Calgary International Airport II

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

These are my thoughts. I'm not quite ready to say AC is fully bending over for WS when these minor RJ routes that people seem worried about, routes they are still making money on since their JV partner is flying them anyway with much better equipment, are scrubbed. Wait it out.

No, UA is making money and AC has ceded the route. There is no such JV for TB traffic.

Ceded or a delayed post-pandemic restart of a route on the verge of being scrubbed in 2019? They clearly have more profitable intentions for the frame so let's not act like they're leaving some plethora of money on the table by bailing.

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Ceded or a delayed post-pandemic restart of a route on the verge of being scrubbed in 2019? They clearly have more profitable intentions for the frame so let's not act like they're leaving some plethora of money on the table by bailing.

Clearly not. AC would operate the route if AC felt it worth operating, and without a JV they are not interested in selling UA flights via connections in IAH and SFO. Better for UA to operate those anyway.

AC is so weak trans-border wise at YYC though, people notice these "minor RJ routes".

[zahav]

Both the Canadair RJ and Embraer RJ were what AC was banking on to make it's Canadian hubs work. They wanted these small- to mid-size planes to feed the Canadian hubs from US destinations no more than a couple hours away, which worked like a charm from YYZ and YUL, but out west it's a bit of a stretch. Not in terms of viability, the planes are more than capable of flying YYC-IAH or YVR-DFW. But people still think of them as small dinky planes. And they do feel much smaller, I don't care what anybody says, they are certainly smaller feeling. UA isn't flying any RJs to YYC or YVR this summer, their ops are fully mainline, which is the first time in forever that I this has happened. They always had an RJ on the odd DEN, SFO, LAX, IAH flight, but this year it's all mainline. Certainly a plus, and I would rather fly on a UA 737 than an AC RJ anyday! Out west we are much more mainline jet dominant, the distances and types of routes command a larger aircraft from airports like YYC and YVR, we don't have nearly as many small + close routes as YYZ and YUL do, where RJs make so much sense. It's same in the US, the big eastern airports have insane amounts of RJ traffic compared to airports like Vegas or LAX

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by zahav

Not in terms of viability, the planes are more than capable of flying YYC-IAH or YVR-DFW.

Those 2 routes are definitely a stretch for the CRJ700 or CRJ900.

CRJ700 range 1400nm
CRJ900 range 1550nm

YVR-DFW - 1524nm
YYC-IAH - 1519nm

The E175s can easily do them however.

Originally Posted by zahav

But people still think of them as small dinky planes. And they do feel much smaller, I don't care what anybody says, they are certainly smaller feeling. UA isn't flying any RJs to YYC or YVR this summer, their ops are fully mainline, which is the first time in forever that I this has happened. They always had an RJ on the odd DEN, SFO, LAX, IAH flight, but this year it's all mainline.

Sure, as long as you realize that UA - or any other airline for that matter - doesn't give a hoot about customers thinking the CRJs or ERJs are small dinky planes. If they feel its the right plane for a route, that's what they will use.

Fortunately for western Canada, a lot of routes are out of range for these planes. Some of them also have restrictions over the Rockies, and the US feeder airline scope clauses don't help either.

Originally Posted by zahav

Not in terms of viability, the planes are more than capable of flying YYC-IAH or YVR-DFW.

There was a stretch a couple years back where the IAH-YYC RJ had to make fuel stops on 3 out of 5 trips in a week. Wasn't at all uncommon over the whole summer, not to mention the number of times payload was left behind.

Generally capable, yes. Does the westbound run stretch the frame? Absolutely. "More than capable" is simply the wrong verbiage and does not accurately describe the real world operation as opposed to range figures from Wikipedia.

[MalcolmTucker]

The E jets are a world of difference compared to the CRJs.

[YYCFlier]

This is something I've never understood. The E175s are hubbed in the east, and the west has CR9s, but the 175s do several routes in the east that could be done with a CR9 and the west has a few routes that would be better served by an E175. Why not move a few to the west?

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by YYCFlier

This is something I've never understood. The E175s are hubbed in the east, and the west has CR9s, but the 175s do several routes in the east that could be done with a CR9 and the west has a few routes that would be better served by an E175. Why not move a few to the west?

Transport Canada obstacle clearance requirements.

Air Canada Engineering was able to demonstrate that in certain conditions, the E175 couldn't meet obstacle clearance requirements over the Rockies, if it lost an engine.

It was decided that it would be easier just to restrict the areas in which the aircraft flew. As many American carriers fly the E175 over the Rockies, into SEA and such, the FAA clearly does not share Transport Canada's stringent obstacle clearance requirements.

To that end, life is simpler for Jazz maintenance and AC crews not having to worry about anything related to Embraers or have parts on hand.

Loads on Air Canada's LAS-YYC service have been atrocious to the extent that I'm somewhat surprised they haven't pulled it. Multiple northbound runs of less than 20 pax.

[hollywoodcory]

Doesn't the AC run to LAS end at the end of the month?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Loads on Air Canada's LAS-YYC service have been atrocious to the extent that I'm somewhat surprised they haven't pulled it. Multiple northbound runs of less than 20 pax.

Weird. Will be northbound on Monday and will report back (Sunday definitely will be full - prices were 4x the Monday prices when booked the Monday).

Not surprising though. The trip was originally for a conference and it ended up being cancelled so I’d guess non leisure loads are still quite depressed.

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory

Doesn't the AC run to LAS end at the end of the month?

Yes, thank God. It's pretty clear why it won't run through summer.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

Loads on Air Canada's LAS-YYC service have been atrocious to the extent that I'm somewhat surprised they haven't pulled it. Multiple northbound runs of less than 20 pax.

Is Calgary just too saturated with cheap Vegas flights for AC to compete?

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

To that end, life is simpler for Jazz maintenance and AC crews not having to worry about anything related to Embraers or have parts on hand.

Given AC’s marginal presence at YYC and contentment with using the CRJ for operations mainline or a Q400 can’t do out west, the lack of E175 equipment does not seem to be a hinderance.

There would be maybe a handful of routes? Houston, Denver. Anything else?

[hehehe]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Given AC’s marginal presence at YYC and contentment with using the CRJ for operations mainline or a Q400 can’t do out west, the lack of E175 equipment does not seem to be a hinderance.

There would be maybe a handful of routes? Houston, Denver. Anything else?

You're right. 4-5 flights a day to IAH/SFO/maybe DEN max isn't nearly enough for AC to bring frames over.

[Johnny Aussie]

Speaking of Star Alliance transborder UA has just updated their summer scheds

A slight shift in capacity between routes and a slight overall capacity decrease since the last schedule update:

IAH - one daily 739 one daily 738
ORD - one daily 738
DEN - two daily 319
SFO - one daily 319

Updated Summer 2022 non-Westjet transborder flights down to 17 daily

UA - 6 (as above)
DL - 3 (2 daily MSP on 321s and 1 daily SLC on E75s)
AA - 3 (2 daily DFW and 1 daily ORD on 738s)
AC - 3 (1 daily EWR on 320s, 1 daily LAX on 223s, 1 daily SFO on CR9s)
AS - 2 (2 daily SEA - one on E75s and one on DH4s)

AC showing 2x daily 7M8 to LAX from Oct 30, which represents a big seat boost from the 2x daily 319 pre-pandemic operation. On that day, 2x daily YYC-IAH also resumes on the RJ, EWR switches to 7M8, and SFO goes from 1x to 2x daily RJ.

So the "AC is bailing on transborder YYC" narrative seems to not be supported by the currently planned winter operation.

Originally Posted by thewave46

Is Calgary just too saturated with cheap Vegas flights for AC to compete?

Yes... but even pre-pandemic it wasn't strong for Rouge when they operated.

[peytol]

Seems odd they can't swing 1X a day to LAS, considering WS is going 3x daily and a quick glance the loads and prices look pretty high.