:48 PM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cage View Post
New USA

A longshot but much needed new USA service is SJC. AC has been getting great results with YVR-SJC, the new route is very complementary to SFO and does not negatively impact services.

From my business friends in the IT industry, highway 101 is the problem with flying into SFO. It can take up to 2 hours in traffic to get to the silicon valley. The normal time is about 1 hour but the traffic can get backed up at anytime of the day. SJC is as 30 minute in peak hour traffic drive away from most of the major players.

If AC and UA are able to link up in a metal neutral comprehensive JV (like the TransAtlantic JV) for transborder and/or pacific; then UA would take back all of YYC-SFO and AC could do YYC-SJC 2x per day on the CR9 (note the AC CRA is being upgraded to CR9 capabilities and additional seats are being added to the existing fleet).

If the new USA destination is not part of Star Alliance, then I would hope for DTW for the international connections into Delta and Skyteam. DTW has double the number of international destinations on DL than MSP.
Speaking of YYC-SFO, it's staying at 2x daily for the winter schedule.

Last edited by thenoflyzone; Jun 18, 2017 at 6:05 PM.
     
     
  #6536  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 3:23 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,591
Main difference is more Economy Max seats. 1 less seat overall. I guess that extra yeild helps keep those extra engines turning, and are very useful for the winter extra long charters from Germany.

https://www.flyedelweiss.com/EN/destinations/Pages/map.aspx?&duration=15
     
     
  #6537  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 5:31 PM
outoftheice outoftheice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 914
Yesterday I arrived at the new International terminal as a passenger for the first time ever (typically I go through as air crew which is a completely different experience). All I can say is I don't know who the Calgary Airport has working for them but they obviously have zero idea on how humans behave and haven't bothered to take 5 minutes to stand and observe passengers arriving in the customs hall during a busy international arrival period. A few observations....

- Passengers connecting on to other flights are greeted by a giant purple wall and purple signs that say "Connections" and direct them to the appropriate lines in the custom hall. It works great. The problem is behind this is a small sign that says "Calgary" that gets completely lost because people's attention is focussed on the big connections signs. The majority of people who actually had Calgary as their destination stood around looking lost until the airport's "Ambassadors" directed them to the line up (myself included and I've been through the new terminal multiple times before).

- Once in the "Calgary" line, people are directed into an area that holds the CBSA automated machines that scan your passport and issue you a receipt based on your declaration card. There are several problems with this area.

The first is that the machines face 'forward' toward the line of custom booths that are between this area and the baggage claim. People get their receipts and naturally move forward towards the booths as they know their final destination lays beyond. Unfortunately you can't actually move forward from this area. There is a railing between the automated machines and the custom booths. What I saw happen time and time again was that the thirty or so people who were using the machines walked forward, hit the railing, looked around confused then realized they had to do a 180 degree U-turn and walk back through the next thirty people who had stepped forward to use the machines to reach the start of the line to see a CBSA agent.

A small effort has been made to mitigate this by placing arrows along the railing to direct people back around to the beginning of the line for the custom booths but of course these signs are at waist-height which means that they are below the tops of the automated machines, out of the natural line of vision for most people and have absolutely zero context attached to them that might help guide people. This ties in with the second issue of the area.

The second problem I saw with the CBSA area was the fact that the use of the automated machines is new to a large number of people. Once people were issued their receipts, they would stand with them in hand and look around lost, unsure of what the next step in the process was. Thankfully most found a CAA airport ambassador to ask but it meant people were occupying a CBSA automated machine that could have been processing the next traveller while the first traveller was looking around for help. There is no signage explaining the process to travellers and that is a major short-coming.

The cheap and easy solution of course to all these problems is improved signage and slight tweaks to the lay-out of the room that would dramatically improve the experience and speed up the process. My suggestions would be:

- Increase the size of the 'Calgary' sign so that it becomes a focal point. I would also suggest adding an images of the Calgary skyline to the sign as well as an outline of a suitcase to help capture people's attention and convey the message that if you're going to the city or collecting your bag, that is the line that you're meant to be in.

- Introduce a '1-2-3' sign system to help walk travellers through their CBSA experience. I saw this system used successfully in my journey through Heathrow and it could easily be applied in Calgary. Place signs that show travellers all of the steps they need to complete to go through the process, number them so they can easily follow along and then place signs that show where they currently are in the process and direct them to the next step. I would suggest the following:
#1 - picture of an automated CBSA machine - 'Complete customs declaration'
#2 - picture of a CBSA officer at desk - 'Show officer declaration'
#3 - picture of suitcase - 'Collect checked luggage'
#4 - exit sign + declaration card - 'Show officer declaration on exit'

- Turn the automated CBSA machines 180 degrees so they face the back of the room, away from the custom booths and towards the entrance for the line up for travellers to see the CBSA agents. Extend the line up for the automated CBSA machines so that the 180 degree U-turn people are currently making when encountering the railing is made for them. This allows people to walk forward to a free machine, complete the declaration, look up, walk forward to the #2 sign and the beginning of the line for the CBSA agents... a natural path forward in the eyes of the traveller even though they're being turned around in the room.

- Place all signage so that it's at least 6 feet in height and not at waist-level so it is visible to everyone.

- And of course last but not least, fix the water fountain problem. At Heathrow I counted 3 "drinking water" stations that included giant "drinking water" signs next to them between getting off the airplane and reaching the customs/terminal connections hall. I know CAA says they're working on this but the initial oversight still drives me nuts.

Okay, rant over. That felt better.
     
     
  #6538  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 11:51 PM
MMMBeer MMMBeer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 128
Not sure if this has been mentioned already (apologies if so): Cage, you called it. AC has contracted with the Aspire lounges in the new terminal for access for AC status and biz class passengers. Saves having to go Concourse C for lounge access.

Kind of a tossup to me: views are nicer in Aspire lounge, but food and booze (to me) is better in MLL. But for US departures I ain't clearing security twice just to access MLL.
     
     
  #6539  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2017, 12:39 PM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMMBeer View Post
Not sure if this has been mentioned already (apologies if so): Cage, you called it. AC has contracted with the Aspire lounges in the new terminal for access for AC status and biz class passengers. Saves having to go Concourse C for lounge access.

Kind of a tossup to me: views are nicer in Aspire lounge, but food and booze (to me) is better in MLL. But for US departures I ain't clearing security twice just to access MLL.
Last few times I have been in a domestic MLL, the food offering has been marginal compared to Aspire. Would prefer Premium lounges over the Swissport ones, but I find both better than MLL at late. MLL has gone down hill over the last couple of years. Cost cutting I guess.
     
     
  #6540  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2017, 9:08 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
Cage, there is some swing gate sorcery going on today that either I didn't notice before, or WestJet only started doing recently.

This domestic-in, int'l-out turn:
YLW 110 YYC 2312 PVR - Gate 76

And these 2 domestic-in, US-out turns:
YYJ 128 YYC 1468 PSP - Gate 75
YEG 104 YYC 1582 DFW - Gate 74

I'm certain these gates still cannot swing the opposite way and do these turns in reverse, so they're not really true swing gates... but that still saves WestJet three tows this morning and sort of increases the number of swing gates to 7.
I have seen this happen in the past, always with the 10-11am WS departure bank. The root cause of the weirdness is that WS Operations Center does not finalize the aircraft assignments until 6-8am day of departure. This causes a lot gate changes at YYC.

Back last July 31 I was flying YYC-SAN and got a gate change announcement at 6am after I had checked in the night before. Sure enough our original aircraft swapped SAN to DFW and caused the gate to change from 21 to 37. At the departure lounge I look over at 21 and see another WS 738.

This practice is actually one of the few benefits of Call to Gate, basically airline ops centers can be lazy and not get the T-72 hours work done until T-6 hours.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.
     
     
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 11:01 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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