Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport

[pspeid]

October 2011-new Terminal opens..."beautiful!, amazing! a huge improvement! I love it! An airport to be proud of!"

May 2019-"too small! ridiculously tiny! absurd! What the HELL were they THINKING????"

Wow...it seems to have taken almost eight years to go from civic pride to unmitigated disaster. We must be mellowing....

[esquire]

Originally Posted by pspeid

October 2011-new Terminal opens..."beautiful!, amazing! a huge improvement! I love it! An airport to be proud of!"

May 2019-"too small! ridiculously tiny! absurd! What the HELL were they THINKING????"

Wow...it seems to have taken almost eight years to go from civic pride to unmitigated disaster. We must be mellowing....

For what it's worth, I thought that the gate areas were oddly undersized right from the first time I set foot in there.

It's not like the whole place is catastrophically flawed, but making the gate area a bit wider, or increasing the space between gates would have made a big difference. I get that WAA didn't have to accommodate regular widebody loads, but as things stand it feels like anything larger than a regional jet results in major congestion around gate areas, spilling right into the path area.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by esquire

For what it's worth, I thought that the gate areas were oddly undersized right from the first time I set foot in there.

It's not like the whole place is catastrophically flawed, but making the gate area a bit wider, or increasing the space between gates would have made a big difference. I get that WAA didn't have to accommodate regular widebody loads, but as things stand it feels like anything larger than a regional jet results in major congestion around gate areas, spilling right into the path area.

You see now THIS is a statement that offers some insightful criticism while avoiding overwrought dramatics. Thank you!!

[esquire]

To elaborate a bit, I always liked the way the terminal looked... I think it's very nice. I just wish there was a bit more of it.

If the airport genie granted me a wish, I would ask for an extension of the terminal to the west. Wider than the current concourse. 4 more gates, but spaced out properly to ensure there's enough room. Anything bigger than a 319 goes to that end. RJs and turboprops go to the existing domestic gates 7-12.

If the genie gave me a second wish, it would be for two more transborder gates along with an expansion of the gate areas to accommodate more people and a couple more dining/shopping options.

The international gate area is fine, I wouldn't change it at all.

[CoryB]

Since the airport has been built the flex gateways are increasingly being dedicated exclusively to international inbound and US outbound flights.

The area next to Gate 6, aka the single wide body jet, had a large seating area removed to accommodate an additional vendor.

Finally some of the secure side space near gate 6 by the Starbucks was removed from general use to a paid lounge space.

I think there are other changes that have reduced the overall space for passengers. The design was also "right sized" for projected traffic at the time. The challenge is YWG definitely still has flights come in waves, ie morning peak, evening peak, etc instead of being more spread out across the whole day. That leads to high passenger volumes at narrow times and very quiet periods at others.

In terms of the terminal expansion, the original vision was the US bound side would add a gate, maybe two, on the eastern side. The other gates would expand of the west side and sort of curl around to where the old terminal was.

Since the original design though there has been an expansion plan that circulated publicly that would see a western expansion for a number of ground gates. This is likely to allow planes currently using terminals on Ferry Rd to move to the main terminal. Those flights are mostly coming from fairly small rural communities.

In terms of baggage for international passengers, I think Canadian law is that you clear customs on your first entry to Canada and your checked baggage needs to be with you in case it is required for Customs inspection. You cannot say arrive from the UK and connect onto the USA without going through Canadian customs.

The talked about "quick connect" would have international passengers still pick up checked bags in Canadian customs but then as you leave via a special exit, which we don't currently have, you drop your checked bag back off and normally are in a different security screening line.

[drew]

The airport is planning a major expansion as we speak. Still very early on, but it's happening.

And no, I don't know details, just that it is happening. The only thing that seems certain at this point is that they won't be expanding further to the east (due to a standalone building that is currently under construction).

[Rogie]

Originally Posted by CoryB

In terms of baggage for international passengers, I think Canadian law is that you clear customs on your first entry to Canada and your checked baggage needs to be with you in case it is required for Customs inspection. You cannot say arrive from the UK and connect onto the USA without going through Canadian customs.

You're right, you do have to clear customs in your first entry point, however, both Vancouver and Toronto (and maybe others) have implemented a programme called ITD - Inernational to Domestic where passengers can arrive on an international flight and connect to a Canadian destination without having to claim and recheck their bags.

It's for select "trusted" flights and airlines, and passengers wait in a hold room until their baggage is cleared before they can connect. But the upshot is, passengers don't touch their bags.

It's a huge $$ investment for the airport, so don't expect to see it except in the largest hubs.

In Vancouver, at least, a similar process exists for International to U.S. passengers, where passengers take a special hallway to bypass the normal Canadian customs and head to U.S. preclearance, with only a few checks.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

The airport is planning a major expansion as we speak. Still very early on, but it's happening.

And no, I don't know details, just that it is happening. The only thing that seems certain at this point is that they won't be expanding further to the east (due to a standalone building that is currently under construction).

Considering how much room they have available, it seems odd to me that they would put up a building that blocks potential eastward expansion... unless the decision was made earlier to not expand to the east, I suppose.

I guess they can permanently convert the swing gates to the international arriving/transborder only as CoryB suggested, but that still doesn't provide a ton more space or units to provide more F&B options to US-bound passengers.

And if they are planning a major expansion, that does speak to a somewhat underbuilt terminal considering that it isn't even a decade old and growth has been steady but not astronomical... the passenger count was in the 3.5 million range around the time the old terminal closed and the new one opened, and now it's up to 4.5 million.

[drew]

I think it must be a bit hard to forecast airport traffic in Winnipeg.

Ultimately, our ceiling is basically what Edmonton is, as we just feed into the established hub/spoke system, so we are very limited in getting routes that go beyond that system, at least with the domestic carriers.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by drew

The airport is planning a major expansion as we speak. Still very early on, but it's happening.

And no, I don't know details, just that it is happening. The only thing that seems certain at this point is that they won't be expanding further to the east (due to a standalone building that is currently under construction).

What would, in your opinion, constitute "major"?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

I think it must be a bit hard to forecast airport traffic in Winnipeg.

Ultimately, our ceiling is basically what Edmonton is, as we just feed into the established hub/spoke system, so we are very limited in getting routes that go beyond that system, at least with the domestic carriers.

Oh yeah, for sure. I am not expecting any growth by orders of magnitude or for Winnipeg to suddenly become an intercontinental hub or anything like that.

It's just that normally new/expanded terminals tend to feel somewhat roomy as there is at least a bit of space set aside for growth in the near future (Toronto T1, Edmonton, Ottawa, etc.). Ours was built with traffic levels around 3.5 million at the time, and it felt like it was designed for pretty much that same number right from day one. It did not have that spacious "we'll grow into it" feeling at all, and here we are barely 7 years after opening day hearing talk about a significant expansion.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

Oh yeah, for sure. I am not expecting any growth by orders of magnitude or for Winnipeg to suddenly become an intercontinental hub or anything like that.

It's just that normally new/expanded terminals tend to feel somewhat roomy as there is at least a bit of space set aside for growth in the near future (Toronto T1, Edmonton, Ottawa, etc.). Ours was built with traffic levels around 3.5 million at the time, and it felt like it was designed for pretty much that same number right from day one. It did not have that spacious "we'll grow into it" feeling at all, and here we are barely 7 years after opening day hearing talk about a significant expansion.

Didn't it open in 2011? Or was it only later in the year?

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Didn't it open in 2011? Or was it only later in the year?

It was in the fall of 2011. Originally was supposed to open a year earlier but construction delays.

[CoryB]

Something to keep in mind is the "new" terminal was supposed to open in 2010 and actually opened in 2011 but the design is 5+ years older than that.

In terms of the US pre-clearance side, the airport was originally designed for US pre-clearance on the departures (upper) level and Canada Customs arrivals (lower) level in roughly the same section of the airport. This allows US based carriers to pull up to a gate and do a turn flight without needing to reposition the aircraft.

It is possible with the prospect of wide body flights, like the 767 routes to the UK, and larger 787 planes entering more wide spread service that the expansion plan is to build to the west and relocate both US pre-clearance and Canada customs to the new section. That would free up the existing US and flex gates for general Canadian service. In the space isn't needed immediately Canada Customs could maintain their existing space but basically leave it as-is as a backup facility in case an emergency situation needs Gate 6 to be used for a wide body arrival.

In my no-limits expansion for US/International flights it would be nice to see the terminal add two new gates to handle wide body aircraft. Not so much that we are going to see them but the added cost to build those out when doing net new could make them worth it for future flexibility.

[esquire]

I see in the Sask air thread that AC has dropped Winnipeg-Saskatoon service. There is still once a day service to Regina, and of course WS still goes to Saskatoon and Regina.

I haven't flown to Saskatchewan since 1995 so I don't follow those routes that closely, but I seem to recall that AC has been off and on with service between Winnipeg and Sask over the last 10 or 15 years.

[bomberjet]

I didn't realize there were direct flights. People I know fly Edmonton then bask to Saskatoon from what I recall.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I didn't realize there were direct flights. People I know fly Edmonton then bask to Saskatoon from what I recall.

I'm sure it was probably just like one flight a day or something like that, so if you wanted to do a same day business trip you had to connect in Alberta for at least one of the directions... at least on AC.

[Jammon]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm sure it was probably just like one flight a day or something like that, so if you wanted to do a same day business trip you had to connect in Alberta for at least one of the directions... at least on AC.

It's a nightmare getting in and out of SK from Winnipeg. With all of the dropped flights, I had to spend an extra day in Regina just because of the lack of options.

[esquire]

^ Driving is always an option... unless someone can swing a < 1 hr connection in YYC, you're probably looking at a travel time that is at most about 2 hours less than driving.

[Pinus]

Delete