Calgary International Airport II

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

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.

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

All subject to change. LAS is now 1x daily on a 319 Rouge.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by YYCFlier

All subject to change. LAS is now 1x daily on a 319 Rouge.

Definitely subject to change. There were so many changes lately regarding the summer scheds and only two months out. I wouldn’t rely on 6 month schedules atm.

EWR eventually losing the 320 at some point is pretty locked in, the frames will be gone. LAX afternoon frequency might go, but the morning one being a MAX is more or less a lock for frame rotation. IAH RJ coming back is a lock. The point remains. They haven't bailed.

Rouge is a much better fit for LAS. That's an obvious and expected downguage.

[zahav]

I think since they are removing Rouge service from Western Canada to Vegas, AC would rather let WS have it, it's not worth the aircraft for them I guess. As you said, WS has 3x daily so they have the much larger share, and AC in general is letting WS have YYC routes, the pandemic has really proved that. If you look over the years, first WS took domestic supremacy, then transborder supremacy, then sun destination supremacy (basically taking out AC, TS, and others), and finally WS is now dominant on true international flights as well. AC isn't seeing strong connections thru YYC, so it's limiting what they are offering. But WS is stepping up so it isn't like they are truly losing much (arguably WS's international offerings are not quite there yet, but the trajectory is up)

[MalcolmTucker]

AC LAS to Calgary last night was full. Just one data point at the tail end of a long weekend, but a data point nonetheless.

[Calfan12]

Originally Posted by zahav

I think since they are removing Rouge service from Western Canada to Vegas, AC would rather let WS have it, it's not worth the aircraft for them I guess. As you said, WS has 3x daily so they have the much larger share, and AC in general is letting WS have YYC routes, the pandemic has really proved that. If you look over the years, first WS took domestic supremacy, then transborder supremacy, then sun destination supremacy (basically taking out AC, TS, and others), and finally WS is now dominant on true international flights as well. AC isn't seeing strong connections thru YYC, so it's limiting what they are offering. But WS is stepping up so it isn't like they are truly losing much (arguably WS's international offerings are not quite there yet, but the trajectory is up)

Yep & that’s okay if Air Canada has limited flights for Calgary YYC as it will help WestJet, Lynx Air ,Flair & other airlines have more demand.

And opens the door to Porter Airlines adding some flights for YYC at some point,as Porter has plans to expand into Western Canada with their new Embraer E195-E2 planes ✈️.

[ilikeredheads]

is there incident happening at YYC?

just looking at flightradar and I see a lot of flights are being diverted elsewhere (most of them to YVR)

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

is there incident happening at YYC?

just looking at flightradar and I see a lot of flights are being diverted elsewhere (most of them to YVR)

Heavy snow.

Originally Posted by Calfan12

Yep & that’s okay if Air Canada has limited flights for Calgary YYC as it will help WestJet, Lynx Air ,Flair & other airlines have more demand.

And opens the door to Porter Airlines adding some flights for YYC at some point,as Porter has plans to expand into Western Canada with their new Embraer E195-E2 planes ✈️.

It's really not okay, we'd prefer to keep full service airlines like Air Canada around here and not have them pushed out by bottom of the barrel carriers like Lynx.

[People_talking]

No incident, just due to the snowy conditions today. Some planes stayed in holding patterns before landing, others diverted.

[People_talking]

Originally Posted by Calfan12

Yep & that’s okay if Air Canada has limited flights for Calgary YYC as it will help WestJet, Lynx Air ,Flair & other airlines have more demand.

And opens the door to Porter Airlines adding some flights for YYC at some point,as Porter has plans to expand into Western Canada with their new Embraer E195-E2 planes ✈️.

Your logic behind this is that you'd rather have Lynx and Flair take demand rather than a full service carrier? Having Lynx and Flair established here and absorbing AC demand is not nearly as critical as having AC operating a well working hub here.

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by zahav

I think since they are removing Rouge service from Western Canada to Vegas, AC would rather let WS have it, it's not worth the aircraft for them I guess. As you said, WS has 3x daily so they have the much larger share, and AC in general is letting WS have YYC routes, the pandemic has really proved that. If you look over the years, first WS took domestic supremacy, then transborder supremacy, then sun destination supremacy (basically taking out AC, TS, and others), and finally WS is now dominant on true international flights as well. AC isn't seeing strong connections thru YYC, so it's limiting what they are offering. But WS is stepping up so it isn't like they are truly losing much (arguably WS's international offerings are not quite there yet, but the trajectory is up)

TATL AC still offering more seats year round with most of WS service seasonal. They could choose to connect via YYC, but YYC is a minor hub and they choose instead to route via YVR. Still, they maintain 2x789 year round (pre-pandemic but no reason it will not go back to this) daily.

Even without WS, YYC would always play second fiddle to YVR.

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

AC LAS to Calgary last night was full. Just one data point at the tail end of a long weekend, but a data point nonetheless.

It’s not about load. It’s about yield. They could fill every seat and still lose money or make more money on another route with that frame.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

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)

This is wild. Never thought I would see the day when AC had less trans-border capacity out of YYC than the American carriers. The world is changing. It also draws into question ACs argument about Flair being controlled by US interests. Is Flair's US control really that much of a threat to Canadian routes? Seems like United is more interested in YYC than AC is (at least trans-border).

All this talk about E175 and RJs serving Calgary. Seems to me like YYC is screaming out for more A220 service. Super comfortable flying experience, and built for long thin routes. That airframe is going to kill it. Too bad the profits for it will now flow out of Canada.

Originally Posted by PPAR

All this talk about E175 and RJs serving Calgary. Seems to me like YYC is screaming out for more A220 service. Super comfortable flying experience, and built for long thin routes.

We are talking about regional jets because YYC-IAH can barely hold on with a 76-seat jet... so why are we talking about a plane with 2x as many seats?

The 220 is good for long and thin routes yes, which it is doing out of YYZ and YUL. But at the same time it simply has to serve the less glamourous role of being a seat-for-seat replacement for the A319, which is what it has done out of Calgary. It's also doing what would have previously been E190 flying.

If the originally announced YYC-BOS ever makes it onto the schedule, that seems like prime 220 material... but there's not some plethora of routes out of YYC screaming for the 220 right now.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

We are talking about regional jets because YYC-IAH can barely hold on with a 76-seat jet... so why are we talking about a plane with 2x as many seats?

The 220 is good for long and thin routes yes, which it is doing out of YYZ and YUL. But at the same time it simply has to serve the less glamourous role of being a seat-for-seat replacement for the A319, which is what it has done out of Calgary. It's also doing what would have previously been E190 flying.

If the originally announced YYC-BOS ever makes it onto the schedule, that seems like prime 220 material... but there's not some plethora of routes out of YYC screaming for the 220 right now.

Points taken, but keep in mind the A220-100 only seats from 100 to 135 passengers. The larger A220-300 is the 150 to 160 seat aircraft, and is the one that is replacing the 319 role.

Originally Posted by PPAR

The larger A220-300 is the 150 to 160 seat aircraft, and is the one that is replacing the 319 role.

Uhh in a Sunwing config maybe. AC is 137 seats. Delta is 130 seats.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by PPAR

All this talk about E175 and RJs serving Calgary. Seems to me like YYC is screaming out for more A220 service. Super comfortable flying experience, and built for long thin routes. That airframe is going to kill it. Too bad the profits for it will now flow out of Canada.

Does the flying experience drive demand for the average Joe? Or is it just us av geeks who really care. From my own experience, I would make a point of booking the CRJ flights between YYC-YEG because I hate flying on turboprops.

(I'm asking because I don't know the answer.)

[People_talking]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

If the originally announced YYC-BOS ever makes it onto the schedule, that seems like prime 220 material... but there's not some plethora of routes out of YYC screaming for the 220 right now.

BOS, PHL, IAD were all talked about as potential new routes for the 220, I remember when BOS got announced WS also announced it immediately after as well.

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by ace.yyc

We are talking about regional jets because YYC-IAH can barely hold on with a 76-seat jet... so why are we talking about a plane with 2x as many seats?

What's interesting is that UA and WS both run mainline on this route.

I suspect AC can't do it because UA's traffic is mostly connecting via IAH hub and AC doesn't really want to drive traffic out of YYC to IAH, it would rather send us to YVR/YUL/YYZ. WS can do it because it's funneling IAH bound pax via YYC. Both carriers offering mainline have a major hub on the other side.

Perhaps 2x CR9 could be 1x223?

[Nick]

I thought YYC-IAH was due to business travel demand between two cities with O&G headquarters. Maybe that travel is dwindled with the pandemic and corporate restructuring.