HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6561  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:44 AM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
Did you see HUX coming tho
While I didn't predict HUX as a destination, the concept of putting extra rouge capacity onto YYC to sun destinations still holds. One thing that does perplex me, AC vacations and the sandals group had a long standing (20+ years) relationship. The relationship appears to be gone.

Acey, as you pointed out HUX is chock-a-block with all inclusive tour operators. aC Vacations is in the same division of AC as rouge, so obviously AC has a hotel provider on the HUX side to market to Calgary and Western canada. The choice of Monday departure and return was a winner when AC did either seasonal flights YYC-MBJ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon View Post
Hux going Rouge 767 is going to be tempting for me to look at but the seat pitch is going to be a significant driver in my choice as well. I've heard 319 is brutal and would not want to be on a longer flight if it were similar.
Rouge has 30" sets pitch in economy and 34" pitch in rouge plus. Furthermore the rouge plus cabin is a decent size on the 763.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.
     
     
  #6562  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:48 PM
ACT7 ACT7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 469
I have flown through YYC a bunch of times now since the new terminal opened and everything I thought from the beginning seems to be a reality - at least in my opinion. I've never understood the need for such a massive expansion at that airport. If I were a betting man, I would say it will be at least 50 years before that terminal reaches anywhere near capacity. The concourse feels vast and largely empty. At 7:30 PM, there were two planes parked at the new terminal - an AC triple 7 and a Condor 767.

I'm not trying to be critical but this seems like it was a Dubai-like project that overshot on international growth projections. Anyone else have that same feeling?
     
     
  #6563  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 4:12 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,591
I think it would have been useful to make more of it triple swing, but otherwise I am reasonably happy.
     
     
  #6564  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 6:17 PM
Bokimon's Avatar
Bokimon Bokimon is offline
Master and Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: CALGARY
Posts: 1,885
I think the Airport Board with their cowboy hats and leather hide boots with spurs were forecasting a 50yr capacity time frame (worst case) so they demanded to just go big during the projects development. Though thinking like a retired oil boss, the collective mentality would of likely been a 5 year time frame before launching the next phase of the project. I would guess that would involve the north part of the site which I'm sure there even must be some hidden master site plan out there on the arch.dwgs that have not been published yet.

Great I fly AM in a few months, hopefully they get the yyc shakedown all done with, otherwise make it up by cruising a bit faster down to Mexico. Hopefully loads are holding steady for a potential dreamer swap in the future..
I worked a special function last week for Hainan who were celebrating the first completed year of service to Calgary and some of their exec team were in attendance, it was a nice fancy banquet containing Hainan swags and some future announcements and plans laid out for what they want to do with YYC service. Should be promising as long as yield holds up.
__________________
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram &
Bokimon- on Flickr for SSP local & Travel coverage.
Architecture, Aviation, Scenery, Skylines
     
     
  #6565  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 6:26 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,591
This --> This?



     
     
  #6566  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2017, 2:28 AM
PPAR's Avatar
PPAR PPAR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 604
I have flown out of the new terminal about a half dozen times now. I can think of one flight where things were quieter, but generally my sense is that it is scaled approximately right. It is often pretty busy. I would also point out that while this forum has seen much negativity toward the new terminal, "white elephant" is not a common complaint.
I would venture to say that given this terminal opened just as the economy tanked, it is remarkably well utilized.
     
     
  #6567  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 8:30 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
Yeah I mean I'm looking at it only from a gate utilization perspective, I don't care to spend enough time inside to see how well lines are moving, check-in is working, customs, etc.

If anything, the pretty decent utilization of IFP gates right now shows how hectic it was before 24 new gates were added overnight.
Cargo hold cave dweller.

The picture above the wing is great, with the exception of pre-board security checkpoint E.

AC and WS have more than enough room to handle the crowds.

There is a minor problem at WS checkin, the kiosk and self serve bag checks clerks are required to do a secondary document check (alternately, document checks are not performed for all pax at the kiosk) at the checkin line. This can create a long line before the self serve bag drop stations. This can be easily fixed by requiring all pax to undergo an electronic document check at the self serve checkin kiosks.

As we are into the summer season, AC's problem of 70 pax with skis/snowboards heading to LHR & FRA is solved. However this problem will return in December.

KLM and BA are co-located at position 5. Now that the self serve bag drop is removed from position 5 there are enough checkin desks for everyone.

Delta has moved 3 times since the terminal opened. Hopefully they are in a permanent spot. DL shares checkin counters with AM.

AA, DL, and AS share one problem; their checkin desks close for brief periods of the day. Customer arriving 3 hours or more before departure don't know where to go because all the electronic signs remove any mention of the airline.

There is a minor problem for Calgary based large groups, there is very little room congregate a group of 20-30 travelers plus their send off relatives. School trips to Europe is an example. The terminal was designed to speed pax through checkin and preboard security in order to wait at the central hall. However the group organizers want everyone at the terminal 3 hours before departure and then have 1.5 hours for the send off and selfie pictures.

Checkpoint D pre-board security rarely has a line. The exception is when both KLM and HU crews are on the same bus and arrive at the same time. The line up grows to 40-50 people instantaneously. Checkpoint D is helped by the airside corridor access for connection pax. On AC the domestic connections is 30-50% of the load some days.

Checkpoint E is probably the worst place in the whole new terminal. Constant work process changes on the CATSA side. Closure of the remote xray viewing room for periods of the day can back up the lines to 20-30 minutes long. Additionally, the checkpoint E dedicated lane for connections has been permanently closed. Connections pax are given priority lane treatment to the regular lane. This causes the normal pax line to grow very quickly.

There is constant staff turnover at both D & E security. The BP checker
- is always new (generally started within the last 2 weeks),
- doesn't know the terminal configuration,
- doesn't know each airlines definition of priority security access,
- Gets surprised at the general line reaction when one pax gets moved forward due to being close to departure (hint half the line is in the same condition).
- Gets overwhelmed when more than 4 people come to the start of the line. Hint, not all BP are required to be scanned. To save time scan 1 ine 4 BPs have the rest join the line.
- Gets overwhelmed when faced with Nexus card holders who know more about the screener job than the noob and are ready to be the jerk in the group. Its a quirk of the system, pax are not required to present their BP unless requested by a screener. So bypass the line of general pax, if the screener challenges then show them their BP. It is legalized queue jumping. If the screener abandons their station to find a supervisor, all pax can get into the appropriate line. The only thing the screener can do is acquiesce to the pax and immediately clear the BP.

The obligatory run through duty free is okay. The lounges, while an improvement from old Chinook/Rocky Mtn variety, are not up to the Aspire standard set in Europe.

Gate areas are okay, but I'm a stand in zone 1 line kind of pax. I would have preferred the traditional configuration of 1 gate per agent desk. I dont like places where 2 or more gates are co-located together. It creates a lot of unused space while simultaneously everyone is congregated into a small area.

The big disappointment is the gate plan. There are daily adjustments and its near impossible to predict where your airplane will be assigned. AC departures to LHR and FRA are fairly consistent but there are exceptions. WS to LGW is all over the map, as are all USA departures. Just today the mid afternoon departure bank had an AS 175 in the middle of 2 UA A320s and UAX 175. Why couldnt the AS 175 and UAX 175 switch spots was beyond me. This creates confusion at the gate counter and over the intercom. While UA and AS were duking it out, seven gates stood underutilized.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.
     
     
  #6568  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 9:27 PM
Cage Cage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: YYC
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
I have flown through YYC a bunch of times now since the new terminal opened and everything I thought from the beginning seems to be a reality - at least in my opinion. I've never understood the need for such a massive expansion at that airport.
If you only look at the mid afternoon and evening periods, the terminal will seem empty. 50% of departure pax is handled by 10:15 to 11am. So the checkin hall is vacant after 9:30am. The central food court hall is vacant after 10am.

The new terminal was required to expand the central processor facilities (checkin, security, retail, customs & immigration, bag claim) and not for more gates.

Lack of space for pax was getting near boil over point in the old terminal. I had four space constraint confrontations with pax last summer.
- June was going through USCBP entrance where Nexus card holders did not have to wait at the Commissionaire guarded entrance and could proceed on through. General line pax took exception to me queue jumping and blocked the path.
- July had drama's at the the UA ORD departure gate. Pax did not appreciate that Zone 1 pax can board before zone 3, despite the zone 3 pax lined up closer to the counter. There was no space for the zone 3 pax to make way for zone 1.
- July was leaving on WS primary departure bank to SAN. Checkin line for bag drop was too crowded, pax infront of me backed up and tripped over our cart, I got the blame for their error.
- August and the family was going through CBSA exit line. Kid was driving the bag cart and I knew there were two lines of pax handing over their documents. we came up past the longer line and enterred the shorter line closer to the wall. Pax behind was less than impressed and made snarky comments that another line was going faster.
__________________
United Premier a Elite latte lifter. Climber of swanky bridges.

Last edited by Cage; Jul 7, 2017 at 10:11 PM.
     
     
  #6569  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 7:05 AM
Lancaster's Avatar
Lancaster Lancaster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
For absolutely no reason, the airport is flip flopping gates for these 2 on certain days. Why?! There's other little things, like apparently BA does not like to use gate 80 when they bring the 789, and prefer 78 or 76. Doesn't make much sense, but the end result is that BA's gate is increasingly random as the equipment is varying more.[...] Why they don't like gate 80, I haven't a clue.
Overall, it's somewhat surprising that there's still so much idiocy and inefficiencies going on with the gates assignments this long after opening.
It's as if they should implement a call-to-gate system to handle all these gate switches...
     
     
  #6570  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 11:52 AM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
No, thankfully I get to spend all my time just driving around the ramp doing nothing.

A 77W just barely fits on gate 76 and the tail sticks out a bit onto the road,
That can't be legal can it ?

77W is 73.86m long, with a wingspan of 64.80 m

Gate 76 seems more than legal for that plane. Based on google earth, seems like that gate should easily handle any widebody with a lengh of 80m and a wingspan of 74 m. Basically anything but an A380, and not because of length, but rather wingspan.

From my observation here at YUL, I do know that AC pilots don't really oversteer while entering a gate (maybe it's a special procedure they have), so often times, a long plane such as the B77W isn't perfectly aligned with the lead-in line. But that shouldn't mean the plane infringes on the vehicle road behind the plane. As long as the plane advances to the proper stop line, the vehicle road behind should be well clear. Or else, its a safety issue.
     
     
  #6571  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 10:23 AM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
The 77W does not use the most forward stop line on gate 76
Why not? What's the restriction preventing the 77W from pulling up to the first stop line?

The 77W, B748 and A346 are the longest planes out there. Seems if any planes should use that first line, it's them.
     
     
  #6572  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 6:43 PM
thenoflyzone thenoflyzone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey View Post
Yeah but absolute length is not what determines the stopping point. More important is the height of the doors and their position on the aircraft relative to the geometry of the 2 bridges for that particular gate, that's why RJ's have to park waaay far back so people don't go tumbling down the jetway cause it'd be so steep. 76 is weird because it's the only gate where all types use the same lead-in line, leading to oddities like the fact that the 767 parks further back and uses the rear bridge of the 2, whereas it uses the forward bridge on all other gates on the new terminal. The 346 uses the most forward stop line but the 77W doesn't, but on other gates like 78 and others the 77W and 346 both park at the most forward line. You'll have to ask the guy who plotted all the new gates, or better yet, the computer software since that's what did it... but it's no doubt related to either the geometry of the bridges or fuel pits and is an issue unique to 76. There's no way a double bridge gate could be perfect for such a range of types on a single lead-in line but they almost did it.

Again, it's only just barely that it encroaches on the road but still annoying that they put it there when 78 has oodles of room and like 10 meters of clearance behind a 77W to the road.
Thanks for the explanation.

All this talk of gate space got me interested, so i went to check out how things work here at YUL when it comes to gates with 2 air bridges. Pretty much all of them have the 77W taxi-in on to the first stop line nearest to the terminal. All the gates with 2 air bridges have 1 lead-in line, except for gate 55.
     
     
  #6573  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 6:46 PM
Tobuz Tobuz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 243
Interesting article in today's USA Today about airport design and passenger experience:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2017/07/10/airport-gate-delivery/458393001/

The article talks about initiatives to deliver food, beverage and retail products to passengers at their gates -- because passengers have become such devout "gate huggers".

Quote:
Solving the 'gate hugger' problem

The developers of Airport Sherpa (now at BWI) and At Your Gate (soon at SAN) have research showing that American fliers are verified "gate huggers": Once through the airport security checkpoint, a majority of travelers head straight for their gate, grab a seat in the hold area or nearby and stay put.

It doesn't matter if their flight is leaving in an hour — or three.

For travelers, gate-hugging can be a problem because passengers who don't stray from their gates miss out on the upgraded dining and shopping options now offered at many airports. Gate-hugging also means airport food and retail outlets miss out on potential sales. And it is rents and fees generated from those sales that make up an increasing percentage of the operating budgets at airports.
IMHO, the idea of delivery to seating at the gate is a bit ridiculous. (Come on. Get up off your rear and just walk over to the Starbucks.)

But if this idea of us (well, at least "Americans", as the article states) being devout gate huggers is a known thing . . . did the planners and designers at YYC who chose to go with Call To Gate (a) not know that or (b) think that passengers wouldn't care?

I find it interesting that one of the biggest challenges in airport design is determining how to maximize retail revenues (and get people to enjoy the space and amenities) when most passengers have a psychological need to anchor themselves within line-of-sight of their boarding gate. Not an easy puzzle to solve, but it's an important part of the passenger experience.
     
     
  #6574  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 6:54 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobuz View Post
I find it interesting that one of the biggest challenges in airport design is determining how to maximize retail revenues (and get people to enjoy the space and amenities) when most passengers have a psychological need to anchor themselves within line-of-sight of their boarding gate. Not an easy puzzle to solve, but it's an important part of the passenger experience.
I've always felt like if I'm not close to the gate, I'll miss announcements that might be relevant to me. If I wasn't sitting close to my gate for a flight a couple years ago, I would have missed my name being called and the gate attendant asking me to swap seats with a family. I got some pretty awesome seats out of the deal!

If only there was an app that could tell passengers everything they need to know without having to be at the gate for 1 or more hours before boarding...
     
     
  #6575  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 1:32 AM
Lancaster's Avatar
Lancaster Lancaster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cage View Post
For the reasons mentioned above, I have advocated to AC executives that brand standard should be to board widebody aircraft from L2 door and have the FA direct biz cabin pax to the left and economy cabin pax to the right. For AC, the 333,77L, and 789 board from L2. 77HD and sometimes the 77W board from doors L1 and L2 at stations where it is possible to segregate pax at the gate agent desk. I also know that HKG boards from both L1 and L2 because the use of both gates is standard ops procedure for the contractor.
Cage, do you know which airports have this capability? I don't think I've seen a gate configuration where you can segregate at the counter...
     
     
  #6576  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 2:08 AM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobuz View Post
Interesting article in today's USA Today about airport design and passenger experience:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2017/07/10/airport-gate-delivery/458393001/

The article talks about initiatives to deliver food, beverage and retail products to passengers at their gates -- because passengers have become such devout "gate huggers".



IMHO, the idea of delivery to seating at the gate is a bit ridiculous. (Come on. Get up off your rear and just walk over to the Starbucks.)

But if this idea of us (well, at least "Americans", as the article states) being devout gate huggers is a known thing . . . did the planners and designers at YYC who chose to go with Call To Gate (a) not know that or (b) think that passengers wouldn't care?

I find it interesting that one of the biggest challenges in airport design is determining how to maximize retail revenues (and get people to enjoy the space and amenities) when most passengers have a psychological need to anchor themselves within line-of-sight of their boarding gate. Not an easy puzzle to solve, but it's an important part of the passenger experience.
You could go back to the old days of a cigarette and candy girl wondering around offering her product for sale. With modern standards you would probably have to have both male and female vendors.

Calgary has the moon buggy's. They could be converted to food trucks.
     
     
  #6577  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 4:48 AM
outoftheice outoftheice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancaster View Post
Cage, do you know which airports have this capability? I don't think I've seen a gate configuration where you can segregate at the counter...
LHR Terminal 2 has this capability but that's the only place I've seen it
     
     
  #6578  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 1:55 PM
EdmontonTraveller EdmontonTraveller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
I've always felt like if I'm not close to the gate, I'll miss announcements that might be relevant to me.
.
.
.
If only there was an app that could tell passengers everything they need to know without having to be at the gate for 1 or more hours before boarding...
[Rant: On]

I am continually amazed that airlines have failed to realize that their primary soft product (i.e. customer service) will be their apps, very very soon for economy plebes and not long after for business pax. And their biggest opportunity isn't putting a pax name on the in-seat screen, or taking food orders on-board, it's managing that waiting time at the airport. The lack of investment in apps for routine service requests makes no sense to me. The lack of airport IT integration is also unfortunate and will need to change.

As for the huggers, it's not just announcements that needs to be solved. A pax has to be convinced that everything they are even remotely eligible for will be given to them without being present at a podium. Flight boarding early, carry-on space overhead, seat upgrades, seats together in the cramped boarding lounge, locating your own party scattered across a de facto shopping mall...even an automatic "alarm clock" reminder of boarding time needs to be 101% guaranteed to overcome the anxiety of being in an unfamiliar situation where the impression is that one little mistake means sleeping on the airport floor for the next two nights.

In the past no one had the ability to deliver real-time individual customer info to pax. Then someone sold a couple billion smartphones.... WestJet really sticks out for its complete lack of priority for their applet. Customer service is best provided by a human, but you can't have humans everywhere always and you can make the technology help your staff instead of replace your staff. Even bring new (contact center) staff to bear on situations you can't reach today.

The value proposition here isn't reducing head count or modestly distracting the frequent flyer. It's building equity in airline brands so they are closer to Apple's than to Jerry's Used Car Lot, even if the consumer only flies once a year.

[Rant: Off]
     
     
  #6579  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 8:06 PM
Canadian74 Canadian74 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: AB/BC
Posts: 710
What are the chances of seeing Interjet at YYC
     
     
  #6580  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 10:26 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 13,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian74 View Post
What are the chances of seeing Interjet at YYC
Pretty high. I'd assume it would be next on their hit-list after YVR.
     
     
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 3:38 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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