Calgary International Airport II

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

To your point that everyone bound for the US will be holding a boarding card with a big E on it, from an airline perspective I can tell you that that's probably much less common than you think. Most connecting passengers will have checked in for their initial flight well before a gate has been assigned for their connecting flight in the airline's system. As a result, the chances are good that their boarding card for their YYC connecting flight will be blank next to the assigned gate.

When a flight arrives into YYC (especially one that's delayed), the last thing people want to do is search for a screen that displays gate information. I would argue that the mindset of most passengers in that scenario is 'I'm connecting to the US or I'm connecting to Mexico, where do I need to go?' and the airport's current way-finding addresses that mindset quite well. A passenger glances up and sees the symbol for connection (and the purple one used in YYC seems to be the international norm now), the US flag or the globe and can quickly and easily start moving in that direction.

Hmmm.

So assuming that people’s boarding passes don’t show a gate number for a connecting flight (although I don’t believe that’s accurate for YYC) ... and assuming, as you suggest, that people won’t look for gate numbers on monitor displays (gotta disagree on that point, too) ... and following your logic that connecting travellers instinctively only want to follow an icon or image (either a US flag or the bad-clipart-globe) rather than a concourse identifier ...

Well, the majority of connections, IIRC, at YYC are domestic to domestic. Arriving at one of three concourses, and departing from one of those same three concourses. And often not intuitive to find one’s way between the three domestic concourses.

So if those folks don’t have concourse/gate numbers on their BPs, and nobody wants to look at monitors for that concourse/gate info, and people don’t understand concourse lettering (but do understand flags and globes) ... how on earth would those people ever find their connecting domestic flight? How would people get between A, B and C without ever knowing or seeking a concourse ID?

And, as an aside, I realize that not everyone here agrees with my contention that YYC’s signs are over-complicated, plagued with way too much unhelpful stuff, and generally not intuitive. But so far nobody has argued with my frustration over wayfinding signs designating the “Chili’s” as airport lounges?? Do we have consensus on that being awful wayfinding signage, at least? (Unless Chili’s has recently joined Priority Pass and I wasn’t aware, or maybe those arrows actually point to secret Centurion Club entrances that I’ve never found?!)

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by casper

What was also odd about the flight, is the crew for both the Air Canada flight to Vancouver and the WestJet flight to Saskatoon were just standing around at the podium until about 10 minutes before the AC flight was scheduled to depart. At that point they opened the door for the flight crew to head down. Clearly that is a assure a late departure. I am assuming they were waiting for someone to reconfigure the passage way.

You are correct. In the new terminal, crew don’t have access to the bridges and must wait for a CSA to let them down to the aircraft.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

But so far nobody has argued with my frustration over wayfinding signs designating the “Chili’s” as airport lounges?? Do we have consensus on that being awful wayfinding signage, at least? (Unless Chili’s has recently joined Priority Pass and I wasn’t aware, or maybe those arrows actually point to secret Centurion Club entrances that I’ve never found?!)

Hehe... I'll agree with you, but not for the reason you think. In an airport context, a "lounge" might be any waiting area, especially at the gates. e.g., "Departure lounge", or "waiting lounge". To me, that's the greater possible confusion.

Most signs for airline lounges will have the fully branded names, "Maple Leaf Lounge", "Red Carpet Club", "Star Alliance Lounge", or even "Airline lounges" if it's one of those terminals with lots of different lounges concentrated in one area. And the people that know they belong to a branded lounge are pretty good about knowing the brand names, I'm not too worried about them.

And I'll certainly agree that "lounge" is an awfully silly name for Chili's. Put up the fork-plate-knife symbol and/or the martini-glass symbol and call it a day.

[Tobuz]

Ha! Fair enough.

And, yes, that is exactly why the word “Lounge” is awful for wayfinding signage in an airport. If there are multiple meanings for a word, that introduces potential for confusion or miscommunication.

In 2017, the word “lounge” is now really only synonymous to “restaurant/bar” to two very different audiences:

- Big urban centre hipsters with ironic big bushy beards wearing ironic lumberjack shirts who hang out in uber-trendy bars that have been named (ironically) “lounges”
- People from small towns in the Canadian prairies, where the “lounge” is still right beside the “smorg” (aka “smorgasbord”, which is the small-town noun for “buffet”) on the main floor of an old, main street hotel

For the other 97% of us (ie not from King Street West or from Virden, Prince Albert or Lloydminster), “lounge” in an airport setting would most likely describe one of two very different things: an exclusive (PP, Aspire, MLL) membership or pay-per-entry facility or (as you said) a plain ol’ departure waiting area with seats.

[FormerWingTipper]

What time do they start? Around 05:00 or 06:00?

I always think it is funny when you walk through C Security around 04:30 and the Link crosswalk lights are "red" - "do not cross" but there are no shuttles even running. How complicated is it to just leave the lights green when the shuttles are parked?

[Johnny Aussie]

Looks like AC is reducing IAH to twice daily year round.

Latest schedule change has the early afternoon flight gone indefinitely now.

This will leave AC with 12 daily transborder flights next summer (3 mainline, 1 rouge and 8 Express).

Westjet continues to chip away at AC at YYC.

On the upside, AS has restored the third daily to SEA next summer. Will remain only twice daily this winter.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

I wonder what role the terrible OTP of this flight played, and AC ground crews being stretched thin by IFP operations. Late afternoon turn faced the same issues this summer.

TBH I think Westjet is putting tremendous pressure on AC at YYC. AC hasn't really done anything here in the last few years... just holding on to what it has I suppose. AC itself seems to refer to YYC as a hub less and less all the time. Really depending on the audience. The latest round of additions has them clearly continuing to focus on YYZ, YUL and YVR. International (including Transborder) has been stagnant outside of certain sun destinations which always come and go with the wind anyway. Still looks like NRT is going to be a 763 and LHR a 789 next summer. AC 10 definitely showing a daily YYZ-YYC-NRT rotation. Things can change of course but it doesn't look promising.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

Loads on WS' YYC-IAH are absolute trash, So it's interesting that AC would roll over for them.

They may be trash (and I’d expect them to be) but assuming that Westjet even steals 12 pax that would normally fly AC, that’s 16% of your load right there. This could be enough to push the flight into the red. I’d also assume there has been pressure on this route for some time. The late afternoon UA flight continues to seriously struggle. I doubt AC would abandon this route altogether but to curb losses, cut some capacity.

I’m actually really surprised WS is maintaining 2 daily throughout the winter.

[thenoflyzone]

Was reading through the BOS thread on a.net, and a guy who works for WS at BOS is hearing that the airline is looking to start YYC-BOS sometime in 2018. Aircraft will RON at BOS.

Makes sense. It is the largest unserved U.S market from YYC, and the DL tie-up only helps the route.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Acey

It's been a rumour here for months. Some expected an announcement by the end of the year, but it looks like that won't happen.

Without knowing the capacity or source of the rumoured poster on airliners.net I think, independently of any rumours, this is potentially the next most logical route from YYC. Especially with the Delta JV. I’m curious to see what they do with BNA as well (ie do they increase it to daily?)

[Tobuz]

The Westin Calgary Airport is now showing a targeted opening date: May 15, 2018. It's still not bookable, though, nor does it yet have its own web page.

https://www.starwoodhotels.com/preferredguest/directory/new-hotels/north-america/ca/ab/list.html

(It's the newly-constructed property on Aero Drive NE, close to the Acclaim Hotel.)

With 250 guestrooms, The Westin Calgary Airport will be located directly on Calgary International Airport property. The five-story hotel will feature a Westin Club Lounge, 30,000 square feet of meeting space, restaurant and lounge.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Acey

Loads on WS' YYC-IAH are absolute trash, So it's interesting that AC would roll over for them.

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

TBH I think Westjet is putting tremendous pressure on AC at YYC. AC hasn't really done anything here in the last few years... just holding on to what it has I suppose. AC itself seems to refer to YYC as a hub less and less all the time.

There are several reasons for the IAH cut:
(1) Aircraft is better utilized (more network feed, higher profit) on other routes. The new YVR transborder routes are better for the aircraft.
(2) AC is building a transpac hub at YVR well before WS gets their 789s, so the YVR transborder ops feed the long term strategy.
(3) AC is coordinating much more with UA on the transborder. The new AC-UA IAH schedule is much more reflective of a coordinated operation.

But more interesting is the UA reduction on YYC-DEN combined with the AC increase on YVR-DEN to 3x/day. There is an opportunity for AC to do mid morning YYC-DEN with a late afternoon or early evening DEN-YYC. The aircraft would be scissors paired with YVR for maximum efficiency.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Was reading through the BOS thread on a.net, and a guy who works for WS at BOS is hearing that the airline is looking to start YYC-BOS sometime in 2018. Aircraft will RON at BOS.

Makes sense. It is the largest unserved U.S market from YYC, and the DL tie-up only helps the route.

Te route makes sense up til the point where the aircraft RON in BOS. The departure is too late in the day for most business traffic. Mid morning departure would be better. If the route goes ahead as advertised, there is no need for DL assistance on the BOS end other than gate space.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Cage

There are several reasons for the IAH cut:
(1) Aircraft is better utilized (more network feed, higher profit) on other routes. The new YVR transborder routes are better for the aircraft.
(2) AC is building a transpac hub at YVR well before WS gets their 789s, so the YVR transborder ops feed the long term strategy.
(3) AC is coordinating much more with UA on the transborder. The new AC-UA IAH schedule is much more reflective of a coordinated operation.

But more interesting is the UA reduction on YYC-DEN combined with the AC increase on YVR-DEN to 3x/day. There is an opportunity for AC to do mid morning YYC-DEN with a late afternoon or early evening DEN-YYC. The aircraft would be scissors paired with YVR for maximum efficiency.

Te route makes sense up til the point where the aircraft RON in BOS. The departure is too late in the day for most business traffic. Mid morning departure would be better. If the route goes ahead as advertised, there is no need for DL assistance on the BOS end other than gate space.

But that's it... AC focussing on YVR in the west. And YVR's numbers are just building from strength to strength. I'm assuming YYC-IAH went into the red at least in the short term especially once WS started.

And AC started building their transpacific hub well before WS announced the 789... AC building off YVR's strong economy, location and market size.. coincidentally now growing even stronger with Westjet's stated intentions.

I think UA's reduction on YYC-DEN is just seasonal... by next summer they should be 4 daily once again. I don't think we will see AC do anything on YYC-transborder for awhile. The PHX to Express from rouge was just to maximise the new YVR-PHX route.

DL actually has a decent focus mini hub at BOS good for many east coast destinations but an arrival too late into BOS would nul that benefit. YYC-BOS still a bit on the small side (less than half of YVR) but this is where geographic location works in Calgary's favour. Hence why YYC-BNA exists.

[FormerWingTipper]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I don't think we will see AC do anything on YYC-transborder for awhile.

What about the YYC-GEG route on the BEH operated by Air Georgian? I keep hoping for that one. Then Gate 96/97 can actually be used for something, lol.

[People.talking]

The @fly_yyc instgram page is saying that YYC has reached its 16 millionth passenger.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by People.talking

The @fly_yyc instgram page is saying that YYC has reached its 16 millionth passenger.

16 millionth passenger was an Air Canada Express pax connecting to YEG.

[hollywoodcory]

Originally Posted by Cage

16 millionth passenger was an Air Canada Express pax connecting to YEG.

YYC Twitter page says the 16 millionth passenger was on WS BZE flight this morning. They gave him a free flight courtesy of WS, and the whole flight got a gift bag.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by Cage

The 717 originated with the MD95 airframe. When Boeing purchased McDonnell Douglas, they closed production of the MD90 program as it competed (rather poorly) with the 737. Boeing transferred the MD95 specs to the 717. Consequently the 717 was an orphan aircraft and only MD88 and MD90 customers wanted the 717.

When AC was looking for a 100 seat airplane, the 717 was compared favourably against the A318 but significantly under performed the E190 in all categories. The icing on the cake was commonalty between the E190 and E175.

The MD-95 was supposed to be three models that could replace the range of DC-9s still flying at the turn of the century and range in seats from 86 to 130.

When Boeing only built the DC-9-30 sized model and failed to commit to the DC-9-50 sized model DC-9 operators had to look elsewhere to replace their combined fleets but nobody was in a huge hurry to do so at the time so there was never a massive order from Northwest or anyone else that Boeing just couldn't refuse that would seen the originally planned family emerge.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by Cage

Te route makes sense up til the point where the aircraft RON in BOS. The departure is too late in the day for most business traffic. Mid morning departure would be better. If the route goes ahead as advertised, there is no need for DL assistance on the BOS end other than gate space.

YYC to BOS via YYZ is a pretty easy connection with the three Encore flights a day between YYZ and BOS.

So my first question would be is Massport offering incentives for such a route. WestJet has seized on such offers a couple times such as Myrtle Beach and Nashville.

[boeing767300]

Yesterday the 30th Dec I spent some not so quality time at the dreaded Gate C72. My flight was AC227 to YVR, it was full full full with at least 20 standby passengers from flights cancelled earlier in the day. Because of the diabolical seating layout and also the lack of seats there were at least 50 passengers holding the wall up and making passage extremely difficult. To make matters worse WS were departing flight 197 to YZF from gate 71. That meant that all of the WS passengers were boxed into the corner with no where to go. Gate agents with both carriers were very challenged and making announcements was a real challenge. Adding to the mess was the difficulty experienced by international passengers attempting to transit that area to the international gates. Washrooms for ladies and men are totally inadequate and additional washrooms are a long ways away. I am not blaming the carriers here as moving aircraft from international to domestic gates would have been a nightmare yesterday due to the conditions. Total blame goes to an airport authority for designing such a quagmire and having the gall to charge the highest AIF fee in Canada for the privilege.