Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport

[bomberjet]

I booked those ultra low cost fares from WestJet.

2 people return to Montreal. $591. And we even got to select seats for no cost. Row 12 at the window.

[factis]

The Airbus A321 XLR appears to have the range (4,000nm) and size to make a Europe route seemingly more sustainable for us. AC has some on order, but not sure if they’ll be used to serve our market. Distance to London is approx 3,400. This is far outside my field of expertise, so feel to weigh in if I’m off base here.

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Now we just need a Euro flight! I always thought (only semi jokingly) that CRL would be the perfect spot. Big enough runway for a 787-9, tons of destinations, lower volume than the big airports and it's a main hub for Ryanair, which cheapass Winnipeggers would love for their connections on holiday haha.

[wags_in_the_peg]

live feed of Perimeter expansion, opening Feb 2025. expansion of its Winnipeg terminal by 20,000 square feet. The expansion will be finished by February 2025 and will be completed in 11 phases.

https://perimeter.ca/winnipeg-terminal-expansion/

[Biff]

It is a beautiful new space. A lot of mass timber, very open. I was able to tour it a month or so ago.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

live feed of Perimeter expansion, opening Feb 2025. expansion of its Winnipeg terminal by 20,000 square feet. The expansion will be finished by February 2025 and will be completed in 11 phases.

https://perimeter.ca/winnipeg-terminal-expansion/

Nice. Hopefully the main terminal follows suit with its anticipated expansion soon as well.

[Calfan12]

Originally Posted by factis

The Airbus A321 XLR appears to have the range (4,000nm) and size to make a Europe route seemingly more sustainable for us. AC has some on order, but not sure if they’ll be used to serve our market. Distance to London is approx 3,400. This is far outside my field of expertise, so feel to weigh in if I’m off base here.

Yes the (New) Air Canada A321 XLR planes ✈️ has the range to do Europe from smaller markets in Canada like: Winnipeg YWG, Edmonton YEG & even Ottawa YOW to both London UK & Frankfurt Germany.

But Air Canada probably will base most of the A321 XLR at its 3 main hubs in Toronto YYZ, Montreal YUL & Vancouver YVR & open more new flight routes, with it there.
Before they even consider doing A321 XLR flights at Calgary YYC & other cities in Canada.

[Myst]

The A321XLR would, without doubt, be the right aircraft for YWG-Europe service. There are still some impediments that will likely keep it a few years away:

Heathrow service would be the best. As a destination airport and for global connections. But it is very capacity restricted, and it is doubtful that very expensive slots would be economically viable with a smaller aircraft. The third LHR runway would open things up a lot, but is probably 10+ years out.

Amsterdam would probably be second best. But with the Dutch reducing available slots for environmental reasons, it is unlikely. Westjet does partner with KLM, but neither airline has XLR on order.

Paris might be 3rd or 4th best. Westjet partners with Air France. Neither have ordered XLR’s.

I’d say Frankfurt is probably 5th best. Fares are more expensive, I believe partly due to some air travel taxes. And a lot of the demand is UK and France, which is a bit of backtracking that makes it less competitive for those passengers.

I like the idea of Dublin - it’s what I’d call 3rd or 4th best. It’s well positioned for connections, and is a reasonably frequent destination. And Aer Lingus has ordered the XLR. Good onward connections on Aer Lingus as well as low cost carriers for anyone using it as a starting point for a trip. But it will likely be years before Aer Lingus have enough XLR’s to send one our way. And they aren’t in an alliance with AC or DL or WS, so frequent flier loyalty could split the traffic more than if KLM or Air France operated a flight. So DUB is my Dark Horse pick for landing a route.

London Gatwick could be possible. It would serve London destined passengers fine. But onward connections less so. To compete with other connections it can’t be two separate tickets, and Gatwick isn’t a hub for an alliance carrier. With no XLR’s it won’t be Westjet. Transat could do it, but they’ve pulled out of the west and would return to other markets before here. And don’t currently have enough aircraft for it, anyways.

Icelandair should be a possibility. They have aircraft on order. A decent destination, and definitely an Icelandic affiliation here. But also not a huge destination market. So if you’re stopping anyways to connect to the final destination, is Keflavic better than elsewhere. And I have not ever heard of Icelandair showing interest.

[factis]

Great post! Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge.

Originally Posted by Myst

The A321XLR would, without doubt, be the right aircraft for YWG-Europe service. There are still some impediments that will likely keep it a few years away:

Heathrow service would be the best. As a destination airport and for global connections. But it is very capacity restricted, and it is doubtful that very expensive slots would be economically viable with a smaller aircraft. The third LHR runway would open things up a lot, but is probably 10+ years out.

Amsterdam would probably be second best. But with the Dutch reducing available slots for environmental reasons, it is unlikely. Westjet does partner with KLM, but neither airline has XLR on order.

Paris might be 3rd or 4th best. Westjet partners with Air France. Neither have ordered XLR’s.

I’d say Frankfurt is probably 5th best. Fares are more expensive, I believe partly due to some air travel taxes. And a lot of the demand is UK and France, which is a bit of backtracking that makes it less competitive for those passengers.

I like the idea of Dublin - it’s what I’d call 3rd or 4th best. It’s well positioned for connections, and is a reasonably frequent destination. And Aer Lingus has ordered the XLR. Good onward connections on Aer Lingus as well as low cost carriers for anyone using it as a starting point for a trip. But it will likely be years before Aer Lingus have enough XLR’s to send one our way. And they aren’t in an alliance with AC or DL or WS, so frequent flier loyalty could split the traffic more than if KLM or Air France operated a flight. So DUB is my Dark Horse pick for landing a route.

London Gatwick could be possible. It would serve London destined passengers fine. But onward connections less so. To compete with other connections it can’t be two separate tickets, and Gatwick isn’t a hub for an alliance carrier. With no XLR’s it won’t be Westjet. Transat could do it, but they’ve pulled out of the west and would return to other markets before here. And don’t currently have enough aircraft for it, anyways.

Icelandair should be a possibility. They have aircraft on order. A decent destination, and definitely an Icelandic affiliation here. But also not a huge destination market. So if you’re stopping anyways to connect to the final destination, is Keflavic better than elsewhere. And I have not ever heard of Icelandair showing interest.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by Myst

The A321XLR would, without doubt, be the right aircraft for YWG-Europe service. There are still some impediments that will likely keep it a few years away:

Heathrow service would be the best. As a destination airport and for global connections. But it is very capacity restricted, and it is doubtful that very expensive slots would be economically viable with a smaller aircraft. The third LHR runway would open things up a lot, but is probably 10+ years out.

Amsterdam would probably be second best. But with the Dutch reducing available slots for environmental reasons, it is unlikely. Westjet does partner with KLM, but neither airline has XLR on order.

Paris might be 3rd or 4th best. Westjet partners with Air France. Neither have ordered XLR’s.

I’d say Frankfurt is probably 5th best. Fares are more expensive, I believe partly due to some air travel taxes. And a lot of the demand is UK and France, which is a bit of backtracking that makes it less competitive for those passengers.

I like the idea of Dublin - it’s what I’d call 3rd or 4th best. It’s well positioned for connections, and is a reasonably frequent destination. And Aer Lingus has ordered the XLR. Good onward connections on Aer Lingus as well as low cost carriers for anyone using it as a starting point for a trip. But it will likely be years before Aer Lingus have enough XLR’s to send one our way. And they aren’t in an alliance with AC or DL or WS, so frequent flier loyalty could split the traffic more than if KLM or Air France operated a flight. So DUB is my Dark Horse pick for landing a route.

London Gatwick could be possible. It would serve London destined passengers fine. But onward connections less so. To compete with other connections it can’t be two separate tickets, and Gatwick isn’t a hub for an alliance carrier. With no XLR’s it won’t be Westjet. Transat could do it, but they’ve pulled out of the west and would return to other markets before here. And don’t currently have enough aircraft for it, anyways.

Icelandair should be a possibility. They have aircraft on order. A decent destination, and definitely an Icelandic affiliation here. But also not a huge destination market. So if you’re stopping anyways to connect to the final destination, is Keflavic better than elsewhere. And I have not ever heard of Icelandair showing interest.

Would Brussels be a potential good match? Not far from the UK/France/NL.

[Myst]

Brussels would be down the list, IMO.

Good destination. But if you look at the number of flights to the rest of Canada, that’s a good indicator of the amount of travellers going there. There’s only flights to Montreal and Toronto, and even Toronto is only seasonal (and only recently added). You want a destination where a significant number of people are flying to.

Brussels Zaventem is a decently sized airport, but much smaller than LHR or AMS. So not as many connections, either.

SN Brussels Airlines is owned by Lufthansa. So it would be a partner with AC, but a secondary hub for LH group. And they don’t have XLR’s on order.

Charleroi airport is where Ryanair flies out of. So connections would not be seamless. People might like the idea of a cheap flight. And having access to a low cost airline is good if you are spending time in Brussels and then going to another city. But if you are just going to Paris it is usually cheaper and much less hassle to just buy a ticket there rather than put together a ticket to Brussels and a cheap flight to Paris. It needs to be an airport where connections can be made on a network carrier.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I booked those ultra low cost fares from WestJet.

2 people return to Montreal. $591. And we even got to select seats for no cost. Row 12 at the window.

The price is good, but the restrictiveness of the fare package is ridiculous. I mean, no carry on's allowed???

I predict there will be a lot of push-back by customers on this fare type and WS will go back to it's basic fare package within one year.

[Zmonkey]

Originally Posted by Justanothermember

The price is good, but the destructiveness of the fare package is ridiculous. I mean, no carry on's allowed???

I predict there will be a lot of push-back by customers on this fare type and WS will go back to it's basic fare package within one year.

Going to point out that Porter has had a no carry on fare for 7 years now.
https://www.flyporter.com/en/travel-...y-on-allowance

United has a basic economy fare too, no carry ons for free within North America.
https://www.united.com/en/ca/fly/bag...tional%20%2425.

Westjet is much bigger, but assume this will last even with the blow back.

[Justanothermember]

I spotted an Air North plane at the airport yesterday. I wonder if they are doing limited time flights to Yellowknife and Whitehorse again?

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Justanothermember

The price is good, but the restrictiveness of the fare package is ridiculous. I mean, no carry on's allowed???

I predict there will be a lot of push-back by customers on this fare type and WS will go back to it's basic fare package within one year.

I think that's the whole point of the ultra basic. You can bring luggage if you pay for it.

$100 for a flight, direct to Montreal, I'll take it!

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I think that's the whole point of the ultra basic. You can bring luggage if you pay for it.

$100 for a flight, direct to Montreal, I'll take it!

Might be tempting for me. Veteran so I get free checked baggage.

[CoryB]

Maybe I am in the minority but I welcome how up front and direct WestJet's new "UltraBasic" fare class is. Under the previous system everyone felt extremely entitled to have two carryon bags, the small under seat one and the larger overhead bin one. Then the gate agents actively try to bully passengers on flights to put those larger bags into the checked luggage on the flight as the plane factually has room for about 4 of 5 passengers (whatever the number actually is) is have bags in the overhead bins. The worst was the people buying the cheapest fare, Basic at the time, as they were in the last boarding group and overhead bin space was "as available" meaning they would most likely be impacted. Also the Basic fare originally came about as a way to monetize the most undesirable seats on the plane, commonly middle seats close to the back of the plane. Lots of people with those tickets were then shocked when they couldn't be within the first 10 rows on the plane with their spouse and three kids.

With the wording on UltraBasic now it is extremely direct and upfront that you are giving up a lot of things but in return getting a rock bottom price on your spot on the plane in return.

I go even further and feel that if a checked bag on the plane is not included in the ticket on the plane passengers should be charged the same or more to have a bag in the overhead bin. Further, that you can book a spot in the overhead bin when you buy your ticket and it means your bag is definitely in the cabin or you could pay at check in, if space is still available. If you want that space for free you take your chance at the gate or it simply is not available for free. Some airlines already do just that and guess what there are very few bags in the overhead bin as why wouldn't you take the bigger bag with more weight in checked luggage?

It isn't that it is anti-consumer but rather makes it a lot more clear if your bag will be in the cabin before you board.

[bomberjet]

I don't really get the backlash on the ultra low cost fare. Like you said, it's upfront that you get nothing and fares can be very cheap. Seems great to me.

It also is something that WestJet, one of the 2 big dogs in Canada, offer this and not just the low cost airlines who seem to come and go every couple years.

AC is competing specific on the Montreal routes now. Friend of mine got return to Montreal on AC for $281!

[Justanothermember]

In retrospect, the fares aren't that bad. You definately know what you get and have the option to pay higher rates for more service. Options are good.

[zalf]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I don't really get the backlash on the ultra low cost fare. Like you said, it's upfront that you get nothing and fares can be very cheap. Seems great to me.

Somewhere in the multiverse, WestJet is introducing a new, more expensive fare where you pay for for carry-on luggage, whether you use it or not. People complain mightily online, though some of them find it a suits their needs.

[cheswick]

Really should have a base fare then pay for any extras you want. Choose seats? Pay. Carry on? Pay. Checked bag? Pay. Early Boarding? Pay. Pick and choose what's important to you.