YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[libtard]

Lots of earth moving going on around Templeton Station. That gravel parking lot has been completely torn up. Excavators everywhere. Anyone know whats getting built there?

[teriyaki]

Very curious about this as well. Don't remember it being highlighted on the 2020 plan.

[Gordon]

Could that construction have anything to do with the Runway end Safety area?

I wonder if the New AC YVR Mel service might connect with and American City As Brisbane does with EWR.

I wonder why West jet Doesn't have any Bridge adapters for the b gates so Encore could use them?

[casper]

Originally Posted by Gordon

....
I wonder why West jet Doesn't have any Bridge adapters for the b gates so Encore could use them?

No idea. However, what I have noticed,

Both AC and WestJet, In Saskatoon (where it gets a bit cold in winter), almost always uses bridges for the Q400 aircraft. They get a lot of Q400.

Both AC and WestJet, In Victoria (where snow is a justification for declaring a natural disaster with military support), almost always Q400 are served on hard stands even when bridges are available.

Perhaps in Vancouver its not worth it, while it is worth it in Calgary and Saskatoon.

[mezzanine]

AC's investors day came and went. Nothing ground-breaking I can parse, but a few things I think I gleaned:

• Growth to be concentrated at YVR, YYZ and YUL (no surprise). YYC gets in as a 'regional hub', but mainline wide body, narrow body and rouge to be focused on "three powerful hubs"
• Emphasis on Rouge and 'low-cost fares' to fight the planned ULCCs and WJ's push into Asia. Growing Rouge flights on domestic routes and to Asia has been reported.
• ?Expansion of BMW service? I assume this is similar to what LH offers to F passengers. Is this already a thing with AC?
• Wifi on all wide body flights by 2019 (finally!)

[LeftCoaster]

Thanks for the link.

Looks like the days of big AC growth are coming to an end for the foreseeable future. Still some growth opportunities though, like Rouge across the Pacific as you noted and some US/Latin flying on the narrow body expansion.

Likely going to be a slow down in the big announcements until WJ gets its Dreamliners though, and that's assuming they will actually stick to their plan to fly longhaul out of YVR, which I'm still not totally convinced they will do.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sounds like they are looking to launch SEA direct yes.

Won't this take a bite out of the Vancouver frequencies, and/or revenue?

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

With YYZ going direct from Manilla on Philippine Airlines attention is turning to where the 4xPW YVR tag on will go next.

Key contenders seem to be:

MNL-YVR-ORD
MNL-YVR-IAH
MNL-YVR-LAS
MNL-YVR-SAN

This article quotes the PAL president as saying they would like to Fly YVR to IAH and ORD, replacing the YYZ and NYC Routes. I'd be totally cool with this as SAN can transfer through LAX so easily and another carrier to LAS is hardly interesting.

Thoughts?

ORD will eventually be non stop, once they have enough A350s. The YVR tag is to buy time for the A350s to arrive.
SAN makes sense, due to runway length and obstacle clearance on departure, making a non stop to MNL a non-starter.
They already tried YVR-LAS, what's different now?
YVR-IAH could work also. But again, MNL-JFK and MNL-IAH are the same distance, so a non stop to IAH is also possible, if demand is there.

They only have 6 A350's on order, so starting more than 3 or 4 ULH routes is highly unlikely.

[LeftCoaster]

Well the demand at IAH is presumably lower than JFK.

If you think ORD will go non-stop then their 6 A350s will go to YYZ, JFK and ORD.

Leaving YVR-SAN, YVR-IAH or YVR-LAS.

LAS was cancelled in favour of YYZ which is clearly a stronger market. The difference now is they can serve YYZ non-stop leaving LAS as the next best option.

[Gordon]

It would be nice to have some South East Asian markets from YVR .

[LeftCoaster]

Sounds like AF is going to start serving SEA.

Not sure if this means they are taking over the DL route or it is being expanded.

Lots of new PNW-Paris capacity now.

[casper]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sounds like AF is going to start serving SEA.

Not sure if this means they are taking over the DL route or it is being expanded.

Lots of new PNW-Paris capacity now.

I have done the Delta flight to Paris twice. It fells like there were a lot of connecting passengers both times.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sounds like AF is going to start serving SEA.

Not sure if this means they are taking over the DL route or it is being expanded.

Lots of new PNW-Paris capacity now.

Originally Posted by casper

I have done the Delta flight to Paris twice. It fells like there were a lot of connecting passengers both times.

I would like to know if this has any implications for YVR><Europe (Paris) pax. Is our market share shrinking or not? Also, how can SEA keep this up if EK is going great guns from there?

[Rusty Gull]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I think Paine Field has the potential to cause real pain to BLI. BLI relies on Canadian traffic and local Bellingham users. Paine field will have the advantage of a much larger population center ( everything North of Seattle ) and it's only an hour extra for Bellingham residents. With the Canadian Dollar the way it is, BLI is less attractive... although you do save on international fees.

I don't see it this way (in terms of the threat from Paine Field). The Canadian dollar is definitely impacting the sun-seeker flights, but their daily services to Seattle or Portland aren't going to suffer at all. In that sense, it's well balanced. The airport wisely renovated during the last boom, which situates it well for future growth in the Bellingham area, and for handling the ebbs and flows of the Canadian traffic. With the Canadian dollar rising, it won't be long until we see a turnaround in cross-border usage of BLI. However, BLI could use more domestic routes in the West (ie, a Denver or Salt Lake City).

[thenoflyzone]

AF/KL and DL have a joint venture across the Atlantic. It doesn't matter who operates SEA-CDG. They share the costs and profits. This should have little to no impact on YVR.

In fact, AF used to serve SEA a few years back. If memory serves, DL took over with the B763 as it was better suited for route at the time. Currently DL operates an A333 on SEA-CDG.

The upgauge in metal from from 763 to A333 tells me the route has matured, and so an AF return seems logical. AF's costs of operations are usually higher than that of DL's, so they might have been waiting for the demand to pick up to send something bigger and better to SEA. They could be taking over the route with a 772/77W/789, or they could launch a second daily with something smaller (A332).

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I would like to know if this has any implications for YVR><Europe (Paris) pax. Is our market share shrinking or not? Also, how can SEA keep this up if EK is going great guns from there?

EK has no market share from SEA to Europe. EK's bread and butter is North America/Europe-India traffic. Yes, AF offers some connection possibilities to DEL, BLR and BOM, but that is not the main reason why AF or DL serve SEA-CDG.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I would like to know if this has any implications for YVR><Europe (Paris) pax. Is our market share shrinking or not? Also, how can SEA keep this up if EK is going great guns from there?

The implication for YVR of AF SEA-CDG are negative. If DL wants to make SEA the Skyteam hub and needs connection traffic to justify the city/airport paying for expansion of the international terminal, then traffic could switch from the YVR flight to the SEA flight.

That said, I suspect that AC has seen interest in protecting their turf from WS. So AC could fill AF's shoes and make YVR-CDG daily in the event that AF moves the flight over to SEA.

While EK is going great guns, they cannot bring in the A380. This limits their disruptive abilities into the SEA market. Also, the EK hub strategy at DXB is limited to 2 banks that are about 6 hours apart. The current SEA schedule hits both banks so there isn't much room for growth.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Cage

The implication for YVR of AF SEA-CDG are negative. If DL wants to make SEA the Skyteam hub and needs connection traffic to justify the city/airport paying for expansion of the international terminal, then traffic could switch from the YVR flight to the SEA flight.

That said, I suspect that AC has seen interest in protecting their turf from WS. So AC could fill AF's shoes and make YVR-CDG daily in the event that AF moves the flight over to SEA.

Does this portend a possible loss of AF at YVR? And is AC (*A) willing to move in to take up that slot year-round? I thought AC & LH, both being *A, would block this, as before 2015.
I'd hate to lose Air France at YVR.

[thenoflyzone]

Seems AF will start SEA with the B789, and that DL will keep operating the route as well.
DL will upgauge SEA-CDG to a B772 next summer.

Still early though, a lot of things can change from now until S18.

In the mean time, both YVR and SEA are seeing increased flying options to CDG. I don't see the negative here for YVR. With our currency still weaker than the US, if anything, YVR still has the upper hand.

I don't think the crowd that drives from one city to another to catch a flight is that huge to begin with. And that's certainly not what keeps YVR's AF flight afloat. Driving between the two cities is still a 3 - 3.5 hour ordeal with some traffic and customs. Pain in the ass.

If YVR can't hold down it's AF flight, it will probably have more to do with AC's launch of the route, not AF/DL's increases at SEA.

[s211]

Am I missing something? I'm pretty sure that Air France was flying Seattle-Paris well before they implemented the Vancouver-Paris flight. I could swear I saw it a few years ago when planning a Paris trip.

Was the Seattle-Paris flight cancelled?

[thenoflyzone]

^ read one of my posts above about the AF/DL joint venture.