Calgary International Airport II

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Over a JAL dreamliner? Not at all.

Seats are virtually the same width, same pitch, but the dreamliner has much better air, is much quieter, and has better seat back screens.

I personally couldn't care less about seat back screens. I only use them for the map anyway. I bring my own movies, and most of the time when I fly I just read and listen to music anyway.

I also don't find the supposedly 'better air' on the 787 to be anything special. I get just as bad jet lag flying trans Pacific on a 787 as I do on a 777 or a 767. Nor, to me, is the 787 noticeably quieter than the 777; the only plane that I've been truly impressed with the low noise level on is the A380.

So, for me, I'd take the direct flight any day of the week.

[LeftCoaster]

The jetlag I've never noticed either, what I do notice is my lips aren't cracked and chapped after a long flight on a dreamliner, nor is my nose/throat dry and sore.

I too would probably take the direct over the connection, especially with the 2-3-2 on the 767, but if you are going to connect of if AC changes the aircraft to something more cramped, the JAL 787 is most certainly the best option.

You may not care about seatback screens, but when I look around on my flight most people seem to be using them. Definitely a factor IMO.

[jc_yyc_ca]

The air on the 787 is definitely better than the 767, 777 or A330. Not just better, but noticeably better, and as Leftcoaster mentioned the humidity is far better. All of my flights on a 787 so far have been better than with the other 3 aircraft.

The A380 is good, but as I mentioned earlier, it's mostly hype. I haven't flown Lufthansa (Like Chemist) but have flown Qantas and Etihad, and while the flights were good, I didn't find them great or even better than the 787 to be honest. Jet engine noise quieter, but too many people, and I found it noisy in general. Too many people getting up and out of their seats over and over...felt like i was still in the airport. A total pain in the 🞵🞵🞵🞵. The last time I went to Australia, I chose to take the dreamliner instead the A380. It's still one of the best flights I've had.

Originally Posted by The Chemist

I personally couldn't care less about seat back screens. I only use them for the map anyway. I bring my own movies, and most of the time when I fly I just read and listen to music anyway.

I also don't find the supposedly 'better air' on the 787 to be anything special. I get just as bad jet lag flying trans Pacific on a 787 as I do on a 777 or a 767. Nor, to me, is the 787 noticeably quieter than the 777; the only plane that I've been truly impressed with the low noise level on is the A380.

So, for me, I'd take the direct flight any day of the week.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

The jetlag I've never noticed either, what I do notice is my lips aren't cracked and chapped after a long flight on a dreamliner, nor is my nose/throat dry and sore.

I too would probably take the direct over the connection, especially with the 2-3-2 on the 767, but if you are going to connect of if AC changes the aircraft to something more cramped, the JAL 787 is most certainly the best option.

You may not care about seatback screens, but when I look around on my flight most people seem to be using them. Definitely a factor IMO.

[hollywoodcory]

WS briefly had loaded its 789 schedule, showing daily LGW starting end of April, but it has since disappeared.

[Johnny Aussie]

Looks like

Daily YYC-LGW
3x weekly YYC-DUB
4x weekly YYC-CDG

WestJet is definitely banking on connectibility to support DUB and CDG.

[hollywoodcory]

In other news, looks like HU has cut its thursday flights for the winter again. Operating only 2x weekly from late October to end of March.

Edit: Looking closer at the schedule they've also cut a bunch of flights from many of their North American routes this winter.

[thenoflyzone]

Nothing unexpected...

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air...l-and-new-calgary-europe-service-in-s19/

WestJet this week (around Tuesday 09OCT18) filed planned Boeing 787-9 international service, scheduled to enter long-haul routes from late-April 2019. The configuration of the 787-9 is J16W28Y260, based on seat map graphics in the GDS. The arrival of Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner also sees the airline launching new nonstop European flights from Calgary.

Reservation for these Boeing 787-9 service will be available as early as Wednesday local time in Calgary.

eff 28APR19 Calgary – London Gatwick
WS001 YYC1920 – 1100+1LGW 789 267
WS001 YYC1945 – 1125+1LGW 789 x267

WS002 LGW1300- 1510YYC 789 1
WS002 LGW1330 – 1540YYC 789 x15
WS002 LGW1350 – 1600YYC 789 5

eff 17MAY19 Calgary – Paris CDG (New route, 3 weekly; 4 weekly from 03JUN19 to 08SEP19)
WS010 YYC1920 – 1210+1CDG 789 x236
WS009 CDG1410 – 1530YYC 789 x347

eff 01JUN19 Calgary – Dublin (New route, 3 weekly; 2 weekly from 11SEP19)
WS006 YYC2045 – 1138+1DUB 789 367
WS005 DUB1345 – 1505YYC 789 147

Additional Boeing 787-9 operating service, including domestic routes, is expected to be filed and available for reservation in the next few weeks.

[thebus]

Any idea where the 767 from YYC-LGW will be reallocated?

[LO 044]

With all due respect to Dublin, why Dublin? Is this some hidden gem of a city for WestJet in terms of business traffic? I don't think WS and EI will code share on anything. Then again Aer Lingus isn't really part of any alliance either so maybe there is a match there. Any background on why this route was chosen?

[Canadian74]

Originally Posted by Canadian74

When did Westjet release its 789 seat map?

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Westjet/WestJet_Boeing_787-9.php

Well, it seems seatguru did have the correct seatmap (other than the L2/R2 door position and the location of the premium economy lav).
Seems to be the densest 3-class layout on the 789 in the world? 320 seats total. Small J cabin, but still..

Also interesting to note: no free meals or checked bag in economy on these new flights as expected, but it does go a bit against their shift to a premium/full-service airline

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Canadian74

Also interesting to note: no free meals or checked bag in economy on these new flights as expected, but it does go a bit against their shift to a premium/full-service airline

Could you please point me in the direction of where it has been mentioned by WS about meals in economy on the WS 787? I’m surprised to learn from you that meals won’t be free!

[zahav]

Originally Posted by Acey

There were some wild predictions coming into today like AKL and EZE. Not sure where those were coming from, exactly.

I think the config is obviously important here, like DUB likely doesn't work on a 30/21/247 frame like AC's.

Also note the westbounds sweetly timed for the new 1730 transborder "bank". They're clearly banking on that for the new SFO run to work. Well played.

Lastly, our white elephant of an international terminal is going to wrecked at 1500 in pretty short order as WS ramps this up. Too many gates, they said... Somebody is gonna consistently have to go off 84 and that gate is garbage for int'l. KL/WS battle for gate 80 is impending.

That baffles me that a huge international terminal could have capacity constraints like that when the overall # of international flights is so low. Seems ludicrous that gates that sit empty most of the day are jam packed during one bank. I suppose it's the airlines that are choosing that one departure time so it's their own fault if they have less than ideal gates or bad turnaround times. Just seems so wasteful to be over capacity for one period and then empty the rest

[Canadian74]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

Could you please point me in the direction of where it has been mentioned by WS about meals in economy on the WS 787? I’m surprised to learn from you that meals won’t be free!

On the 787 website, they talk about meals in Business and Premium economy, but no mention under Economy.

If you try a dummy booking on westjet website for these 787 flights, no mention of meals either. But if you move up to Premium, it says meals included.

They don't have free meals on LGW flights right now either. Even Transat and Rouge have meals and checked bag on long haul flights.

I don't quite understand what Westjet's new model is trying to accomplish.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by Canadian74

On the 787 website, they talk about meals in Business and Premium economy, but no mention under Economy.

If you try a dummy booking on westjet website for these 787 flights, no mention of meals either. But if you move up to Premium, it says meals included.

They don't have free meals on LGW flights right now either. Even Transat and Rouge have meals and checked bag on long haul flights.

I don't quite understand what Westjet's new model is trying to accomplish.

No free meals on LGW flights? Really? Air travel in North America really is awful. Here in China even on domestic runs of 2-3 hours on non-mainline carriers you still get free meals!

[msmariner]

Originally Posted by zahav

That baffles me that a huge international terminal could have capacity constraints like that when the overall # of international flights is so low. Seems ludicrous that gates that sit empty most of the day are jam packed during one bank. I suppose it's the airlines that are choosing that one departure time so it's their own fault if they have less than ideal gates or bad turnaround times. Just seems so wasteful to be over capacity for one period and then empty the rest

Is there a chance that there are gate restraints on the other end? Maybe WS has a time slot in LGW and has to leave here a certain time... or BA and LHR ... or KLM in Amsterdam. Just a thought

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Canadian74

They don't have free meals on LGW flights right now either.

That is true.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by Acey

There were some wild predictions coming into today like AKL and EZE. Not sure where those were coming from, exactly.

I suspect a winter routing to PPT and on to AKL could work. Hawaii is so popular out of western Canada, there would likely be demand for Tahiti as a novel destination in spite of the distance.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by PPAR

I suspect a winter routing to PPT and on to AKL could work. Hawaii is so popular out of western Canada, there would likely be demand for Tahiti as a novel destination in spite of the distance.

I loved French Polynesia! It would be amazing if someday WS serviced PPT!

[MalcolmTucker]

Part of the maintenance could be in DUB. Isn’t that the case for the 737s? Must see consistent demand for their existing flights.

[Bokimon]

Years ago YYC had 3 or 4x flights to GLA during the summer season and it was fairly popular, both from Transat and maybe one or two of the euro charter/low cost carriers. Back then, a good number of the leisure travelers would split off to DUB while others stayed in Scotland.
This to me might sound like a bit of throwback to regain those good ol'Gaelic days, but now using Dreamliners instead of A330s or 767s to get that connection back in the YYC bloodstream and 3x/week I guess is a good start to see how this route will do.
WJ might of done some homework to sniff out any past routes at YYC that had a decent run and was worth reviving.
Add to it, J cabin seats are being sold for like $1600 one way which is a pretty good deal, they will rely on loyalty redeemers and well off locals to snag these seats while regular econo fare is hovering around the $800 R/T which also isn't too bad either.

LGW no surprise to swap out the 767s and CDG are I guess next logical choices, keep an arms distance from any star hubs where they will get chewed out as soon as they put their toes into their turf.

I am more interested to see what routes will be announced later on out of YVR and YYZ. More exotic choices could very well be possible out of those two and that will indirectly help YYC locals connect thru but I would wager they be non star hubs.

Only surprise I thought was no MUC, that would be a great German alternate for a seasonal run..