Calgary International Airport II

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

Top transborder for calendar year 2016. I believe these numbers to be correct, summing only scheduled and not charter pax

Somewhat surprised SEA is YEG's #1?

This is based on actual passengers flown on each route (not O&D) so it does actually make sense.

You should add the remaining Transborder routes of HNL, FLL, MCO and PDX to complete the YYC list

[Trans Canada]

Originally Posted by Acey

Of note is that the An-124 that has been here multiple times in recent weeks is about 15 times more rare than a Il-76.

Il-76 is far more rare in Calgary. I don't get excited for the 124s any more..

[FormerWingTipper]

Another major International Terminal Building Baggage System outage yesterday. Many late flights and delayed baggage.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Crew area, for the navigator. Very common for Russian airliners of the 60s and 70s to have glass noses such as this, mostly used by the navigators. Russia wasn't well covered by radar back in those days (especially Siberia), and radio NAVAIDS were few and far between. So the navigators on board had to have the ability to look outside to help them navigate.

Pic here.

Read the following for some more info.

http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=745975

https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/2krqe1/why_do_many_sovietrussian_transport_planes_have/

Thanks for the info! I imagine that it would have been very trippy sitting in the nose like that! So now that radar is commonplace, is that area unused, and the position eliminated?

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

is that area unused, and the position eliminated?

I think so.

With the advent of GPS, there is no need for a navigator anymore.

[hoboman27]

Originally Posted by FormerWingTipper

Another major International Terminal Building Baggage System outage yesterday. Many late flights and delayed baggage.

Any idea why or how these things happen? Software, hardware, human error?

[hollywoodcory]

Originally Posted by FormerWingTipper

Another major International Terminal Building Baggage System outage yesterday. Many late flights and delayed baggage.

I think many of the delayed flights were more so related to bad weather.

[Tobuz]

I had a chance to wander the domestic courses after one of my rare non-USA flights today.

I wanted to check out the progress in the 'high' A gates, where some of the moving sidewalks are now working and most of the construction hoarding is down.

That area looks fantastic. A huge, huge improvement.

The only aspect to that space that leaves a little (well, a lot) to be desired is how it links to the main part of the A concourse. The two little hallways are, umm, little. And poorly marked. And really would not be intuitive to anyone trying to navigate the space. You either walk through Manchu Wok's line-up in the foodcourt, or you have to seek out an almost secret little opening between all of the security screening and the entrance to the Chinook Lounge.

But still, that new area and those gates went from dismal to impressive!

But, alas. The signs. Those wayfinding signs.

Whenever I walk the domestic side of YYC, I cringe. As I outlined in my previous signage rant/review, I'm a bit of a signage nerd. But I really don't think I'm being overly critical. Compared to some of the big hub airports that I travel through (and compared to regional competitors like YVR, and compared to the wayfinding signage bliss of an IKEA store), much of the wayfinding at YYC is frankly bush league amateur. And confusing. And inaccurate.

First of all, the directional signs in the A and C concourses still point to "Lounges" that aren't actually Lounges. That drives me absolutely nuts. Lounge, in an airport setting, to air travellers, means a "Lounge". MLL, or Chinook, or Priority Pass, or Aspire. It does not mean a Chili's. Which is where YYC's wayfinding points people. Argh.

I stumbled across some gems that appear to be new since the hoarding came down (or perhaps I didn't notice them when I did my previous rant).

First example of an awful, brand new sign:



This is guiding people coming from the A concourse to B, C, D or E.

Where this sign is posted, B is a hard right turn. (It's at the entrance to B.)

From this location, C, D and E are all actually straight ahead.

But, hmmm, at first glance, this sign seems to say:
- only C is straight ahead
- and B, D and E are all to the right

But that's wrong! Absolutely wrong!! But if almost any traveller glances at that sign (which is what people do with wayfinding signs) that's exactly the message it would communicate ... unless someone were to stop in their tracks and critically analyze and decipher the arrows and how they interplay with the two different background colours.

This one's stupid, it's wrong, and it's overly complicated. Why not just an arrow pointing straight with "C D E", and an arrow pointing right with "B". Why are D and E so much smaller than B and C? Why are B and C different colours and on a different background than D and E? Nothing about this sign is user-friendly or intuitive.

Another goofy example:



Unlike the previous sign, this one's not actually wrong. It's just more bad design.

Its sole purpose in life is to let people know that three concourses - C, D and E - are all straight ahead. "Keep going this way, people. If your next flight leaves from a C, D, or E gate, you're going the right direction."

Hmmm. So, then:
- Why is the C 18" tall? but the D and E are only 8" tall?
- And why is C shown in a different colour than D and E, and on a different line than D and E?
- Why are only "D" and "E" labeled as being "Connections". But oddly "C" isn't for Connections? You can be damned sure that if I'm standing in this spot in YYC, the only reason I'm there is because I'm connecting. Whether I'm going to a gate in any of the C, D, or E concourses, I'm still connecting!
- And if, from a passenger viewpoint and understanding, C, D and E concourses are all on par with each other (because, well, they are), why does the sign over-complicate by showing me a list of gate numbers for one concourse that's ahead, but not the other two concourses? When I'm standing airside by the Montana's windows, how on earth does having a list of gate numbers for any concourses help me? ("Gee, Ethel, our flight leaves from gate C50. But the sign only tells me that the entire C concourse is ahead. Hmm. I wonder if C50 is one of the gates in C. If only they'd listed out all of the gate numbers in this hallway")

No, just keep it simple, easy and intuitive. Like signs need to be in an international, hub airport (or one that aspires to be an international hub airport.)

All that's needed here: an "ahead arrow", a big letter C, a big letter D, and a big letter E. Period. Boom. Mic drop.

No separate, blue connections bar with smaller fonts for some (but not all) concourse letters. No icons of a globe (that, without squinting, look a bit like a frog run over by a car). No gate numbers, since anyone here only needs the 'big picture' info that is the Concourse.

And for god's sake, please stop the silly "small font, different colour" treatment for D and E concourses on all of the signs. That just overcomplicates, and confuses. In connecting travellers' eyes, YYC has five concourses, and they simply need to get from one to another. For passengers connecting between concourses, it's just A, B, C, D and E. Period.
Not A, B, C, Connections D and Connections E.

Heck, YYC friends, I fixed this one for you. Three minutes of PowerPoint fun, and here's your replacement sign for that spot outside of the Montana's windows:



Easy-peasy. C, D and E are all this way. A concourse is a concourse, and these three are all straight ahead! At a glance, I can tell whether or not I'm going the correct direction. This one's on me, YYC.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by Acey

I see that you've made it your life work to make all signage as simple and minimalist as possible, but it's definitely worse off without a US flag.

No, not my life’s work. Just the topic of a very rare rant from me.

As for your “simple and minimalist” comment, that’s not necessarily my preference. That’s the foundation of good wayfinding. There’s a science behind wayfinding that pulls in psychology, sight, and language that’s actually pretty cool and makes for an interesting read.

And that science dictates simple and minimalist.

Especially when you have users who don’t speak a common language, or who may be fatigued or stressed or easily confused. Ie in airports. Simplicity works, and “more” is absolutely not “better”. In fact, wayfinding experts will tell you that having more on a sign is always, always worse. Whether that’s more info than truly needed, or more words than are needed, or more complications. Simple and minimalist works.

As for the US flag, nope, not at all opposed to it (even though it is redundant, since everyone bound for the U.S. will be holding a boarding pass with a big “E” gate designation on it.)

Originally Posted by Acey

Because of the way IFP is built and the significant differences between the D and E gates, I prefer the original's diagrammatic differentiation of them. A concourse is not just a concourse.

It’s definitely a matter of opinion. Sure, there are differences in the buildings, the destinations, and the process for access. And I’m sure that’s why someone at YYC made the signs this way.

But if the sole reason any of these signs exist is to help get inexperienced travelers, and/or non-Calgarians who’ve never seen or used YYC before, and/or international visitors speaking a variety of languages ... from their arrival gate to their departure concourse as effortlessly as possible, what purpose does the “diagrammatic differentiation” serve? There might be background rationale that says the concourses are a bit different, but that’s all irrelevant to “Bob and Betty” when they are simply trying to connect from Saskatoon to Kahului, and need to find the E concourse entrance painlessly. Anything that diverts from that basic, simple message - in a complex building - will only serve to confuse, not make it easier.

[hoboman27]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

Heck, YYC friends, I fixed this one for you. Three minutes of PowerPoint fun, and here's your replacement sign for that spot outside of the Montana's windows:



Easy-peasy. C, D and E are all this way. A concourse is a concourse, and these three are all straight ahead! At a glance, I can tell whether or not I'm going the correct direction. This one's on me, YYC.

Keep it up Tobuz! Submit it to YYC

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

No, not my life’s work. Just the topic of a very rare rant from me.

As for your “simple and minimalist” comment, that’s not necessarily my preference. That’s the foundation of good wayfinding. There’s a science behind wayfinding that pulls in psychology, sight, and language that’s actually pretty cool and makes for an interesting read.

And that science dictates simple and minimalist.

Especially when you have users who don’t speak a common language, or who may be fatigued or stressed or easily confused. Ie in airports. Simplicity works, and “more” is absolutely not “better”. In fact, wayfinding experts will tell you that having more on a sign is always, always worse. Whether that’s more info than truly needed, or more words than are needed, or more complications. Simple and minimalist works.

As for the US flag, nope, not at all opposed to it (even though it is redundant, since everyone bound for the U.S. will be holding a boarding pass with a big “E” gate designation on it.)



It’s definitely a matter of opinion. Sure, there are differences in the buildings, the destinations, and the process for access. And I’m sure that’s why someone at YYC made the signs this way.

But if the sole reason any of these signs exist is to help get inexperienced travelers, and/or non-Calgarians who’ve never seen or used YYC before, and/or international visitors speaking a variety of languages ... from their arrival gate to their departure concourse as effortlessly as possible, what purpose does the “diagrammatic differentiation” serve? There might be background rationale that says the concourses are a bit different, but that’s all irrelevant to “Bob and Betty” when they are simply trying to connect from Saskatoon to Kahului, and need to find the E concourse entrance painlessly. Anything that diverts from that basic, simple message - in a complex building - will only serve to confuse, not make it easier.

As a counter-point to your rant, I would argue that the current way-finding signage works better than the minimalist alternative that you're advocating for.

To your point that everyone bound for the US will be holding a boarding card with a big E on it, from an airline perspective I can tell you that that's probably much less common than you think. Most connecting passengers will have checked in for their initial flight well before a gate has been assigned for their connecting flight in the airline's system. As a result, the chances are good that their boarding card for their YYC connecting flight will be blank next to the assigned gate.

When a flight arrives into YYC (especially one that's delayed), the last thing people want to do is search for a screen that displays gate information. I would argue that the mindset of most passengers in that scenario is 'I'm connecting to the US or I'm connecting to Mexico, where do I need to go?' and the airport's current way-finding addresses that mindset quite well. A passenger glances up and sees the symbol for connection (and the purple one used in YYC seems to be the international norm now), the US flag or the globe and can quickly and easily start moving in that direction. Once they are moving in the correct direction I think most passengers assume they will cross paths with a display for gate information and will plan to pause momentarily to discover their exact gate at that point.

In my mind, making use of signs that focus on the concourse letters assumes people have a basic knowledge of the Calgary Airport and have knowledge prior to stepping foot in the terminal of the next gate they require. In both cases I think the opposite is true for most travelers.

[Tobuz]

So then how do people find their way to flights bound for Costa Rica, or Mexico, or Frankfurt? More flags? Or how do passengers figure out where to go when doing a domestic connection — between A and B, or between B and C? (Especially since YYC signs don’t label those connections as “Connections”)

I said above I’m not opposed to the US flag on wayfinding. It does serve a purpose, and it does communicate fairly clearly.

But if that’s the only way that many people could find their way to a Vegas or Phoenix or Kahului gate, then how the heck would they find their way to other, non-US destinations?

When I look at the current signage, the US flag is fairly intuitive. The weird Microsoft clip art of a world map, however, is not intuitive in the same way. On most of the wayfinding, it’s so small that many wouldn’t even get - from a distance - that it’s a map, much less that it’s meant to convey ‘concourse with gates for non-Canadian, non-US destinations’.

When I’ve connected at ORD and IAH, those airports use terminal letters and arrows. Period. I haven’t heard of problems with people not understanding how terminals or concourses are designated.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Acey

They ask somebody in a white hat.



The concept of pre-clearance is not intuitive, and does not exist at IAH nor ORD. The same physical parking positions for airplanes getting fed from multiple podiums and holdrooms is a problem unique to YYC.

Problem unique to Canadian airports and European airports. Also unique to a variety of other countries that has passport exist control.

Yes, YYC has poor signage. Was catching a flight to Vancouver that left from one of those silly swing gates. AC had a flight to Vancouver and WestJet had one going to Saskatoon. The gate is difficult to find, crowded. Generally a crappy setup from a signage perspective.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Acey

The gate 70-73 configuration, specifically. I doubt, because of the ridiculous compromises made since opening to achieve additional "swing" function, that any airport has a set of trisector gates in anything resembling this configuration. Obviously nothing else in Canada does.

YVR has a host of gates that swing between us and international and gates that swing between domestic and international. The key difference is the entire hold room swings so it is a single podium.

YVR aND a host of other airports have a nbe of gates that can offload into domestic and then load from international. They also have the oposite.

YYC is unique in trying to build an airport where passangers are expected to not sit near their gates. This the cause of a lot of the overcrowding.

After experience the customer experience of boarding an AC A319 at the same time that a Westjey 737 is boarding in the 7 gate area I would hate to see what this swing gate are is likewith some wide body aircraft.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by casper

Problem unique to Canadian airports and European airports. Also unique to a variety of other countries that has passport exist control.

I hate passport exit controls, but unfortunately they are quite ubiquitous here in Asia.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Acey

What's unique is trisector gates feeding from three holdrooms to the same airplane, and the bonkers low/high road configuration that allows it to be so.

Spot on.

As WS ops grow, they will be able to have distinct transborder/international ops from domestic ops. This is how most airlines deal with the situation. This will cut the need for swing gates in half.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

(1) To your point that everyone bound for the US will be holding a boarding card with a big E on it, from an airline perspective I can tell you that that's probably much less common than you think. Most connecting passengers will have checked in for their initial flight well before a gate has been assigned for their connecting flight in the airline's system. As a result, the chances are good that their boarding card for their YYC connecting flight will be blank next to the assigned gate.

(2) When a flight arrives into YYC (especially one that's delayed), the last thing people want to do is search for a screen that displays gate information. I would argue that the mindset of most passengers in that scenario is 'I'm connecting to the US or I'm connecting to Mexico, where do I need to go?' and the airport's current way-finding addresses that mindset quite well. A passenger glances up and sees the symbol for connection (and the purple one used in YYC seems to be the international norm now), the US flag or the globe and can quickly and easily start moving in that direction.

(1) YYC gates are assigned 24-36 hours before departure, there is a good chance that pax will have connecting gate information on the second BP.

In the event of a gate change, in most circumstances whether the gate is D74 or D83, they letter designation will get them most of the way there. The only exception is when WS gate swaps a domestic departure to/from D70s to A1-20s. Under this extreme sample, the guest may be severely impacted.

Cell phone app technology is becoming common place to address the issue of gate swaps or no gate information. UA had this for atleast 4 years now. Example: i flew FRA-ORD-YYC, got the FRA departure gate change while waiting for the taxi in Wiesbaden, Got the ORD departure gate when i was walking to USCBP in ORD. AC app has the functionality and WS is hoping to implement many more app feature in the near future.

(2) Most travelers have the concept down for letter designation means concourse or zone place and number is actual gate. For those that Fly Once To See Granny, well they are more likely to see the uniformed agent at the top of the arrivl gate or they will want to speak to a white hatter.

Originally Posted by Acey

(3) This is precisely the point I was addressing. The value of simply directing people toward the letter "E" can be quantified the number of pax who have any idea what the hell that means in relation to the document they have in their hand.

(3) While most pax wont have the significance of "E" They can decipher that E is their concourse. The US flag can be a bit of an outlier as only Canadian frequent flyers will understand the transborder significance. For everyone else there is "E Gates ->".

One early wayward action by YYC/CAA was to use the letter designation to suggest the preboard security checkpoint. That is why we got weird gates like A70-73. The CAA, at CATSA behest, decided to go with this way-finding idea. Mercifully this was short lived.

[milomilo]

Personally, I would always just look at my boarding pass for a gate number/concourse (or a board/my phone if it isn't printed) and then follow the letters, completely ignoring anything else. I don't know or care how the gates are organised by country or whatever so that information is irrelevant to me. I suspect most other travelers also have no interest in the specifics of how airports are designed.

I agree with Toyuz, his suggested sign (perhaps with the flags on if people find that useful too) is the most intuitive, and the blue section just makes a mess of the sign and adds confusion for no gain.

[casper]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Personally, I would always just look at my boarding pass for a gate number/concourse (or a board/my phone if it isn't printed) and then follow the letters, completely ignoring anything else. I don't know or care how the gates are organised by country or whatever so that information is irrelevant to me. I suspect most other travelers also have no interest in the specifics of how airports are designed.

I agree with Toyuz, his suggested sign (perhaps with the flags on if people find that useful too) is the most intuitive, and the blue section just makes a mess of the sign and adds confusion for no gain.

I usually just follow the letters. Earlier this week YYC was my destination airport, however last month, I connected in YYC on the way to Dallas. Did YVR to YYC on WestJet and connected on American (WestJet codeshare). The boarding passes from online checkin did not gate information for the connecting flight. Also interesting American could not use the WestJet boarding pass. Was called up to podium at YYC to have my WestJet issued boarding passed replaced by one printed on AA card stock. The WestJet and AA integration is now an academic issue. However it is not uncommon to have a boarding pass with no gate information on it.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Cage

Spot on.

As WS ops grow, they will be able to have distinct transborder/international ops from domestic ops. This is how most airlines deal with the situation. This will cut the need for swing gates in half.

I get the impression swing gates are an important aspect of YVR operations.

I agree the three way swing is part of the problem.

Had they had some domestic gates that could deplane into customs that would handle the case where you have the US or International inbound and then a swing to domestic. This three way swing thing is weird.

In my recent experience this week I was on an AC flight from YYC to YVR. Looking it up on flightaware I see the aircraft came in from New York.

What was also odd about the flight, is the crew for both the Air Canada flight to Vancouver and the WestJet flight to Saskatoon were just standing around at the podium until about 10 minutes before the AC flight was scheduled to depart. At that point they opened the door for the flight crew to head down. Clearly that is a assure a late departure. I am assuming they were waiting for someone to reconfigure the passage way.

My flight was heading out on 71. I was standing by the back wall and it was crowded. Had there been passengers connecting to the US or International at the time they would have had to make their way through the maze of people waiting at this swing gates. They should have oriented the gates the other way so the lineups would have blocked the regular connecting passenger passage to the international terminal.