YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion - Page 633

LeftCoaster · #**12641** Posted **Feb 27, 2018, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

Or rotate it with DUB plus new destination? HRB? CTS?? CJU??? or maybe a crack at LIM??

Since AC is also gradually replacing some matured TPAC Rouge routes with B787 and A330... those Route 767s will need to go somewhere else....

I'm hoping this gives us a new route but am assuming it means another 767 transitioned away from YVR.

If it does mean the 767 base closes in YVR then I think that will likely mean Dublin goes mainline. It is clearly performing well being bumped from 3xPW to 5xPW and service from YYZ and YUL just went mainline. As far as I know this is one of the only long-haul destinations AC serves with both mainline and Rouge aircraft.

With all that said I think there are several routes that would work well for Rouge and hope they base a few frames here permanently.

Summer:
FCO, BER, and DUB, all 3-5 times a week.

Winter is a bit tougher:
LIM, CTS, PPT also 3-5 times per week?

Alpine · #**12642** Posted **Feb 27, 2018, 4:05 AM**

KE's plans to use a 747-8i on the ICN-YVR route (June 1-October 27) have been cancelled; it will continue to be a low-season 787-9.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/277051/korean-air-s18-changes-as-of-07feb18/

This means YVR will once again have no 747-8i flights. I don't know if Sea-Tac has any.

I wonder why AC's mainline/Rouge's short-haul product is consistently good (or at least okay) w.r.t. IFE, meals, selection of alcoholic drinks, overall experience, etc., while the domestic (and sometimes even international!) product of U.S. carriers is almost consistently terrible.

whatnext · #**12643** Posted **Feb 27, 2018, 4:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lancaster

Flying Rouge on many domestic routes is a really exciting development for AC in my opinion. I believe you could see mainline focus on hub-hub and hub-spoke flying for connecting/business/premium economy passengers, and Rouge taking on point-point O&D flying that the market won't support as a connection through YUL, YYZ and YVR.

For instance - maybe YWG - YXE is better served as Rouge, or seasonal winter weekly flying from YWG to CUN, or seasonal YWG - YYT. Opens up a whole new market segment that their premium-focused mainline can't really do.

Yeah exciting if you enjoy "race to the bottom" service and comfort. Rouge A319s should be registered as instruments of torture, the product in Y is so uncomfortable.

Johnny Aussie · #**12644** Posted **Feb 27, 2018, 6:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alpine

KE's plans to use a 747-8i on the ICN-YVR route (June 1-October 27) have been cancelled; it will continue to be a low-season 787-9.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/277051/korean-air-s18-changes-as-of-07feb18/

This means YVR will once again have no 747-8i flights. I don't know if Sea-Tac has any.

Reported by me ages ago.

The 747-8i is one of the most uncommon widebody pax aircraft out there. Flown commercially by CA, LH and KE only. Only 36 frames flown by those three carriers. Very few airports see them on a regular basis.

SpongeG · #**12645** Posted **Feb 27, 2018, 6:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcair

Miami Air? Saudia? Iraq Airways? If not, could you tell if it was a wide-body (i.e. 777) or narrow-body (A320 or 737)?

none of those, was a widebody though, we had to sit on the tarmac or taxi area a while cause the gate we were going to use had a plane in it and I only caught glimpses of it through the windows on the other side from me. I didn't think to look when i went through the terminal. It was one I have never seen at YVR before. Perhaps a special stopover for the olympics coming back? It was at gate D55 I think.

CareerShow · #**12646** Posted **Feb 28, 2018, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm hoping this gives us a new route but am assuming it means another 767 transitioned away from YVR.

If it does mean the 767 base closes in YVR then I think that will likely mean Dublin goes mainline. It is clearly performing well being bumped from 3xPW to 5xPW and service from YYZ and YUL just went mainline. As far as I know this is one of the only long-haul destinations AC serves with both mainline and Rouge aircraft.

With all that said I think there are several routes that would work well for Rouge and hope they base a few frames here permanently.

Summer:
FCO, BER, and DUB, all 3-5 times a week.

Winter is a bit tougher:
LIM, CTS, PPT also 3-5 times per week?

That would be great. Perhaps an a333 rotated through Dublin with YYZ is in the cards. Either that or a 788 would be my guess.

zahav · #**12647** Posted **Mar 1, 2018, 8:31 AM**

CTV had a segment tonight about YVR, and the growth. Nothing new that forumers on here didn't already know, but just reinforced the growth plans. Here's a link:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/changes-coming-to-vancouver-s-bustling-yvr-airport-1.3821453

Some comments from Craig Richmond below:

“YVR is the fastest growing international airport in North America,” said Craig Richmond, CEO of the Vancouver Airport Authority, “I have to tell you, nobody expected this rapid growth.”
The airport had 24 million passengers pass through it in 2017, and it’s expecting an extra five million more per year by 2020.
"We're seeing planes 91 per cent full to Europe and 86 per cent full to Latin America," said Richmond.

Interesting claim about fastest growth in NA, it's debatable depending how it's measured. But I like the comment about Latin America, the worry was too much capacity to MEX but sounds like it's getting absorbed? He obviously got those stats somewhere, so hopefully the fact he mentioned it at all is a good sign the flights are holding up. The fact that AM is holding up their doubly dailies AND codesharing on the new daily WS service I think is a good sign

officedweller · #**12648** Posted **Mar 1, 2018, 9:51 PM**

Major parking changes take effect at Vancouver International Airport
http://www.news1130.com/2018/03/01/parking-vancouver-airport/

The value lot has moved to Templeton Station for construction of a parkade extension.

http://www.news1130.com/2018/03/01/parking-vancouver-airport/

Johnny Aussie · #**12649** Posted **Mar 2, 2018, 6:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

Interesting claim about fastest growth in NA, it's debatable depending how it's measured. But I like the comment about Latin America, the worry was too much capacity to MEX but sounds like it's getting absorbed? He obviously got those stats somewhere, so hopefully the fact he mentioned it at all is a good sign the flights are holding up. The fact that AM is holding up their doubly dailies AND codesharing on the new daily WS service I think is a good sign

In regards to the fastest growth comment, they are referring to the fastest growing airport in North America in terms of "international traffic," not the fastest growing "international airport." Although YVR's overall growth in 2017 would still be one of the top in North America anyway.

trofirhen · #**12650** Posted **Mar 2, 2018, 12:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

In regards to the fastest growth comment, they are referring to the fastest growing airport in North America in terms of "international traffic," not the fastest growing "international airport." Although YVR's overall growth in 2017 would still be one of the top in North America anyway.

This growth is so exciting. One early route was YVR - AMS, which then-Canadian Pacific Airlines began, and was allowed to keep, the other European destination being LHR with AC.
Air Canada was then a crown corporation, and had everything else in Europe, and the Caribbean, before it got big, after taking over Canadian Airlines.
If I had my wish list for year-round overseas destinations, I'd add SIN, BKK, IST, MUC; ... MTY, GDL, GRU, LIM, SCL, PTY, EZE ... and in the States; IAD, MIA, MCO, ATL, maybe another...
Maybe even IKA, BOM and KUL, if the demand is there. (One can always dream)

Johnny Aussie · #**12651** Posted **Mar 3, 2018, 11:12 PM**

** deleted post **

Johnny Aussie · #**12652** Posted **Mar 3, 2018, 11:13 PM**

** deleted duplicate post **

Johnny Aussie · #**12653** Posted **Mar 3, 2018, 11:14 PM**

Further on the “fastest” growth for international...

Both SAN and SLC did have higher international growth rates than YVR. But to compare.... both cities had well under 1M International Passengers in 2017.

thenoflyzone · #**12654** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 2:30 PM**

^
Starting to split hairs here. Either way, what Richmond said is false.

As far as the busiest airports in Canada are concerned, they dont have the overall top growth rate for 2017 (belongs YUL), so he had to get creative in his wording. They dont have the biggest absolute intl passenger increase (belongs to YYZ). And as Johnny alluded to, they dont even have the top intl growth rate in North America either, so Richmond's sentence is not exactly true. But what do you expect. Managers have to say something.....

Vagabond · #**12655** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 2:47 PM**

So no TK for YVR for the time being.

https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2018-40

mezzanine · #**12656** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagabond

So no TK for YVR for the time being.

https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2018-40

Oh well. To have been a fly on the wall though... AC's move to move YVR-DEL flight year round surprised me and if TK really was interested in YVR i suspect that would have been a major driver on AC's part to move the DEL flight to year round. IMO i'd rather have a more viable DEL flight on AC than service to TK.

and TK will come around asking again no doubt..

nname · #**12657** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 5:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Oh well. To have been a fly on the wall though... AC's move to move YVR-DEL flight year round surprised me and if TK really was interested in YVR i suspect that would have been a major driver on AC's part to move the DEL flight to year round. IMO i'd rather have a more viable DEL flight on AC than service to TK.

and TK will come around asking again no doubt..

TK will go to SEA according to some post in airliners.net.

trofirhen · #**12658** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagabond

So no TK for YVR for the time being.

https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2018-40

Quote:

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Oh well. To have been a fly on the wall though... AC's move to move YVR-DEL flight year round surprised me and if TK really was interested in YVR i suspect that would have been a major driver on AC's part to move the DEL flight to year round. IMO i'd rather have a more viable DEL flight on AC than service to TK.

and TK will come around asking again no doubt..

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

TK will go to SEA according to some post in airliners.net.

Still, a real disappointment. Withg SEA so close close, YVR's losses can become Seattle's gain, as was the case - I understand - with EK.
Why is the Canadian government so "tight-assed" about this, I wonder?

Vagabond · #**12659** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Oh well. To have been a fly on the wall though... AC's move to move YVR-DEL flight year round surprised me and if TK really was interested in YVR i suspect that would have been a major driver on AC's part to move the DEL flight to year round. IMO i'd rather have a more viable DEL flight on AC than service to TK.

and TK will come around asking again no doubt..

I agree, although (aside from DEL) YVR does not have particularly good connections to much of South & West Asia, and TK would have filled that gap nicely. Also, TK's flights from LAX and SFO both depart in the early evening, and a similar schedule ex-YVR would have provided another option for folks who can't catch the earlier flights on LH, KLM, or one of the East Asian carriers.

It also would have been cool to check out Istanbul's massive new upcoming airport!

thenoflyzone · #**12660** Posted **Mar 5, 2018, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagabond

So no TK for YVR for the time being.

https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2018-40

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Still, a real disappointment. Withg SEA so close close, YVR's losses can become Seattle's gain, as was the case - I understand - with EK.
Why is the Canadian government so "tight-assed" about this, I wonder?

I guess they are still protecting AC's interests. It 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵, but that's the only conclusion, considering they recently signed updated biliaterals with countries where AC wants to expand service, such as Israel, Morocco, etc

We know TK (and EK) would go after YVR-India traffic if they were to launch service to YVR. Their fares would be very competitive against AC's non stop flight to DEL. Traffic headed to India is low yielding, and usually wouldn't mind a connection at IST or DXB if it meant saving a few hundred dollars. This would hurt AC's business case between YVR and DEL, especially if TK/EK were granted daily flights to YVR.

Hence, our government is "tight-assed" with Turkey and U.A.E.

Although I do agree that granting open-skies type agreement to Turkey/U.A.E would be over the top, I think both these countries deserve an incremental increase in flights. Start off with 10x weekly each, expand it to 14x weekly after a year or two and then 21x weekly a few years after that. This way, EK/TK can both increase YYZ to daily (or more), and launch YVR. This incremental increase in flights wouldn't hurt AC too much, especially if it's spread out across 5-6 years.

I guess Canada/AC doesn't see it that way.

Our government is being a bit too protectionist.

In the mean time, as I've said before, TK can always cancel YUL and serve YVR as their second point in Canada, if they think there is more money to be made there.