Canadian Airport Thread II

[LO 044]

After recently flying from YEG to/from Europe on WS via YYC for the first time, I can tell you that AC has nothing to worry about. I posted a bit of a review on the YYC thread but honestly WS and YYC are simply not up to snuff to AC and YVR/YYZ/YUL.

AC has a better location at YYC than WS which makes no sense as this is supposed to be WestJet's "fortress hub". The lounge is small and the connection walk is long for a small airport. WestJet's gate position at CDG is dreadful and the airport itself requires long walking distances relative to LHR, AMS and FRA. AMS would be a better place for WestJet to continue growth but it looks like KL has carved up those routes, which is probably a bonus for Canadian travelers.

Maybe YYC/YVR are close in destinations but there is a lot that separates these two airports and the airlines that fly to them. The numbers don't say everything. YVR is head and shoulders above YYC.

[nname]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Not much separating YVR/YYC, to be quite honest, which is a bit surprising, but the rest is pretty much as expected.

Well, YYC have many sun destinations including BZE, PTY, MBJ, PUJ... which increases both country and destination count. YVR have non of these. I don't think YVR have any sun destination that cannot be reached from YYC... except for maybe MIA and LIH if you consider those.

Surprising that since WG merged into WS, the only unique destination they kept is 1x weekly VRA. I guess for any other destination outside of the 4 in Mexico (which already served by both AC and WS mainline), they force you to connect through YYC for everywhere else now?

[jc_yyc_ca]

Originally Posted by LO 044

After recently flying from YEG to/from Europe on WS via YYC for the first time, I can tell you that AC has nothing to worry about. I posted a bit of a review on the YYC thread but honestly WS and YYC are simply not up to snuff to AC and YVR/YYZ/YUL.


Maybe YYC/YVR are close in destinations but there is a lot that separates these two airports and the airlines that fly to them. The numbers don't say everything. YVR is head and shoulders above YYC.

They do in the end. Everyone has their anecdotal stories and their own experiences. I've also had other people with stories of how they preferred making transfers at YYC as opposed to some of the other airports.

In the end everyone is going to have different reasons for choosing the routes they do, maybe it's cost, maybe it's other reasons, but in the end the numbers are the numbers.

[Denscity]

How would the numbers change if WestJet was based in Vancouver and not Calgary?

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by jc_yyc_ca

They do in the end. Everyone has their anecdotal stories and their own experiences. I've also had other people with stories of how they preferred making transfers at YYC as opposed to some of the other airports.

In the end everyone is going to have different reasons for choosing the routes they do, maybe it's cost, maybe it's other reasons, but in the end the numbers are the numbers.

These aren't anecdotal stories. The YYC thread has enough detractors of YYC itself than any other airline thread. I'm not a business traveler but I'm also not some lay person that doesn't look at the details of airports I fly through. YYC was built with a call to gate system and a Jetsons style go kart connection system. Neither worked and what you have is leftovers.

Which other airport doesn't cater first and foremost to their main carrier? FRA Terminal 1 is LH and Star Alliance. CDG Terminal 2 is AF and Sky Team. YYZ Terminal 1 is AC and Star Alliance. At YYC, AC seems to have the best gate locations yet the fewest flights and connections.

Denscity is correct. If WestJet's hub was at YVR, all those international flights would be at YVR except maybe LHR. You can talk about the numbers but the numbers don't tell the entire story. This isn't some anti-YYC stance from a YEG passenger. I just expected more when WS and YYC claim to be a great competitor. They aren't really and the cons have been discussed at nauseum on many websites. I guess I was finally able to experience these issues which is too bad.

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Top 8 busiest airports in Canada (by passenger numbers), ranked by number of non stop destinations and number of countries served.

Source: flightconnections.com

YYZ - 192 destinations (33 domestic) / 68 countries
YUL - 162 destinations (34 domestic) / 51 countries
YVR - 121 destinations (44 domestic) / 25 countries
YYC - 107 destinations (40 domestic) / 20 countries
YEG - 52 destinations (27 domestic) / 6 countries
YHZ - 48 destinations (18 domestic) / 16 countries
YOW - 41 destinations (18 domestic) / 10 countries
YWG - 41 destinations (21 domestic) / 6 countries

Interesting that YYZ has one less domestic destination than YUL. This can be explained by all the Air Inuit and Air Creebec flights from YUL to northern Quebec/Nunavik. YYZ doesn't have an equivalent. This boosts YUL's domestic destination count, without doing much for passenger numbers.

Not much separating YVR/YYC, to be quite honest, which is a bit surprising, but the rest is pretty much as expected.

YHZ outperforming it's peers (YOW/YWG) and YYZ is fast approaching 200+ destinations, in line with other majors such as JFK (198) and LHR (217).

CDG, FRA and DXB are in the 270-295 range. Of course, no one can touch IST, with 319 destinations in 119 countries.

Thanks for posting this. YHZ certainly has done a stellar job of attracting new routes post-pandemic (even pre-pandemic). YHZ must also be the leader for percentage of route network that is seasonal. YHZ has wild fluctuations, handling more pax than YOW in July and August while barely handling half of YOW's traffic during the winter doldrums. YHZ will post some incredible summer international summertime numbers - more than YOW, YEG and YQB combined (and YWG but they're always at zero at this time of year).

[Chinook Arch]

Originally Posted by LO 044

Denscity is correct. If WestJet's hub was at YVR, all those international flights would be at YVR except maybe LHR. You can talk about the numbers but the numbers don't tell the entire story. This isn't some anti-YYC stance from a YEG passenger. I just expected more when WS and YYC claim to be a great competitor. They aren't really and the cons have been discussed at nauseum on many websites. I guess I was finally able to experience these issues which is too bad.

I’ve seen enough of your posts over the years to know you’re a YYC hater so keep on hating. JC‘s point was simply that in the end the numbers at YYC keep going up. We can all agree that YYC isn’t perfect and it has its faults. Nobody claims otherwise but at the end of the day, the numbers keep going up and international flights keep getting added. If people don’t like it, they will choose YVR or some other airport and the numbers will go down. If it’s not the disaster you make it out be the numbers will go up.

Regarding whether Calgary would have any international flights without WestJet, who knows how many, but there would be more than just one flight to LHR.

[Chinook Arch]

Originally Posted by Denscity

How would the numbers change if WestJet was based in Vancouver and not Calgary?

Of course Calgary would have less numbers, but it’s kind of like asking whether Calgary would have palm trees if only it was closer to the sun. Or what would YYZ, numbers look like if Europe was located there Japan is and all the explorers and immigration had come from the west instead of the east?
I’ve heard different people from Edmonton ( and some other places) say over the years. “If only Banff wasn’t there Calgary’s airport wouldn’t be as busy” I mean, you can do hypotheticals all day and it’s fun to do those but at the end of the day this thread is about stuff that’s actually happening.

[jc_yyc_ca]

Originally Posted by nname

Well, YYC have many sun destinations including BZE, PTY, MBJ, PUJ... which increases both country and destination count. YVR have non of these. I don't think YVR have any sun destination that cannot be reached from YYC... except for maybe MIA and LIH if you consider those.

Surprising that since WG merged into WS, the only unique destination they kept is 1x weekly VRA. I guess for any other destination outside of the 4 in Mexico (which already served by both AC and WS mainline), they force you to connect through YYC for everywhere else now?

There may be some WS to the US that aren't from YVR. The only one I can think of is Nashville?, but yeah, probably a lot of sun vacation destinations, and a couple of overseas flights.
For overseas, I'm not sure if YVR has direct to Barcelona or Rome.

[jc_yyc_ca]

Originally Posted by LO 044

These aren't anecdotal stories. The YYC thread has enough detractors of YYC itself than any other airline thread. I'm not a business traveler but I'm also not some lay person that doesn't look at the details of airports I fly through. YYC was built with a call to gate system and a Jetsons style go kart connection system. Neither worked and what you have is leftovers.

Which other airport doesn't cater first and foremost to their main carrier? FRA Terminal 1 is LH and Star Alliance. CDG Terminal 2 is AF and Sky Team. YYZ Terminal 1 is AC and Star Alliance. At YYC, AC seems to have the best gate locations yet the fewest flights and connections.

Denscity is correct. If WestJet's hub was at YVR, all those international flights would be at YVR except maybe LHR. You can talk about the numbers but the numbers don't tell the entire story. This isn't some anti-YYC stance from a YEG passenger. I just expected more when WS and YYC claim to be a great competitor. They aren't really and the cons have been discussed at nauseum on many websites. I guess I was finally able to experience these issues which is too bad.

I mean aren't stories on a forum thread anecdotal?
I won't argue that YYC doesn't have its faults. My point was more that I have heard both good and bad stories, and I've seen both good and bad stories even here on SSP. Everyone has different priorities, and thus people will have different experiences.
The reason I say the numbers are what matter in the end, is because, it's the only thing concrete. If WS or YYC see numbers go down, it presumably means they need to fix some issues. If the numbers continue to go up, it means, either things are pretty good or the faults aren't important enough for people to care.
This is purely anecdotal, but I know cost is important for people. I don't look at prices very much tbh, but last summer when I went to Europe YYC->BCN and CDG->YYC), there were people from Vancouver, Edmonton and Saskatoon on the flight. Probably more from other places too, but in talking to the ones from Van, Sask, Edm, I was told that for them it was the cheapest flight, so maybe a lot of it comes down to cost.

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by Chinook Arch

I’ve seen enough of your posts over the years to know you’re a YYC hater so keep on hating. JC‘s point was simply that in the end the numbers at YYC keep going up. We can all agree that YYC isn’t perfect and it has its faults. Nobody claims otherwise but at the end of the day, the numbers keep going up and international flights keep getting added. If people don’t like it, they will choose YVR or some other airport and the numbers will go down. If it’s not the disaster you make it out be the numbers will go up.

Regarding whether Calgary would have any international flights without WestJet, who knows how many, but there would be more than just one flight to LHR.

Whatever you're smoking must be good stuff. Let me know where you're getting it. The last thing I am is a YYC hater lol. Most of the time I make comments about how YEG is more interested in land development like horse racing and building out Costco's instead of funneling that money to improve air service at YEG. I do believe people should fly YEG-YVR/YUL/YYZ-Anywhere more than YEG-YYC-Anywhere. This is economic common sense. Those 3 markets are more important for Edmonton than a connection to Calgary is because most people drive to Calgary if they need to. The main reason people fly YEG-YYC is to connect and that's it. So yes I want more flights to the big cities because frankly they are more important and in addition provide better options and connection experiences than YYC. Do you think YYC passengers should fly to YYZ and AMS via YEG? That's all I'm saying.

And in terms of being a YYC hater, I have said many times before I try to fly to Europe via YYC but AC seems to price out connections at YYC to the point YVR, YUL and YYZ are the one to go through. WS is a mess unless you love flying to CUN, PHX and LAS. A couple of months ago, I tried booking YEG-YYC-CDG-BER and it wasn't possible and/or the price was astronomical. Instead, I had to overnight it at CDG as booking separate tickets was risky. Regardless, I found the experience similar to what is said on the YYC thread and some of those work inside the airline industry. What can I say I expected more out of the so called fortress hub. I'm not saying YYC is some airport in Moldova but for a fairly new airport, it has issues that the airport authority doesn't seem like it wants to address.

Your numbers won't be going up much with 7 787's so good luck with that. The Max 10 can only bump up domestic and US numbers so much. If WestJet's 787's are full already, bringing in more connecting passengers doesn't really work. Yes you would have LHR and maybe CDG but FCO, BCN and so on? I'm not so sure. If I was WS, I would push YYC to get better gates saying we will purchase more long distance aircraft and provide you a windfall with increased flights/connections but we can't do that when the connection experience at YYC for most people is subpar that that of YVR or YYZ.

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by jc_yyc_ca

I mean aren't stories on a forum thread anecdotal?
I won't argue that YYC doesn't have its faults. My point was more that I have heard both good and bad stories, and I've seen both good and bad stories even here on SSP. Everyone has different priorities, and thus people will have different experiences.
The reason I say the numbers are what matter in the end, is because, it's the only thing concrete. If WS or YYC see numbers go down, it presumably means they need to fix some issues. If the numbers continue to go up, it means, either things are pretty good or the faults aren't important enough for people to care.
This is purely anecdotal, but I know cost is important for people. I don't look at prices very much tbh, but last summer when I went to Europe YYC->BCN and CDG->YYC), there were people from Vancouver, Edmonton and Saskatoon on the flight. Probably more from other places too, but in talking to the ones from Van, Sask, Edm, I was told that for them it was the cheapest flight, so maybe a lot of it comes down to cost.

I completely understand your points but I don't know if you can completely correlate numbers to what WS and/or YYC is doing and especially what YYC is doing. There has been growth at WS over the last couple of years and non-stop flights will almost always win out over connecting flights unless the price difference is very different. So WS added a YYC-CDG flight. They have zero competition really and they cannot raise the prices substantially relative to connecting through YUL or AMS for example. Naturally more people are flying the non-stop route but is the service better on WS than on AC or KL? You can't really make that correlation. You can say it's good enough relative to AC or KL. But when you look at destination options, frequent flyer programs, lounges, etc. you can't say that WS is better. It's also easy to be better at your base but you saw what happened to WS at YUL and YYZ, they got slaughtered. But can you say their service was subpar to AC? Not necessarily. Ideally, if WS kept the same amount of planes and destinations and the same prices for 5 years, we would see if "numbers" would be level or stagnant or if there would be growth.

This is my point. I hope that WS and YYC strive for more than good enough but everything I have read and experienced isn't better it's just good enough. Just good enough wasn't good enough at YYZ and YUL.

[Surrealplaces]

To Jcyyc's point, I think cost is a big still a big factor, and probably the most important. I recently took WS to Tokyo and returned from Seoul by WS. There were people transferring to/from from cities in eastern Canada even though there are closer direct flights from YUL and YYZ. I was told they were the cheapest tickets.
Cost being a factor might be offset if the airport was terrible, buit that doesn't appear to be the case. Going by satisfaction reports, YYC appears to be roughly in the middle. Skytrax has it at three stars, which is average and a recent JD Power survey of large airports has it slightly below average for North America, but above average for Canada, 2nd just after YVR..
Basically not bad, but not great, so yeah there's always room for improvement. Also many of those reviews could be local passengers taking direct flights, and their reviews may be higher than average, idk. I mean I all the flights I've taken in recent years have been direct, and the airport has been a good experience for me.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Denscity

How would the numbers change if WestJet was based in Vancouver and not Calgary?

And how good would the Canucks be if McDavid played for them instead of the Oilers ?

[casper]

Originally Posted by Surrealplaces

To Jcyyc's point, I think cost is a big still a big factor, and probably the most important. I recently took WS to Tokyo and returned from Seoul by WS. There were people transferring to/from from cities in eastern Canada even though there are closer direct flights from YUL and YYZ. I was told they were the cheapest tickets.
Cost being a factor might be offset if the airport was terrible, buit that doesn't appear to be the case. Going by satisfaction reports, YYC appears to be roughly in the middle. Skytrax has it at three stars, which is average and a recent JD Power survey of large airports has it slightly below average for North America, but above average for Canada, 2nd just after YVR..
Basically not bad, but not great, so yeah there's always room for improvement. Also many of those reviews could be local passengers taking direct flights, and their reviews may be higher than average, idk. I mean I all the flights I've taken in recent years have been direct, and the airport has been a good experience for me.

Toronto and Montreal are also not great airports. They all suffer from the same problems. They were designed for a different time.

Aircraft today are larger and denser. Airport authorities are also greedy and want to put food services and shops in locations where there should be seating.

International transfer to domestic and us was not considered when these airports were first build so all three of them are doing weird things.

Vancouver is the best of the lot for this but it still involves way to much scanning of boarding passes.

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by casper

Toronto and Montreal are also not great airports. They all suffer from the same problems. They were designed for a different time.

Aircraft today are larger and denser. Airport authorities are also greedy and want to put food services and shops in locations where there should be seating.

International transfer to domestic and us was not considered when these airports were first build so all three of them are doing weird things.

Vancouver is the best of the lot for this but it still involves way to much scanning of boarding passes.

This is what's unfortunate for YYC. They had a chance to build something more simplistic but functional as their buildout was not that far back. Perhaps with the duopoly of airlines we have in Canada, it would have been smarter to make Concourse B and C the international / US concourses and put WS on one side and Air Canada on the other. WS would have had brand new piers to build their fortress hub. Of course I understand it's not that simple and hindsight is 20/20. YYC gambled on call to gate and lost to customers and airlines. The Jetsons people mover was a head scratcher as well.

In terms of food options and availability, I think YYC got it right. Tons of options at every Concourse. I might even say better than YVR depending where you are. I remember Concourse A/B at YVR not being that great for food options. Again, first world problems but things that can be improved on.

[casper]

Originally Posted by LO 044

This is what's unfortunate for YYC. They had a chance to build something more simplistic but functional as their buildout was not that far back. Perhaps with the duopoly of airlines we have in Canada, it would have been smarter to make Concourse B and C the international / US concourses and put WS on one side and Air Canada on the other. WS would have had brand new piers to build their fortress hub. Of course I understand it's not that simple and hindsight is 20/20. YYC gambled on call to gate and lost to customers and airlines. The Jetsons people mover was a head scratcher as well.

In terms of food options and availability, I think YYC got it right. Tons of options at every Concourse. I might even say better than YVR depending where you are. I remember Concourse A/B at YVR not being that great for food options. Again, first world problems but things that can be improved on.

My view as a regular passenger and not an airport operator on what they should have done......

Build a new pier next to A, (where they have the Q400/Saab ground loading gates). Lets call it new-A. Build that out as the new domestic pier for WestJet. Perhaps even two piers with a few swing gates.

The current Pier-A could have been renovated to become all international with maybe one of two swing gates in that area between A and B. Most of the gates already had escalators etc. to an overhead customs arrival area.

The current Pier B could have been converted to all US departures. They may need to do something weird with US security on second floor and escillators down to the gates so you can still walk between new-A, A, C etc gate side. Have a few swing gates in that area between A and B.

Then Air Canada could stay in C and the other airlines would go where there was spare space.

Less walking and more compact setup.

[thenoflyzone]

^ No. Here’s why.

YYC needed the parallel runway. So expanding the terminal to the east made sense. They botched the interior dynamics, but they built it in the right place.

Originally Posted by casper

Toronto and Montreal are also not great airports. They all suffer from the same problems. They were designed for a different time.

Aircraft today are larger and denser. Airport authorities are also greedy and want to put food services and shops in locations where there should be seating.

International transfer to domestic and us was not considered when these airports were first build so all three of them are doing weird things.

Vancouver is the best of the lot for this but it still involves way to much scanning of boarding passes.

Toronto T1 and YUL international and transborder piers aren’t that old, and the designs are more fluid than YYC.

Anyway, YUL’s main problem now is road congestion, and passengers havent seen the worst of it yet. The multi-level parking is about to come down later this year, and the departure ramp will then be demolished. It’s going to be a shit show for 5+ years.

Remote drop offs and shuttle buses for EVERYONE. Let that sink in for a minute !

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by craner

And how good would the Canucks be if McDavid played for them instead of the Oilers ?

Well they wouldn't win a cup with him but would probably be better.
Depends what they had to give up.
Luckily both Vancouver and Victoria have won cups already.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by LO 044

These aren't anecdotal stories. The YYC thread has enough detractors of YYC itself than any other airline thread. I'm not a business traveler but I'm also not some lay person that doesn't look at the details of airports I fly through. YYC was built with a call to gate system and a Jetsons style go kart connection system. Neither worked and what you have is leftovers.

Which other airport doesn't cater first and foremost to their main carrier? FRA Terminal 1 is LH and Star Alliance. CDG Terminal 2 is AF and Sky Team. YYZ Terminal 1 is AC and Star Alliance. At YYC, AC seems to have the best gate locations yet the fewest flights and connections.

Denscity is correct. If WestJet's hub was at YVR, all those international flights would be at YVR except maybe LHR. You can talk about the numbers but the numbers don't tell the entire story. This isn't some anti-YYC stance from a YEG passenger. I just expected more when WS and YYC claim to be a great competitor. They aren't really and the cons have been discussed at nauseum on many websites. I guess I was finally able to experience these issues which is too bad.

Cheers