^ In keeping with what Jammon said, I don't think Hawaii is commonly marketed as a package destination sort of place. I'm assuming that this may have to do with the lack of mega-resorts that need to work with airlines to bring in big crowds? Once you get outside of Waikiki on Oahu, it's mostly smaller sized hotels. Most people I know tend to rent condos. No question that makes it hard to compete with the alluring all inclusive $1500 trip to Cancun or the Dominican.
But yeah, there probably is a chicken and egg element to this. With a flight, more people would go. For instance, I don't recall many people going to Panama before Transat ran its nonstop flights for a while. I'm sure it would make the trip more palatable for people with children or older seniors who would have a hard time with the full day of travel it currently takes to get there.
But yeah, there probably is a chicken and egg element to this. With a flight, more people would go. For instance, I don't recall many people going to Panama before Transat ran its nonstop flights for a while. I'm sure it would make the trip more palatable for people with children or older seniors who would have a hard time with the full day of travel it currently takes to get there.
Well, to be fair, it is a 8 hr plus trip, even direct from Winnipeg.
Well, to be fair, it is a 8 hr plus trip, even direct from Winnipeg.
Yeah - Hawaii would still serve a pretty niche market in Winnipeg.
You would be competing with much shorter and cheaper options that are available from Winnipeg to the standard spots in the Caribbean and central America.
That said, plenty of Winnipeggers do go to Hawaii already and I'm sure a non-stop flight would probably only encourage more people to go.
No doubt - but IMO the Caribbean will always be the more convenient option for YWG. And our non-stop service to that area of the world is OK, but certainly could be better. I would prefer more non-stop options south versus a non-stop to Hawaii.
Hawaii is typically not a last minute vacation choice - whereas the Caribbean certainly is.
No doubt - but IMO the Caribbean will always be the more convenient option for YWG. And our non-stop service to that area of the world is OK, but certainly could be better. I would prefer more non-stop options south versus a non-stop to Hawaii.
Hawaii is typically not a last minute vacation choice - whereas the Caribbean certainly is.
If Air Canada gets approval from its pilot union to expand Rouge, I could see a whole scale increase in the number of flights to Caribbean destinations.
30,189 one way journeys in 2014. Concentrate that seasonally, bump up the number due to direct, and you have a nice seasonal bit.
Yeah... I wouldn't see it as more than maybe a once, twice a week seasonal kind of thing. As I said before, if Winnipeg could support widebody charters to random places like Panama City which is 3/4 as far away as HNL, then I'd imagine Hawaii could work.
It seems that YWG is getting the 2nd daily flight to Denver back starting in June. Right now United shows the flight as two CRJ-200's but I have a feeling that once we get closer to the departure date that they will upgauge one of the flights to a CRJ-700 similar to the current ORD flights.
It seems that YWG is getting the 2nd daily flight to Denver back starting in June. Right now United shows the flight as two CRJ-200's but I have a feeling that once we get closer to the departure date that they will upgauge one of the flights to a CRJ-700 similar to the current ORD flights.
Currently, DEN is being operated by a CR7 on some days and CR2 on others. ORD is currently operating with one CR7 and one CR2 a day (down from 2 CR7s a few weeks ag0) and goes to 3 flights per day in June. Those 3 flights are supposed to be on a mix of E45 and CR2, meaning there won't be any First available to ORD for the summer as there has been this spring.
^ Definitely good news, if only because it means that service to Denver won't be likely to end anytime soon. Just those two measly CRJs a day will open up a lot of economical alternatives for anyone heading to the SW USA or anywhere across the Pacific.
That's funny. Why is it in the news again today? Are they making further cuts to service?
Just a guess, but probably because the seasonal flights are starting so it's somewhat "newsy" again. But as far as I can tell there is no actual news in that story, just a rehash of the January announcement.
^^ Seasonal flights to Gatewick have started again as have long delays due to mechanical issues. The CBC ran a story of one traveller getting hit with an two day delay on their flight. CBC likely asked WestJet for comment and they pointed back to reducing service to better manage these issues. Flight was from Edmonton though as I think YWG service hasn't started back yet.
On a related note, WestJet is learning some hard lessons about why those 25+ year old 767 were available so cheaply. Glad to see they got orders in for 787s but going to be growing pains for a while.
We flew WJ to Gatwick this year (we split our time between Canada and London). It was among the worst flights I've ever been on. Massive delays, ancient plane with 3 toilets out of commission and luggage compartments that wouldn't close, non-reclining seats, WJ's atrocious "watch your favourite shows on your phone b/c we're too cheap to spring for seatback screens" inflight service and some of the most downtrodden flight staff I've witnessed. And it cost more than AC, despite not being a direct flight (as advertised) and getting into Gatwick, which is a far trickier and costlier commute than Heathrow.
I'll never fly with them again to the UK, and I'd bet that's true of a staggeringly high percentage of their customers since these routes began. Absolute sh**show.
^ That sounds awful. The kicker to me is that you pay extra for a meal...sure, I get not including a meal on a 2 hour flight to Edmonton, but on an 8 hour flight overseas? Yeesh.
To get from Gatwick to London is 20 pounds by train and takes about half an hour, so unless there's a big savings over Heathrow (which there usually isn't), it's not really worth it.
To get from Gatwick to London is 20 pounds by train and takes about half an hour, so unless there's a big savings over Heathrow (which there usually isn't), it's not really worth it.
Agreed. Taking the Tube from Heathrow is extremely easy and much cheaper. Particularly if you are staying on the blue line.
Prev
Linear Mode
