YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion - Page 677

nname · #**13521** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 6:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

KIX is 6 weekly from what I see, just x6

SO curious what is happening with DUB, I can see them moving it to mainline. I hope that is the case at least!

Not from AC Flight Schedule (which usually updates first)

Code:

<CarrierCode>AC</CarrierCode>
<FlightNumber>39</FlightNumber>
<OverallStatus>SCHEDULED</OverallStatus>
  ...
<OperatingInfo>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-11">false</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-12">true</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-13">true</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-14">true</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-15">true</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-16">false</Operating>
  <Operating departureDate="2019-08-17">true</Operating>
</OperatingInfo>

nname · #**13522** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 7:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

SO curious what is happening with DUB, I can see them moving it to mainline. I hope that is the case at least!

I was thinking they could convert it to 788 and use the other 3x weekly for something else... but then I notice there aren't any spare 788s anymore. In fact, the current routes for 788 couldn't even fit without some small schedule adjustments.

I guess another possibility is that it'll use the slot for CDG (they both x246), and uses something else for CDG? Possibly rotate with the 333s from YUL?

Or it can rotate with the 789s... but there aren't any non-daily 789 routes except for MEL (which increases to 4x weekly, also happens to be x246).

And then speaking of that, what are they going to do with the other 3x weekly from the MEL rotation? MEL will no longer rotate with DEL, since DEL will be daily next summer.

Johnny Aussie · #**13523** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 7:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

I was thinking they could convert it to 788 and use the other 3x weekly for something else... but then I notice there aren't any spare 788s anymore. In fact, the current routes for 788 couldn't even fit without some small schedule adjustments.

I guess another possibility is that it'll use the slot for CDG (they both x246), and uses something else for CDG? Possibly rotate with the 333s from YUL?

Or it can rotate with the 789s... but there aren't any non-daily 789 routes except for MEL (which increases to 4x weekly, also happens to be x246).

And then speaking of that, what are they going to do with the other 3x weekly from the MEL rotation? MEL will no longer rotate with DEL, since DEL will be daily next summer.

Looks like there is still more to the story then!

Fantastic to see increases to ZRH, MEL and DEL.

Will have to wait and see how this all unfolds.

mezzanine · #**13524** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 3:18 PM**

Ha! Will it be SIN?

It would be good timing with the LNG announcement and some of the proponents being from SE Asia.

thenoflyzone · #**13525** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 4:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Ha! Will it be SIN?

It would be good timing with the LNG announcement and some of the proponents being from SE Asia.

Probably not.

Only 2 789 deliveries left to come from now until summer 2019.

The new YYZ-VIE takes up 1 frame. Several other 788/789 routes are increasing in frequency, and therefore with 1 (or less) frames left, can't see there being room for a daily SIN flight. (launching SIN at anything less than daily service is a waste of time). And AC still needs some frames to replace the 767s on YYC-NRT, YOW-FRA/LHR. And DUB is still a question mark.

I simpy can't see how YVR-SIN can be operated with the current fleet plan of AC (without another route being canceled that is).

I used to think YVR-SIN was a priority for AC, but the more I think about it, the less likely that scenario seems. Probably for the better. 30,000 O&D is not enough to sustain such a long route. Of course, there is always SQ...

nname · #**13526** Posted **Oct 3, 2018, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Probably not.

Only 2 789 deliveries left to come from now until summer 2019.

The new YYZ-VIE takes up 1 frame. Several other 788/789 routes are increasing in frequency, and therefore with 1 (or less) frames left, can't see there being room for a daily SIN flight. (launching SIN at anything less than daily service is a waste of time). And AC still needs some frames to replace the 767s on YYC-NRT, YOW-FRA/LHR. And DUB is still a question mark.

I simpy can't see how YVR-SIN can be operated with the current fleet plan of AC (without another route being canceled that is).

I used to think YVR-SIN was a priority for AC, but the more I think about it, the less likely that scenario seems. Probably for the better. 30,000 O&D is not enough to sustain such a long route. Of course, there is always SQ...

They must do something with those 2 frames that runs the 4x weekly YVR-MEL, right? Where else can they put it for the other 3 days? There is no other non-daily 789 routes out of YVR, and I don't think they'd run any domestic flight 3x weekly to rotate with long haul from another base...

Now thinking more about this, calculating the widebody requirement for YVR next summer

-3 Removal of Rouge 767 flights
+1 Change 7x weekly CDG/ZRH into 14x weekly CDG/ZRH/KIX rotation
+0 Change 7x weekly DEL/MEL into standalone DEL flight
+0 Aircraft change for LHR/FRA

Now the more complicated stuff
+1.1 4x weekly MEL flight, the second frame only needed for approx 12 hours on Tuesday morning
+0.6 4x weekly DUB still in limbo, but this plane cannot be the same as the 0.1 from MEL flight as it is still in the air Tuesday morning for x246 schedule

So as of now, the YVR actually have 0.3 less widebodies in service per week, but of course, the current schedule will require +1 plane just for Tuesday morning. Unless there will be a change in schedule to remove the Monday flight to DUB, I don't see how it would work.

And didn't AC ordered 4 more 333s to replace the 763s?

zahav · #**13527** Posted **Oct 4, 2018, 7:13 AM**

I think AC would rather SQ take the risk of a Singpore flight, look how long it took them to finally launch even an un-risky route like TPE, letting BR operate it for *A all those years. And AC's Euro additions were fairly safe too (CDG moreso than ZRH, but still). I feel like AC is way quicker to cozy up to its European *A partners than the Asian ones. They could do so much more with their YVR base and partners like Thai and Singapore but just don't seem to want to try. They even codeshare closer with Cathay than they do with SQ, and Cathay is One World! Kinda bizarre to me

nname · #**13528** Posted **Oct 4, 2018, 7:57 AM**

I was so curious about how the DUB flight and the extra 3x weekly flight will go, so I gathered all the mainline long-hual frequency changes from AC:

Code:

Toronto ->
  Berlin 4->6 R
  Bogota 5->D R
  Bucharest 2->3 R
  Lima 4->3 R
  Manchester 5->D R
  Vienna 0->7 M
  Warsaw 7E->7R
Overall -7E +7M +14R

Montreal ->
  Algers 4->5 R
  Bordeaux 0->4 N
  Bucharest 2->3 R
  Dublin 4->3 N
  Lima 2->3 R
Overall +3N +3R

Vancouver ->
  Delhi 4->D M
  Dublin 5->4 R
  Honolulu 5R->7N
  Kahului 2R->5N
  Melbroune 3->4 M
  Nayoga 3->0 R
  Osaka 6R->5M
  Zurich 3->5 M
Overall +11M +12N -17R

E = 767 Mainline
M = 787 Mainline
N = 7M8 Mainline
R = Rouge

So all the Rouge resource freed up from YVR were already taken up. One 767 frame is gone (which was the plan I believe), the previous reported equipment change between 777, 787, and 330 seems to be status quo. And the last two new 787 seems like going one each to YVR and YYZ, but there's not enough to run 11 weekly at YVR from just a single plane??

And there's doesn't seen to have enough resource to add anything else though.. unless the new A330s are also coming next year? But that would be replacing the remaining mainline 767s still in the system?

The entire long-hual schedule so far for S19:

Code:

AC 2	77W	D	HND - YYZ
AC 4	789	D	NRT - YVR
AC 6	789	D	NRT - YUL
AC 8	77W	D	HKG - YVR
AC 10	763	D	NRT - YYC - YYZ
AC 12	789	D	PVG - YUL
AC 14	-	-	Not Found!
AC 16	77L	D	HKG - YYZ
AC 18	789	D	TPE - YVR
AC 20	-	-	Not Found!
AC 22	-	-	Not Found!
AC 24	-	-	Not Found!
AC 26	77W	D	PVG - YVR
AC 28	789	D	PVG - YYZ
AC 30	77W	D	PEK - YVR
AC 32	77W	D	PEK - YYZ
AC 34	77L	D	SYD - YVR - YYZ
AC 36	788	D	BNE - YVR
AC 38	789	2357	MEL - YVR
AC 40	788	23457	KIX - YVR
AC 42	789	D	YYZ - DEL
AC 44	789	D	YVR - DEL
AC 46	789	1357	YYZ - BOM
AC 48	-	-	Not Found!
AC 50	-	-	Not Found!
AC 52	-	-	Not Found!
AC 54	-	-	Not Found!
AC 56	789	246	YYZ - DXB
AC 58	-	-	Not Found!
AC 60	-	-	Not Found!
AC 62	77W	D	ICN - YYZ
AC 64	789	D	ICN - YVR
AC 66	-	-	Not Found!
AC 68	-	-	Not Found!
AC 70	-	-	Not Found!
AC 72	-	-	Not Found!
AC 74	-	-	Not Found!
AC 76	-	-	Not Found!
AC 78	-	-	Not Found!
AC 80	-	-	Not Found!
AC 82	333	347	YUL - TLV
AC 84	789	D	YYZ - TLV
AC 86	-	-	Not Found!
AC 88	-	-	Not Found!
AC 90	789	D	YYZ - GRU
AC 92	789	2467	YYZ - SCL
AC 94	789	135	YYZ - EZE
AC 96	-	-	Not Found!
AC 98	-	-	Not Found!
AC 800	-	-	Not Found!
AC 802	788	24567	YVR - ZRH
AC 804	-	-	Not Found!
AC 806	788	1357	YVR - CDG
AC 808	333	123567	YUL - CMN
AC 810	-	-	Not Found!
AC 812	7M8	257	YUL - KEF
AC 814	7M8	1346	YUL - BOD
AC 816	7M8	1346	YYZ - KEF
AC 818	7M8	246	YUL - DUB
AC 820	7M8	2457	YYZ - SNN
AC 822	7M8	D	YYT - LHR
AC 824	789	D	YYZ - AMS
AC 826	-	-	Not Found!
AC 828	333	12456	YUL - LYS
AC 830	-	-	Not Found!
AC 832	333	D	YUL - BRU
AC 834	333	D	YYZ - YUL - GVA
AC 836	789	D	YYZ - MAD
AC 838	763	D	YOW - FRA
AC 840	789	D	YVR - FRA
AC 842	333	D	YYZ - DUB
AC 844	77L	D	YYC - FRA
AC 846	789	D	YYZ - MUC
AC 848	77W	D	YYZ - LHR
AC 850	789	D	YYC - LHR
AC 852	-	-	Not Found!
AC 854	789	D	YVR - LHR
AC 856	77W	D	YYZ - LHR
AC 858	77W	D	YYZ - LHR
AC 860	7M8	D	YHZ - LHR
AC 862	-	-	Not Found!
AC 864	333	D	YUL - LHR
AC 866	-	-	Not Found!
AC 868	788	D	YYZ - LHR
AC 870	333	D	YUL - CDG
AC 872	77W	D	YYZ - FRA
AC 874	789	D	YUL - FRA
AC 876	77L	D	YYZ - FRA
AC 878	77W	D	YYZ - ZRH
AC 880	77W	D	YYZ - CDG
AC 882	77W	D	YYZ - CPH
AC 884	77W	D	YUL - CDG
AC 886	-	-	Not Found!
AC 888	763	D	YOW - LHR
AC 890	77W	D	YYZ - FCO
AC 892	77W	D	YUL - FCO
AC 894	788	D	YYZ - MXP
AC 896	788	D	YVR - LHR
AC 898	789	D	YYZ - VIE
AC 1900	763	D	YYZ - ATH
AC 1902	763	D	YUL - ATH
AC 1904	763	2457	YYZ - EDI
AC 1906	763	D	YYZ - VCE
AC 1908	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1910	763	D	YYZ - BUD
AC 1912	763	D	YUL - BCN
AC 1914	763	D	YYZ - BCN
AC 1916	763	123567	YYZ - LIS
AC 1918	763	456	YUL - VCE
AC 1920	763	24567	YUL - ALG
AC 1922	763	134567	YYZ - PRG
AC 1924	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1926	763	D	YYZ - WAW
AC 1928	763	247	YUL - OTP
AC 1930	763	D	YYZ - MAN
AC 1932	763	1246	YUL - NCE
AC 1934	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1936	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1938	763	136	YYZ - GLA
AC 1940	763	1357	YVR - DUB
AC 1942	763	136	YUL - LIM
AC 1944	763	D	YYZ - BOG
AC 1946	763	2457	YYZ - LIM
AC 1948	319	357	YYZ - PTY
AC 1950	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1952	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1954	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1956	-	-	Not Found!
AC 1958	763	357	YYZ - OPO
AC 1960	763	357	YUL - LIS
AC 1962	763	357	YUL - MRS
AC 1964	763	136	YYZ - OTP
AC 1966	763	123467	YYZ - TXL
AC 1968	763	2346	YYZ - ZAG
AC 1970	-	-	Not Found!

thenoflyzone · #**13529** Posted **Oct 4, 2018, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

And didn't AC ordered 4 more 333s to replace the 763s?

Yes. 4 ex. SQ A333s that are now with TAP. They are all 9.5 years old at the moment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

.. unless the new A330s are also coming next year? But that would be replacing the remaining mainline 767s still in the system?

yes, in 2019. YVR-DUB will more than likely go A333, by the looks of it.

LeftCoaster · #**13530** Posted **Oct 5, 2018, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

August stats are out. Growth more subdued for sure, I think the onslaught of fires/weather factored in as many had predicted. I wonder if rebookings into September will help those numbers, or if it was just a wash of cancellations without rebooking? The US numbers continue to be underwhelming after a stronger first half of the year. Still the Trump effect?

Domestic: +4.5% (+6.8% YTD)
Transborder: +2.9% (+6.1% YTD)
International (non-transborder): +10.2% (+13% YTD)
International (incl transborder): +6.7% (+9.7% YTD)
Overall: +5.7% (+8.3% YTD)

Still not bad numbers for the month, roughly the same as YUL's overall growth but lower than YYC's. YYC domestic has been pulling ahead again, while international is shrinking. YVR and YUL are more similar with international leading the way

Hmm well the PAX increases largely mirror the capacity increases I was tracking for peak summer.

So the PAX increased by more than capacity increased on Asia-Pac so average loads went up. PAX increased by less than capacity increased on Europe, so loads went down, but given the big increase to Europe seats this summer that is likely a very impressive absorption on the new routes. Explains why it seems ZRH might be getting a bump.

Transborder on the other-hand is a big disappointment. So is domestic... where are all those YYC flyers going, cause it doesn't seem to be YVR!

I wonder if swoop and YXX are taking a bit of YVRs steam on the domestic front?

nname · #**13531** Posted **Oct 5, 2018, 9:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Transborder on the other-hand is a big disappointment. So is domestic... where are all those YYC flyers going, cause it doesn't seem to be YVR!

I wonder if swoop and YXX are taking a bit of YVRs steam on the domestic front?

Or maybe now people can take direct YVR-Europe flights (International) instead of YVR-YYZ-Europe (Domestic) or YVR-EWR-Europe (Transborder).

Similarly, people can now use YVR-MEX-South America (International) instead of YVR-YYZ-South America (Domestic) or YVR-LAX-South America (Transborder).

Some of the increase in International traffic must be coming from somewhere... not all of them are new.

Johnny Aussie · #**13532** Posted **Oct 5, 2018, 11:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Hmm well the PAX increases largely mirror the capacity increases I was tracking for peak summer.

So the PAX increased by more than capacity increased on Asia-Pac so average loads went up. PAX increased by less than capacity increased on Europe, so loads went down, but given the big increase to Europe seats this summer that is likely a very impressive absorption on the new routes. Explains why it seems ZRH might be getting a bump.

Transborder on the other-hand is a big disappointment. So is domestic... where are all those YYC flyers going, cause it doesn't seem to be YVR!

I wonder if swoop and YXX are taking a bit of YVRs steam on the domestic front?

Just be careful when comparing capacity vs actual growth as your spreadsheets (which are excellent by the way) are just estimates.

Both Asia Pacific and Europe statistically within an error margin implies that all capacity is most likely being absorbed. My former auditor days lingo!

There were some cancellations to FRA as well this summer. All that needs to be taken into account.

Overall fantastic international growth continuing.

As the base number for transborder starts to become higher even decent flight additions will now reflect lower % growth. In pure numbers growth YVR still plodding along well. TBH there wasn’t significant transborder capacity added this summer compared to last summer. 18,000 more transborder pax in Aug 18 vs Aug 17. Case in point YEG transborder increased a massive 25% in August but only 15,000 more passengers. I will suggest that capacity increases didn’t get absorbed as well but certainly not “poor.”

Same with domestic... I don’t think there were any significant increases this year... Flair’s additions were very minor. Domestic growth at 4.5% is still pretty decent actually. Still 50,000 more domestic passengers in Aug 2018 vs Aug 2017.

zahav · #**13533** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 7:03 AM**

Not sure if it was a factor, but AC added tons of flights this summer that bypassed YVR (YCD-YYZ, YKA-YYZ, YYJ-YUL too I think). I mentioned a few posts back that it is very encouraging to see AC beef up service to those centres as it shows there is strong demand from BC cities. However for YVR traffic, more point to point service from secondary cities do take some away from domestic connections.

It's pretting obvious that AC's priorities as firmly in YYZ, they would sooner do a route like YYZ-YKA than even a couple weekly YVR-YHZ or YVR-YQB, which connect way bigger and more important (sorry Kamloops) cities

casper · #**13534** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 8:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

Not sure if it was a factor, but AC added tons of flights this summer that bypassed YVR (YCD-YYZ, YKA-YYZ, YYJ-YUL too I think). I mentioned a few posts back that it is very encouraging to see AC beef up service to those centres as it shows there is strong demand from BC cities. However for YVR traffic, more point to point service from secondary cities do take some away from domestic connections.

It's pretting obvious that AC's priorities as firmly in YYZ, they would sooner do a route like YYZ-YKA than even a couple weekly YVR-YHZ or YVR-YQB, which connect way bigger and more important (sorry Kamloops) cities

I am not certain these new routes to YYZ are going to have a major impact on YVR. It is more a case of over flying YYC. From Kamloops you would be more likely to use YYC as your connecting airport heading east.

Johnny Aussie · #**13535** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 10:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

Not sure if it was a factor, but AC added tons of flights this summer that bypassed YVR (YCD-YYZ, YKA-YYZ, YYJ-YUL too I think). I mentioned a few posts back that it is very encouraging to see AC beef up service to those centres as it shows there is strong demand from BC cities. However for YVR traffic, more point to point service from secondary cities do take some away from domestic connections.

It's pretting obvious that AC's priorities as firmly in YYZ, they would sooner do a route like YYZ-YKA than even a couple weekly YVR-YHZ or YVR-YQB, which connect way bigger and more important (sorry Kamloops) cities

Tons of flights?

YCD-YYZ 4 weekly
YKA-YYZ 3 weekly
YYJ-YUL 3 weekly

Let's not get too carried away here.

Clearly these markets can sustain limited seasonal flights. Not necessarily prioritising YYZ more like the markets are large enough.

nname · #**13536** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 12:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

Not sure if it was a factor, but AC added tons of flights this summer that bypassed YVR (YCD-YYZ, YKA-YYZ, YYJ-YUL too I think). I mentioned a few posts back that it is very encouraging to see AC beef up service to those centres as it shows there is strong demand from BC cities. However for YVR traffic, more point to point service from secondary cities do take some away from domestic connections.

It's pretting obvious that AC's priorities as firmly in YYZ, they would sooner do a route like YYZ-YKA than even a couple weekly YVR-YHZ or YVR-YQB, which connect way bigger and more important (sorry Kamloops) cities

thenoflyzone · #**13537** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 3:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahav

It's pretting obvious that AC's priorities as firmly in YYZ, they would sooner do a route like YYZ-YKA than even a couple weekly YVR-YHZ or YVR-YQB, which connect way bigger and more important (sorry Kamloops) cities

That's not true. As Johnny said, those markets are served because the demand is there during peak season. There is probably more demand on YUL-YYJ than YVR-YQB, that's all.

thenoflyzone · #**13538** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 4:39 PM**

...there is also probably more demand for YYJ-Europe than YQB-East Asia. And with YUL getting service to the main East Asian markets, there is less of a need to connect in YVR.

Johnny Aussie · #**13539** Posted **Oct 6, 2018, 10:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

...there is also probably more demand for YYJ-Europe than YQB-East Asia. And with YUL getting service to the main East Asian markets, there is less of a need to connect in YVR.

I would assume YQB passengers travelling to/from East Asia would have connected in YYZ even before YUL had flights to NRT, PVG and PEK. So really there probably would have been minimal (next to zero) passengers transiting YVR from YQB to Asia anyway.

thenoflyzone · #**13540** Posted **Oct 7, 2018, 1:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I would assume YQB passengers travelling to/from East Asia would have connected in YYZ even before YUL had flights to NRT, PVG and PEK. So really there probably would have been minimal (next to zero) passengers transiting YVR from YQB to Asia anyway.

Exactly right. AC's East Asian network from YYZ is almost as big as YVR, meaning a lesser need to connect there.