Calgary International Airport II

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Cage

I will wade into the WS YVR ops are or are not a Hub.

First off we need to separate the layman's definition of hub vs airline operations hub definition. Stick a camera or microphone infront of any airline executive and they better call any airport with greater than 20 flights/day as hub status, to do otherwise would damage the airline brand in the eyes of the local civic boosters.

A proper and modern definition of hub would depend on number of departures, percentage of connecting vs O&D pax, and number of connection possibilities. A traditional approach would also include a minimum 100-250 daily departures, however I discount this metric as its too USA and European centric.

Westjet does not have a hub operation at YVR, rather their operation should be classified as a Focus City. However this distinction is lost on all but a few industry insiders.

Excluding the Hawaii operation, YVR is the end of the line for most WS viable connections. Combined with a strong O&D market, this makes WS YVR ops a prime example of a Focus City, similar to DL BOS, UA LGA, and LH TXL.

WS YXY operations is a prime example of the local context. By moving to YYC from YVR, the YXY operations more than quadruple the number of commercially viable connection possibilities.

The WS YVR ops reminds me of the original AC YVR ops before the end of the Hollis Harris era. YVR was the end of the line unless your final destination was YYJ or Hawaii. After the 90s expansion to KIX and HKG 4x/wk, it could be somewhat argued that AC had a hub, but it wasnt until the merger with CP that AC got a true hub at YVR.

WS YVR is in a similar situation, put a half dozen Asian flights through YVR and they have a true hub operation.

I’d actually have to agree Westjet at YVR doesn’t really fit the definition of a hub... with about 80 daily flights this summer really just a strong focus city. Firmly Westjet’s 3rd largest base with strong mainline operations.

[LO 044]

So the question is when/if WS starts flights to Asia and i'm assuming they will, where will the flights be from. Is it worth it for WS to fly YYC-Asia and have a huge population from YVR having to backtrack to YYC before continuing on to Asia? Will this be competitive in any way based on AC and a multitude of other airlines available at YVR? I just don't see it. We at YEG will couldn't care less whether we connect at YYC or YVR to get to Asia (insert joke here). Same thing for anyone connecting from the east. So the only people that will truly be affected is those out of YVR. Saying that i don't know if YVR is a blood bath for flights to Asia and WS is banking of at least capturing anyone out of Alberta which will makeup for lack of connections from BC.

Another question for the experts. Which flights from Canada provide higher yield Canada-Asia or Canada-Europe? From my limited research it seems like prices to Asia are always less expensive yet the flight times are much longer. It will be curious if WS will start to fly more so to Asia or Europe once the 787's arrive.

[casper]

Originally Posted by LO 044

So the question is when/if WS starts flights to Asia and i'm assuming they will, where will the flights be from. Is it worth it for WS to fly YYC-Asia and have a huge population from YVR having to backtrack to YYC before continuing on to Asia? Will this be competitive in any way based on AC and a multitude of other airlines available at YVR? I just don't see it. We at YEG will couldn't care less whether we connect at YYC or YVR to get to Asia (insert joke here). Same thing for anyone connecting from the east. So the only people that will truly be affected is those out of YVR. Saying that i don't know if YVR is a blood bath for flights to Asia and WS is banking of at least capturing anyone out of Alberta which will makeup for lack of connections from BC.

Another question for the experts. Which flights from Canada provide higher yield Canada-Asia or Canada-Europe? From my limited research it seems like prices to Asia are always less expensive yet the flight times are much longer. It will be curious if WS will start to fly more so to Asia or Europe once the 787's arrive.

The issue WestJet is going to have is it has very few 787 on order. During the first few years even fewer. An Asia flight uses up two aircraft. A European flight can generally be done with one aircraft. I think they get more bang for their buck focusing on Europe.

[CloudInspector]

Originally Posted by LO 044

So the question is when/if WS starts flights to Asia and i'm assuming they will, where will the flights be from. Is it worth it for WS to fly YYC-Asia and have a huge population from YVR having to backtrack to YYC before continuing on to Asia? Will this be competitive in any way based on AC and a multitude of other airlines available at YVR? I just don't see it. We at YEG will couldn't care less whether we connect at YYC or YVR to get to Asia (insert joke here). Same thing for anyone connecting from the east. So the only people that will truly be affected is those out of YVR. Saying that i don't know if YVR is a blood bath for flights to Asia and WS is banking of at least capturing anyone out of Alberta which will makeup for lack of connections from BC.

Looking at the route maps from the investor day slides and Saretzky’s Vancouver Board of Trade presentation, it looks like the 787 flying will be focused on YVR and YYZ. In my opinion, using YYC to fly to Asia and overflying millions of people wouldn’t make sense, and it could be why United flies trans-Pacific out of SFO and LAX versus their massive hub in DEN.

Just my opinion though, I’ve been wrong once or twice before

[hollywoodcory]

http://westjet2.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1316

The news release says YYC is now WS largest hub in Canada. Lots of domestic increases.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory

http://westjet2.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1316

The news release says YYC is now WS largest hub in Canada. Lots of domestic increases.

I like how the press release highlights that YYC is “once again” Westjet’s largest hub. YYZ edged out YYC for a couple of years.

This summer by adding 72 flights per week at YYC vs only 28 at YYZ puts YYC back on top.

Westjet will have about 137 daily flights from YYC vs 128 at YYZ.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by CloudInspector

Looking at the route maps from the investor day slides and Saretzky’s Vancouver Board of Trade presentation, it looks like the 787 flying will be focused on YVR and YYZ. In my opinion, using YYC to fly to Asia and overflying millions of people wouldn’t make sense, and it could be why United flies trans-Pacific out of SFO and LAX versus their massive hub in DEN.

Just my opinion though, I’ve been wrong once or twice before

I would tend to agree, but that doesn't mean WS won't try at least 1 Asian flight out of YYC.

Even UA has DEN-NRT.

I think the bulk of WS 787s that will fly out of YYC will be aiming towards Europe. (LGW, CDG, etc)

[hollywoodcory]

Not sure if this has always been the case, but NRT is jumping to 5x weekly in late March till end of April when it goes daily. Last year it was only 4x weekly during the same period.

Operating everyday except Monday and Sunday.

[Mazrim]

On a related note about the above NRT news...what's the more comfortable economy section? The YYC-NRT 767 or the YVR-NRT 787? I'm not well versed in this stuff but starting to look into it for a trip later this year.

I'm a tall guy so every inch of extra space counts!

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory

Not sure if this has always been the case, but NRT is jumping to 5x weekly in late March till end of April when it goes daily. Last year it was only 4x weekly during the same period.

Operating everyday except Monday and Sunday.

Always been a gradual increase. Although it looks like the route is going to be on a 763 after all.

AC is restoring the YYC-YQQ route this summer (seasonal) though so a little AC love buried under the massive Westjet increase! One daily DH4.

https://aircanada.mediaroom.com/2018-01-...estic-Regional-Routes-starting-July-2018

Also... I don’t think the Westjet press release took into account the new 11 daily Westjet Link flights. The actual increase in frequencies would be more than 140 per week compared to last summer.

[hollywoodcory]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Always been a gradual increase. Although it looks like the route is going to be on a 763 after all.

AC is restoring the YYC-YQQ route this summer (seasonal) though so a little AC love buried under the massive Westjet increase! One daily DH4.

https://aircanada.mediaroom.com/2018-01-...estic-Regional-Routes-starting-July-2018

Also... I don’t think the Westjet press release took into account the new 11 daily Westjet Link flights. The actual increase in frequencies would be more than 140 per week compared to last summer.

I asked an AC agent and they said it is an frequency increase of 1x weekly then what was originally planned in April. So 3x weekly till end of March to 5x weekly for April and then daily in May. Still on a 763 and a thru flight.

[hoboman27]

The airport's baggage system, is it as good as they say? Looks expensive.

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1314757

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by Acey

Legroom differences for most seats seems negligible in the 31" pitch range, but 767 seat is about half an inch wider and its config of 2-3-2 feels more spacious and no "double excuse me". As someone of average height, I hate middle seats more than I hate a lack of legroom.

Yep, which is why I much prefer the A330 over the 787/777. I like to have a window seat, but I don't like having to climb over two people to get out. I do a lot of flying for business, especially in southeast Asia, and I'm so glad that the A330 is the standard plane for regional flights in this part of the world.

[zahav]

Just a question, does anyone here edit Wikipedia? Specifically articles on airports like YYC, YEG, YVR, etc? I would do so here and there when there were route announcements. The airport articles used to have airlines separated by mainline and Express as separate entries (ie. AC mainline/express/rouge destinations split out separately, UA mainline/express split etc.) Now they are all under one single entry ie. Air Canada, United Airlines, American Airlines. It appears to be all airports changed to this new standard. Interesting change, it is good in that in condenses information and eliminates double entries (for example, if Westjet mainline and Encore both served the same route pairing, the same destination would be shown twice). It's bad since now you can't tell which routes are mainline and which are express, for us hard-core AV geeks. But of course you can still find out at each airline's website or Googe Flights, but Wikipedia used to be a quick reference for it

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by zahav

Just a question, does anyone here edit Wikipedia? Specifically articles on airports like YYC, YEG, YVR, etc? I would do so here and there when there were route announcements. The airport articles used to have airlines separated by mainline and Express as separate entries (ie. AC mainline/express/rouge destinations split out separately, UA mainline/express split etc.) Now they are all under one single entry ie. Air Canada, United Airlines, American Airlines. It appears to be all airports changed to this new standard. Interesting change, it is good in that in condenses information and eliminates double entries (for example, if Westjet mainline and Encore both served the same route pairing, the same destination would be shown twice). It's bad since now you can't tell which routes are mainline and which are express, for us hard-core AV geeks. But of course you can still find out at each airline's website or Googe Flights, but Wikipedia used to be a quick reference for it

The change you saw on the airport pages was done without proper consensus. It is being dealt with. I'm an extensive wiki editor (close to 20,000 edits so far... but slowing down lately) mostly on aviation related material. We are voting on this as we speak. We should be arriving at a consensus soon.

You can read through the discussions about this here.

it's funny. This topic made it to airliners.net as well....

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

On a related note about the above NRT news...what's the more comfortable economy section? The YYC-NRT 767 or the YVR-NRT 787? I'm not well versed in this stuff but starting to look into it for a trip later this year.

I'm a tall guy so every inch of extra space counts!

I'm a frequent AC traveler (and frequent lurker of this thread ) so I can comment pretty well on this topic.

Depends on what you want.

• Legroom is about identical
• Dreamliner has vastly superior seatback screen/entertainment system
• 767 has wider seats
• dreamliner is quieter
• Dreamliner has much better cabin air so you feel less jetlagged when you arrive
• Dreamliner windows are dimmable centrally so some jackass opening their window mid flight while you are trying to get a nap wont wake you

All in all I much prefer the dreamliner, despite the thinner seats, but if you're a wider set person it may be not worth the squeeze.

[zahav]

Thanks for the info noflyzone and Acey, I am an avid Wiki reader but only slightly into editing, so didn't even realize to check the boards.

Regarding YVR being a hub or focus city question, just a couple things to thicken the plot a bit. I agree it could be more a focus city, especially compared to YYC and YYZ. But you can't discount certain destinations as one of the reasons it's not a hub (like "Oh other than Hawaii"), that is a big market for WS. It's not insignificant that they connect flights to 4 Hawaiian cities multiple times daily from YVR. Orange County is another city only served from YVR.

And with Encore, there is healthy feeders from YYJ, YLW, YXS, YXT, YXJ etc. Granted it's not on YYC levels, but it is signficiant enough that it is in hub territory. Another thing to consider is how WS partners with all the international carriers out of YVR. WS flights to all over Canada (pretty much all destiations if you do a search) have codeshares with many airlines: JAL, Korean, China Airlines, Qantas on tons. This means although WS doesn't have overseas flights, it connects pax from all the YVR international flights to points across Canada. So WS hubs pax from YWG, YQR, YXE, YEG, YYC to it's partners too. Again I know the "hub" defintion is debatable, but there is definitely an argument to be made the YVR is one. WS has 35 destinations non-stop.

Just my two cents, I still agree with either option in it's own way, but I don't think you can definitevely rule it out as a hub as there is a lot of connecting pax, not just end-point. And PS, Delta does classify BOS as a hub, a smaller one yes, but it is a hub and not a focus city.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm a frequent AC traveler (and frequent lurker of this thread ) so I can comment pretty well on this topic.

Depends on what you want.

• Legroom is about identical
• Dreamliner has vastly superior seatback screen/entertainment system
• 767 has wider seats
• dreamliner is quieter
• Dreamliner has much better cabin air so you feel less jetlagged when you arrive
• Dreamliner windows are dimmable centrally so some jackass opening their window mid flight while you are trying to get a nap wont wake you

All in all I much prefer the dreamliner, despite the thinner seats, but if you're a wider set person it may be not worth the squeeze.

This is some great info, thanks for that! The width doesn't bother me, but the lack of leg room definitely does. Guess there's no advantage on the 767 there, though Acey's note about the 2-3-2 setup is a good point.

[topdog]

Agreed 100%. I've flown the Dreamliner, the 767, and the A330 and my best flying experiences have been with the Dreamliner. It's the only times I've ever had a decent nap/sleep, and even though the seats are thinner I never noticed it at all. The seats were more comfortable.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm a frequent AC traveler (and frequent lurker of this thread ) so I can comment pretty well on this topic.

Depends on what you want.

• Legroom is about identical
• Dreamliner has vastly superior seatback screen/entertainment system
• 767 has wider seats
• dreamliner is quieter
• Dreamliner has much better cabin air so you feel less jetlagged when you arrive
• Dreamliner windows are dimmable centrally so some jackass opening their window mid flight while you are trying to get a nap wont wake you

All in all I much prefer the dreamliner, despite the thinner seats, but if you're a wider set person it may be not worth the squeeze.

[BlueFusion]

Looks like there are issues getting Westjet Link off and running...

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/westjet-link-launch-delayed-672040033.html