YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

On paper a non-stop wouldn't make sense. the east coast of australia is closer to canada than SE asia with a good premium market but AC runs the non-stop from YVR, not YYZ. from SE asia, YYZ is ~ 2000 km further than YVR if it goes TPAC which would make for a long-ass flight.

Unless AC is thinking of a 5th freedom stop somewhere from YYZ to SE asia.

So I was looking into this a bit and hand't really realized how far it is to SIN from YVR. Air Canada doesn't even have a plane that could make it. Lends some credibility to the YVR-BKK-SIN route, which would just be within the range of a 787-9. YYZ is just flat out, even Singapore Airlines' new A359 ultra long range version can't even come close to doing it. It can do the YVR route though, in fact their standard 359 can do it...

So that got me thinking about SG's fleet. They have ordered 67 A359s and 30 B787-10s to replace 23 B772s and 28 A333s.

That's a net of 46 additional long haul frames with similar seating capacity and much longer range. That's a ton of growth.

So where are all those new frames going to fly?

Between local carriers and the ME3 the Europe to SE Asia/Australia runs are highly competitive and very well served. That really leaves Singapore with Asia and the Americas to deploy all this new metal. Given the sorry state of South American aviation today I think that really leaves East Asia and North America. Given that and all the new planes SG is going to have I would be shocked if in the next few years they didn't start flying to YVR again.

[Gordon]

would any plane that can do YvR Syd nonstop not be able to do the yvr sin
toute

[LeftCoaster]

Damn you're totally right, I forgot about Air Canada's 777LR, I was only thinking about their 787s and 773s.

Ya the 777LR will do any of the above.

My point still stands about all SGs extra planes though

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

On paper a non-stop wouldn't make sense. the east coast of australia is closer to canada than SE asia with a good premium market but AC runs the non-stop from YVR, not YYZ. from SE asia, YYZ is ~ 2000 km further than YVR if it goes TPAC which would make for a long-ass flight.

Unless AC is thinking of a 5th freedom stop somewhere from YYZ to SE asia.

* Where, in your opinion, might that be? Tokyo seems to make sense to me, being relatively northeastward compared to others (polar route) but I'm probably wrong.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

So I was looking into this a bit / ..... come close to doing it. It can do the YVR route though, in fact their standard 359 can do it...

So that got me thinking about SG's fleet. They have ordered 67 A359s and 30 B787-10s to replace 23 B772s and 28 A333s.

That's a net of 46 additional long haul frames with similar seating capacity and much longer range. That's a ton of growth.

So where are all those new frames going to fly?

Between local carriers and the ME3 the Europe to SE Asia/Australia runs are highly competitive and very well served. ........ I think that really leaves East Asia and North America. Given that and all the new planes SG is going to have I would be shocked if in the next few years they didn't start flying to YVR again.

Can you make a rough estimation of about how many years for that? Also, when / if do you think YVR will get BKK / SIN on Air Canada? Thanks

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by nname

Sichuan Airlines had applied for 2x weekly Chengdu-Zhengzhou-Vancouver starting October. Some of the frequency will come from reducing service on the Chengdu-Shenyang-Vancouver route. Maybe they would go for 2x weekly each?

Sounds like the Vancouver Sun doesn't read this forum, or they would have had an airline to speculate on:

Canada-China e-commerce conference features new Vancouver flight announcement

The biggest announcement at a Vancouver conference about using e-commerce to bypass the challenges of cross-border trade was not about that subject, but a new direct air link.

Speaking at the inaugural Canada China Trade Conference at the Vancouver Convention Centre on Tuesday, a senior Chinese official announced the launch this fall of a new direct flight between Vancouver and Zhengzhou, a city Beijing is trying to mould into a trade hub.

“According to our airport officials, before the end of this year, a direct route from Zhengzhou to Vancouver will be established,” said Zhang Yanming, the administrative committee chief of Zhengzhou’s new airport-economic zone, in a video message at the conference. “When that happens, it will be even easier for everyone here to do business in Zhengzhou.”

Zhengzhou city representatives did not say which airline will operate the twice a week service that starts on Nov. 11. Earlier this month, Beijing Capital Airlines said it will start flying between Vancouver and Hangzhou on Dec. 30, becoming the sixth Mainland Chinese carrier to enter YVR.

Zhang said the direct flight to the 415-square-kilometre airport economic zone is partly about e-commerce. The zone is home to a Foxconn factory that makes a major portion of the world’s Apple iPhones. Zhang said flights to the zone, located centrally in the Chinese market, would allow B.C. companies engaged in e-commerce the most direct access to get their products into China.
http://vancouversun.com/business/loc...t-announcement

Either way some more smoke to add to this fire. Hopefully it's 2x PW for both Zengzhou and Shenyang.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

* Where, in your opinion, might that be? Tokyo seems to make sense to me, being relatively northeastward compared to others (polar route) but I'm probably wrong.

Can you make a rough estimation of about how many years for that? Also, when / if do you think YVR will get BKK / SIN on Air Canada? Thanks

(1) Fifth freedom traffic would be best handled through ICN. The primary issue with Japan is that they don't want upper level freedom traffic to hinder their local airlines JAL and ANA. Primary witness is the extended time it took for USA to get daytime access to HND. The wait was primarily due to UA and DL hubs at NRT. UA solved their issue by beefing up SFO and DL created SEA as their Asian hub of choice. Additionally UA and ANA have teamed up in comprehensive JV as does AA and JAL. The Koreans are not as picky about foreign airlines setting up hub operations in their territory.

(2) I can see SIN on 3-4 times per week nonstop basis out of YVR with the 789 or 77L. 3-4 times per week would only require one aircraft whereas any further frequency would require a second aircraft.

I don't see BKK working out unless AC runs out of places to send the 789. Yield being the biggest impediment for the route.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Cage

(1) Fifth freedom traffic would be best handled through ICN. The primary issue with Japan is that they don't want upper level freedom traffic to hinder their local airlines JAL and ANA. Primary witness is the extended time it took for USA to get daytime access to HND. The wait was primarily due to UA and DL hubs at NRT. UA solved their issue by beefing up SFO and DL created SEA as their Asian hub of choice. Additionally UA and ANA have teamed up in comprehensive JV as does AA and JAL. The Koreans are not as picky about foreign airlines setting up hub operations in their territory.

(2) I can see SIN on 3-4 times per week nonstop basis out of YVR with the 789 or 77L. 3-4 times per week would only require one aircraft whereas any further frequency would require a second aircraft.

I don't see BKK working out unless AC runs out of places to send the 789. Yield being the biggest impediment for the route.

Thanks Cage, I appreciate the response. One remaining question, if I may, though. In what timeframe can you imagine YVR-SIN; like in how many years from now?

Also, As it seems Thai wants to fly BKK-YVR and BKK-SEA, I guess that would be sufficient, hence the no-go by AC.

But when is all this likely to begin, do you think.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Cage

(1) Fifth freedom traffic would be best handled through ICN. The primary issue with Japan is that they don't want upper level freedom traffic to hinder their local airlines JAL and ANA. Primary witness is the extended time it took for USA to get daytime access to HND. The wait was primarily due to UA and DL hubs at NRT. UA solved their issue by beefing up SFO and DL created SEA as their Asian hub of choice. Additionally UA and ANA have teamed up in comprehensive JV as does AA and JAL. The Koreans are not as picky about foreign airlines setting up hub operations in their territory.

(2) I can see SIN on 3-4 times per week nonstop basis out of YVR with the 789 or 77L. 3-4 times per week would only require one aircraft whereas any further frequency would require a second aircraft.

I don't see BKK working out unless AC runs out of places to send the 789. Yield being the biggest impediment for the route.

Perhaps going in the other direction....

In years past I thought it was YVR-LHR-(somewhere in India)-SIN Basically doing it as a tag on to Heathrow flight. That would require more Heathrow slots. Probably not likely.

AC has also tried to service India with Switzerland. Less issues with slots, but who knows.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Either way some more smoke to add to this fire. Hopefully it's 2x PW for both Zengzhou and Shenyang.

Sichuan has been allocated only three flights per week in the new allotment shuffle so unfortunately that won't work.

No kidding though, there is very little in the way of additional flying that will be able to happen on the cap of 76 flights per week. And from what I have heard the cap may be in place for a few years. Who knows!? So not only is this a hindrance to YVR but any other city in Canada hoping to land new routes to China with Chinese carriers. The only unused frequencies available are Hainan with only two left. Otheriwse, if there are to be any frequency increases or new routes they will have to come at the expense of current routes which I hear is somewhat potentially possibly sort of likely maybe (how's that for vague!)

I'm going to put on my former auditors hat and word this as vaguely as possible.... but I understand that China asked for a significant increase in frequencies per week but were denied by the lobbying and objection by another entity. Therefore, the cap at 76 remains. And it may be a couple of years or more until this is negotiated again.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by casper

Perhaps going in the other direction....

In years past I thought it was YVR-LHR-(somewhere in India)-SIN Basically doing it as a tag on to Heathrow flight. That would require more Heathrow slots. Probably not likely.

AC has also tried to service India with Switzerland. Less issues with slots, but who knows.

(1) The late 80s routing was YVR-LHR-BOM-SIN on either 742 or L1011-500 metal by original AC. The route was a big disappointment as there was no local traffic rights on BOM-SIN.

A second India attempt at YYZ-DEL was made by AC using 345s or 343s, but this was uneconomical due to high fuel costs.

A third India attempt was 763 equipment YYZ-ZRH-DEL.

(2) It is doubtful that AC would ever do another Canada-Europe-India route again. Any AC pax desiring this routing can connect through FRA on LH. The AC/UA/LH group TransAt JV includes provisions for beyond revenue sharing on joint tickets, which is a long winded way of saying AC gets a cut of the FRA-India revenue from LH.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Sichuan has been allocated only three flights per week in the new allotment shuffle so unfortunately that won't work.

No kidding though, there is very little in the way of additional flying that will be able to happen on the cap of 76 flights per week. And from what I have heard the cap may be in place for a few years. Who knows!? So not only is this a hindrance to YVR but any other city in Canada hoping to land new routes to China with Chinese carriers. The only unused frequencies available are Hainan with only two left. Otheriwse, if there are to be any frequency increases or new routes they will have to come at the expense of current routes which I hear is somewhat potentially possibly sort of likely maybe (how's that for vague!)

I'm going to put on my former auditors hat and word this as vaguely as possible.... but I understand that China asked for a significant increase in frequencies per week but were denied by the lobbying and objection by another entity. Therefore, the cap at 76 remains. And it may be a couple of years or more until this is negotiated again.

Maybe they can make it 1.5 weekly each - a flight every 4-5 days, or one of the weekly alternates between CGO and SHE

So let me see...

Air China (20x weekly)
14x PEK-YVR
2x PEK-YUL
1x PEK-YUL-HAV
3x Carge to YEG

China Eastern (21x weekly)
11x PVG-YVR
7x PVG-YYZ
3x KMG-PVG-YVR

China Southern (15x weekly)
7x CAN-YVR
3x CAN-YYZ
3x Cargo to YVR
2x unallocated

Hainan (12x weekly)
7x PEK-YYZ
3x PEK-YYC
2x unallocated

Sichuan (3x weekly)
3x CTU-SHE-YVR

Xiamen (3x weekly)
3x XMN-YVR

Beijing Capital (3x weekly)
3x HGH-TAO-YVR

Total 77x weekly

Hmm.. where did I make a mistake...?

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I understand that China asked for a significant increase in frequencies per week but were denied by the lobbying and objection by another entity. Therefore, the cap at 76 remains. And it may be a couple of years or more until this is negotiated again.

Interesting! I wonder who that 'other entity' might be... I'm guessing it might be a certain airline with a maple leaf decorating its tails?

More seriously, though, with the rapid expansion of Chinese airlines to YVR (and internationally), a bit of time to consolidate might not be a bad thing. I'd be interested to know average load factors on YVR-China routes outside the tier I cities (PEK, PVG, CAN).

[nname]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Interesting! I wonder who that 'other entity' might be... I'm guessing it might be a certain airline with a maple leaf decorating its tails?

More seriously, though, with the rapid expansion of Chinese airlines to YVR (and internationally), a bit of time to consolidate might not be a bad thing. I'd be interested to know average load factors on YVR-China routes outside the tier I cities (PEK, PVG, CAN).

Or maybe it could be a good time for that 'other entity' to venture into some of the secondary Chinese market like what UA did...

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by nname

Air China (20x weekly)
14x PEK-YVR
2x PEK-YUL
1x PEK-YUL-HAV
3x Carge to YEG

China Southern (15x weekly)
7x CAN-YVR
3x CAN-YYZ
3x Cargo to YVR
2x unallocated

Hainan (12x weekly)
7x PEK-YYZ
3x PEK-YYC
2x unallocated

Total 77x weekly

Hmm.. where did I make a mistake...?

Just with Air China - 19 flights per week:
PEK-YVR will (most likely) cap at 11 per week. This will be enough to get through the slower winter/spring months. Xmas peak will have the extra 4 weekly flights added shortly (apparently). This route is potentially tipped to go 747-8 next summer in lieu of fewer frequencies.
PEK-YUL will be 4 pw with one going on to HAV.
Cargo is at 4pw but only 3 being utilised.

The 2 unallocated for CZ are confirmed for the CAN-YVR-MEX route.

The 2 unallocated by HU is still the BIG mystery. As we know they want direct YVR-TSN but a minimum of 3 per week so the possibilities here are only run 2, run more than 2 but where to get the extra frequencies? Or just not bother. With such limited options for the additional 2 per week it's a tough call. Originally the Hainan Group applied for 4 weekly on Tianjin Airlines and then later with 5 weekly on Hainan. So there is still a possibility something may be arranged for this route to launch. Apparently a decision will be made before the end of the year.

[CanSpice]

My family flew down to Disneyland last week through YVR and John Wayne Airport in Orange County. When we came back we got to walk back through the international arrivals section with the canoe and the pond. My seven-year old daughter loved it, she said it was awesome. She's only been through SNA as a sentient being (she flew through Hilo and Honolulu airports when she was 9 months old) so I'm thinking that YVR's definitely set a high bar for her. She'll probably expect every airport to be as awesome as YVR now!

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Thanks Cage, I appreciate the response. One remaining question, if I may, though. In what timeframe can you imagine YVR-SIN; like in how many years from now?

Also, As it seems Thai wants to fly BKK-YVR and BKK-SEA, I guess that would be sufficient, hence the no-go by AC.

But when is all this likely to begin, do you think.

My thoughts on timeline for SIN would be either summer 2017 or summer 2018.

YVR-DEL is the to be determined factor. If loads and yields exceed expectations (basically the flight is profitable from day one), then AC would have the financing and business case to launch SIN. Alternately if DEL tanks and is completely unprofitable, dumping DEL and going to SIN would be a good mitigation strategy. The conundrum is what if DEL is marginally profitable but requires more time to mature. Launching SIN could sink both routes as SIN would be a good one stop into India for traffic not destined to Delhi area.

In any case, AC is only a little over 1/2 complete the 787 program, there is lots of opportunities for new routes, especially if the 333s will stay in the fleet for the foreseeable future.

[LeftCoaster]

Not a big surprise but ANA is keeping the 787-900 on the YVR-HND year round now per airlineroute and not reverting to a 787-800 like last winter.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...as-of-24aug16/

Looks to me to be a good sign, since the ANA 789s are very premium heavy compared to the 788s so high yielding demand must be good.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Cage

I don't see BKK working out unless AC runs out of places to send the 789. Yield being the biggest impediment for the route.

I don't see it working on Thai either, but nothing they do seems to work so maybe YVR would work the least bad?

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Sichuan has been allocated only three flights per week in the new allotment shuffle so unfortunately that won't work.

No kidding though, there is very little in the way of additional flying that will be able to happen on the cap of 76 flights per week. And from what I have heard the cap may be in place for a few years. Who knows!? So not only is this a hindrance to YVR but any other city in Canada hoping to land new routes to China with Chinese carriers. The only unused frequencies available are Hainan with only two left. Otheriwse, if there are to be any frequency increases or new routes they will have to come at the expense of current routes which I hear is somewhat potentially possibly sort of likely maybe (how's that for vague!)

I'm going to put on my former auditors hat and word this as vaguely as possible.... but I understand that China asked for a significant increase in frequencies per week but were denied by the lobbying and objection by another entity. Therefore, the cap at 76 remains. And it may be a couple of years or more until this is negotiated again.

Well this is all incredibly frustrating. I suppose I understand AC wanting to limit Chinese carriers since their new routes to India are definitely competing with connections through PEK, PVG, CAN etc... but their protectionism is getting a bit nuts.

I guess at least we'll likely see bigger planes if not more frequencies?

Originally Posted by Cage

My thoughts on timeline for SIN would be either summer 2017 or summer 2018.

YVR-DEL is the to be determined factor. If loads and yields exceed expectations (basically the flight is profitable from day one), then AC would have the financing and business case to launch SIN. Alternately if DEL tanks and is completely unprofitable, dumping DEL and going to SIN would be a good mitigation strategy. The conundrum is what if DEL is marginally profitable but requires more time to mature. Launching SIN could sink both routes as SIN would be a good one stop into India for traffic not destined to Delhi area.

In any case, AC is only a little over 1/2 complete the 787 program, there is lots of opportunities for new routes, especially if the 333s will stay in the fleet for the foreseeable future.

Will be very interesting to see how DEL plays out. though it's predominantly VFR traffic, 3 flights a week is not much to fill and given that it will draw from not just YVR but several other western markets I would hope they could easily fill the front of the plane given that.

[mezzanine]

I suspect there will be a lot of motivation for SE Asian airlines to establish a connection to YVR. All of the flag carriers (Singapore, Thai, Malaysian) are getting squeezed in their existing markets by the ME3 carriers on the high end and by LCCs on the low end. North American routes provide a new market relatively insulated from the ME3 and LCCs. If they have an efficient plane and get the connections right it could be sustainable, moreso than AC as they have a lower cost structure.

I think there would also be a "first-mover" advantage as well, as Thai, SQ and to some extent Vietnam airlines all are getting new and efficient planes and are in the same boat with their goals and competition.

I suspect Malaysia will not be able to fly to NA for a long, long time, if ever...

[nname]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Well this is all incredibly frustrating. I suppose I understand AC wanting to limit Chinese carriers since their new routes to India are definitely competing with connections through PEK, PVG, CAN etc... but their protectionism is getting a bit nuts.

I guess at least we'll likely see bigger planes if not more frequencies?

It may seems limiting with 76 flights/week, but China-US only allows 180 flights/week and US is a much bigger market compared to Canada.

For Canada, the 76 weekly are going mostly to YVR and YYZ, with YUL, YYC, YEG taking a small piece with one route each
For US, the 180 weekly are shared among LAX, SFO, JFK, HNL, ORD, and multiple routes going to SJC, LAS, SEA, BOS, and some more frequencies to IAH, IAD, EWR, ...

In the end, we may still be getting the bigger piece of the pie....