YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[LeftCoaster]

Just saw this on airline route, is it a reduction from double daily to 11x per week?

Beijing – Vancouver CA997/998 operates 4 weekly (Day x124) with expanded operational period compared to 2015: 01JUN16 – 30SEP16
http://airlineroute.net/2016/03/08/ca-s16update2/

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Just saw this on airline route, is it a reduction from double daily to 11x per week?

Beijing – Vancouver CA997/998 operates 4 weekly (Day x124) with expanded operational period compared to 2015: 01JUN16 – 30SEP16
http://airlineroute.net/2016/03/08/ca-s16update2/

This is another route with frequency adjustments throughout the year. Always hard to predict what's going to happen.

Last summer it went from daily to 11 weekly from mid June - early September only.

Then a further adjustment it went from 11 weekly to double daily from about mid August til the end of the summer schedules.

The first boost to 11 weekly is starting earlier this summer, so will they increase back to double daily??? Don't know. Always hard to predict lists of flights based on past cycles. Last year's double daily schedule was released in April.

[LeftCoaster]

Ahh I see, so the early June is actually a slight capacity bump over last year, assuming they still go double daily mid August.

I've been showing double daily in my charts assuming it was the norm, I didn't know it was such a recent and short upgrade.

Since they seem to be going to 11x daily earlier than last year, it's probably a good sign for a resumption of double daily service I'd imagine.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Since they seem to be going to 11x daily earlier than last year, it's probably a good sign for a resumption of double daily service I'd imagine.

I think they are going to implement the Beijing Shuttle.

11 daily every hour on the hour from 0600-1400 and then two late night ones at 0100 and 0200..... Rumoured that a few of those may be on the 747-800!

[LeftCoaster]

Haha, well the way Air China seems to want to funnel people through PEK you might not be that far off. Fares are stupid cheap through Beijing these days, I can't imagine they are making great yields.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Fares are stupid cheap through Beijing these days, I can't imagine they are making great yields.

Hmmm, I have recently been paying special attention to flight prices to Asia and from YVR Shanghai comes very often the cheapest with China Eastern. I haven't really seen any deals that would have made Air China the cheapest through Beijing in the past 6 months.

Also China Southern was having some sales before Christmas through Guangzhou, but not recently. It has really been China Eastern discounting many routes out of YVR, which is a bit strange as they fly a small plane (A330)on this route and the connections for their YVR flights are horrible (most requiring a layover of 7-16 hours and many times change of airport to SAN).

Reviews of China Southern are also pretty poor, so not sure if the prices are tempting enough even when discounted heavily. Anyways, just something I have noticed.

[vanlaw]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Hmmm, I have recently been paying special attention to flight prices to Asia and from YVR Shanghai comes very often the cheapest with China Eastern. I haven't really seen any deals that would have made Air China the cheapest through Beijing in the past 6 months.

Also China Southern was having some sales before Christmas through Guangzhou, but not recently. It has really been China Eastern discounting many routes out of YVR, which is a bit strange as they fly a small plane (A330)on this route and the connections for their YVR flights are horrible (most requiring a layover of 7-16 hours and many times change of airport to SAN).

Reviews of China Southern are also pretty poor, so not sure if the prices are tempting enough even when discounted heavily. Anyways, just something I have noticed.

The cheapest fares I've noticed in the past month to many destinations in Asia for later this year or early 2017 have been on EVA one stop through TPE. I haven't flown with them, but the get pretty solid reviews.

[Klazu]

Hmm, what search engine are you using? I have (unfortunately) never seen them being cheapest on Google Flights to many destination in South East Asia. Maybe Google's algorithm has decided that we deserve different prices. So unfair.

[vanlaw]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Hmm, what search engine are you using? I have (unfortunately) never seen them being cheapest on Google Flights to many destination in South East Asia. Maybe Google's algorithm has decided that we deserve different prices. So unfair.

I always start with Google's ITA Matrix. Although you cant book from it, I've usually been able to find the fare on another site after. In the initial search I choose 'search calendar of lowest fares" to search for a full month, and put a range for "length of stay", say 14-17 nights.

[LeftCoaster]

Delta surprisingly posted a couple of cuts at SEA today.

One of the 2x daily Seattle to Amsterdam is going from a 332 to a 764.
Seattle to Seoul is being downgraded significantly from an A333 to a B763
Seattle to Shanghai is being downgraded from an A332 to a 763

These nearly offset previously announced upgrades on SEA-HKG and SEA-NRT.

I'm a little surprised by this given the strong year last year at SEA.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Delta surprisingly posted a couple of cuts at SEA today.

One of the 2x daily Seattle to Amsterdam is going from a 332 to a 764.
Seattle to Seoul is being downgraded significantly from an A333 to a B763
Seattle to Shanghai is being downgraded from an A332 to a 763

These nearly offset previously announced upgrades on SEA-HKG and SEA-NRT.

I'm a little surprised by this given the strong year last year at SEA.

I think the consensus is they are definitely posting strong increases in passenger numbers but it really has to be taken into context. Looking at some of the fares out of SEA indicates they may be struggling to fill their planes. Yields being trashed? Who knows. But there are a significant number of flights being replaced by 767-300s for sure.

If you had a base of say 3200 passengers on a route then add 1000 seats but only fill 650 of the new seats, total traffic will still increase 20%.

Same scenario with airports showing large gains in international traffic. The conclusion is made there must be a huge untapped market of international travel. But if that is off a very small base, add a few additional weekly sunflights and voila! Massive % gains and bragging rights... LOL

[casper]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I think the consensus is they are definitely posting strong increases in passenger numbers but it really has to be taken into context. Looking at some of the fares out of SEA indicates they may be struggling to fill their planes. Yields being trashed? Who knows. But there are a significant number of flights being replaced by 767-300s for sure.

If you had a base of say 3200 passengers on a route then add 1000 seats but only fill 650 of the new seats, total traffic will still increase 20%.

Same scenario with airports showing large gains in international traffic. The conclusion is made there must be a huge untapped market of international travel. But if that is off a very small base, add a few additional weekly sunflights and voila! Massive % gains and bragging rights... LOL

At the case time Delta is trying to turn Seattle into a hub (or gateway or whatever it wants to a call it). There should be a good a percentage of transfer passengers. Perhaps it is not panning out as they expected.

I would think Seattle geographically would make a better connecting airport that LAX of San Francisco. Perhaps not.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by casper

At the case time Delta is trying to turn Seattle into a hub (or gateway or whatever it wants to a call it). There should be a good a percentage of transfer passengers. Perhaps it is not panning out as they expected.

I would think Seattle geographically would make a better connecting airport that LAX of San Francisco. Perhaps not.

That's why they are building up so much domestic traffic into SEA as well. Although, new route announcements seem to be waning.

The trick with developing hubs in the US for the big three, not unlike anywhere else in the world really, is to ensure they don't damage existing hubs to a point where overall diminishing returns occur. DL as we all know have significant ops in Detroit, MSP, Atlanta, LAX, SLC etc. By re-routing pax through SEA, instead of DTW or SLC for example, requires some decent yield/revenue management to get the best overall outcome.

But yeah, obviously they aren't growing capacity to Asia or Europe. In July: ICN, PEK, PVG and LHR on 763s, AMS and HKG on 332s, AMS and CDG on 333s and NRT on 777s. KIX and HND are long gone too.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

That's why they are building up so much domestic traffic into SEA as well. Although, new route announcements seem to be waning.

The trick with developing hubs in the US for the big three, not unlike anywhere else in the world really, is to ensure they don't damage existing hubs to a point where overall diminishing returns occur. DL as we all know have significant ops in Detroit, MSP, Atlanta, LAX, SLC etc. By re-routing pax through SEA, instead of DTW or SLC for example, requires some decent yield/revenue management to get the best overall outcome.

But yeah, obviously they aren't growing capacity to Asia or Europe. In July: ICN, PEK, PVG and LHR on 763s, AMS and HKG on 332s, AMS and CDG on 333s and NRT on 777s. KIX and HND are long gone too.

How does SEA compare to YVR in
-total overseas flights
-total overseas pax

Also, is Seattle ramping up, trying to compete with the YVR Pacific Gateway role, or not? In the USA, it has to compete with SFO and LAX, which are mega-destinations.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

How does SEA compare to YVR in
-total overseas flights
-total overseas pax

Also, is Seattle ramping up, trying to compete with the YVR Pacific Gateway role, or not? In the USA, it has to compete with SFO and LAX, which are mega-destinations.

Seattle doesnt have much going for it in terms of international flights or passengers. I did a study a few years back studying the airport stats published by the airports themselves. My findings were that almost 50% of YVRs pax are international travellers (of course including the states). Sea Tac by comparison were only 20% IIRC

YVR and Sea Tac have almost the same amount of gates (with YVR edging out SEA)

SEA moves over 40M pax each year vs YVRs 20M however SEA has 20% more aircraft movements than YVR

In terms of AirCraft Cargo, Again 20% more than YVR.

This was a while ago when i did this comparison (regards to movements and cargo stats)

YVR is one of the few airports in NA where a good chunk of it is international PAX. Its up there with LAX, SFO, Logan, MIA, JFK.

SeaTac international destinations include Tokyo, Beijing, Seoul, Shanghai, Mazatlan, Cabo, London, Rejkavik, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam and Dubai. YVR flies already to most of those places in addition to Auckland, Sydney, Mexcio CIty, Rome, Manchester, and all those cities in China i cannot pronounce. YVR is definitely an international gateway compared to SEA TAC

Miami like Vancouver has a proportionate amount of international passengers. Miami is a lot bigger than Vancouver overall but because its pretty much the gateway to latin america it s makeup of international pax is similar. I believe MIA overtook JFK a few years back with its share of international passengers.

[Klazu]

Boundary Bay Airport (YDT) in Delta is Canada's 7th busiest airport in terms of airplane movements - even ahead of Ottawa's YOW and many other!











Not everything out of YDT is only general avatiation, though. There are also few scheduled routes to Victoria and Nanaimo.





The terminal building is actually verynew and modern for such a small airport!

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Seattle doesnt have much going for it in terms of international flights or passengers. I did a study a few years back studying the airport stats published by the airports themselves. My findings were that almost 50% of YVRs pax are international travellers (of course including the states). Sea Tac by comparison were only 20% IIRC

Seattle competes directly with LAX/SFO more than YVR, imo. FOR MOST Americans, SEA/SFO/LAX makes little difference in terms of time-savings over the Pacific. SEA will save 500–700 miles from NYC

For Torontite Canadians, however, a diversion to SFO/LAX to get to Asia adds a lot more (~1000 less than LAX) and YVR saves the hassle of going through an American airport. YYC - YVR - NRT is even more dramatic, with YVR being ~1400 miles less than LAX.

YVR is one of the few airports in NA where a good chunk of it is international PAX. Its up there with LAX, SFO, Logan, MIA, JFK.

I am not sure you can rank it with LAX unless you exclude US destinations. I wouldn't really consider the USA international, I'd consider it "USA"

But as for traffic. It makes sense given Vancouver's high Asian demographic that trips to places outside of NA are higher than Seattle. Lots of business & family ties across the Pacific.

Miami like Vancouver has a proportionate amount of international passengers. Miami is a lot bigger than Vancouver overall but because its pretty much the gateway to latin america it s makeup of international pax is similar. I believe MIA overtook JFK a few years back with its share of international passengers.

So... could YVR overtake YYZ one day? Only if we get an airline HQ in Western Canada. WestJet?

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I am not sure you can rank it with LAX unless you exclude US destinations. I wouldn't really consider the USA international, I'd consider it "USA"

But as for traffic. It makes sense given Vancouver's high Asian demographic that trips to places outside of NA are higher than Seattle. Lots of business & family ties across the Pacific.

So... could YVR overtake YYZ one day? Only if we get an airline HQ in Western Canada. WestJet?

First point: That is the problem I have highlighted on numerous occasions. Canada is the only country that separates Transborder from Other International. So comparing country to country is tough. LAX would have a fair amount of Canadian and Mexican traffic included in their international figures. Should those be removed to compare? PDX is another good example of this. Probably about 1/2 of their international traffic would be transborder (Canada/Mexico). So how to compare?

Second point: Yup, this is what makes YVR so attractive for Asian flights and it doesn't appear the attraction is slowing down.

Third point: Even with an airline based in YVR, I would say YYZ will remain supreme ruler of the airport pax crown for as long as I can see into the future. Toronto is just too large a market with its large business base, population, location, diverse demography etc etc.... Let's just accept YVR is doing OK for its size, location and diverse demography etc... YVR will continue to prosper.

****

Here is SEA's list of overseas destinations and by carrier:

ICN(DL,KE,OZ); NRT(DL,NH); PEK(DL,HU); PVG(DL,HU); LHR(DL,BA); FRA(LH,DE); DXB(EK); TPE(BR); KEF(FI); AMS(DL); CDG(DL); HKG(DL)

So 12 destinations served by 11 carriers including Delta.

The only destination not served by YVR is DXB. The only carriers not served by YVR are EK, OZ and HU.

[Klazu]

Checking systems down YVR-wide today for three hours. Huge line-ups in all terminals. The issue has been solved now.

[SFUVancouver]

Has anyone travelled recently on a long-haul Air Canada 777-200LR?

I've got a 14 hour 50 minute flight coming up tomorrow night to Sydney (in a middle seat, I regret to add) and I'm expecting that it will be on one of Air Canada's "upgraded" aircraft that have the high density layout. New seats are nice, but the loss of more than an inch and a half of seat width, plus leg room, is going to be a real pain, I expect.