YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion - Page 608

Johnny Aussie · #**12141** Posted **Oct 27, 2017, 8:02 AM**

Duplicate post... don't know how that happened.

trofirhen · #**12142** Posted **Oct 27, 2017, 11:41 AM**

I wonder if YVR will ever get Guadalajara (or Monterrey, for that matter)

libtard · #**12143** Posted **Oct 27, 2017, 3:19 PM**

YVR needs more South American routes

YVR - Bogota would be incredible

trofirhen · #**12144** Posted **Oct 27, 2017, 3:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by libtard

YVR needs more South American routes

YVR - Bogota would be incredible

So would Lima, Santiago CL, and São Paulo

thenoflyzone · #**12145** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 1:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by libtard

YVR needs more South American routes

YVR - Bogota would be incredible

"More" implies they already have one. That's not the case.

The problem with YVR-South America is that a narrow body cannot operate it. You need a long haul aircraft to make a go out of it. Demand between YVR and any South American city doesn't warrant a wide body. That's the main problem.

As for YVR-BOG, who is going to operate the route? The route is too long for AC's Max 8 or Max 9, so they would need to put a 763 or a 788 on it, which is too big. AV would need the same gauge of aircraft, but they don't even fly to SFO, a UA megahub. Seems to me SFO would be served before YVR.

Dont see Brazilian carriers launching YVR either. YVR-LIM is Rouge territory, and they are maxed out on 767s. So that leaves Asian carriers on a 5th freedom flight from YVR to S. America as the only option.

Problem with 5th freedom flights is, they are tough to make money on. They would not only be competing against US and EU carriers between Asia and South America, but also against the likes of EK, QR and TK, who operate to several cities in South America, and offer decent connections to East Asia from their hubs.

For these reasons, Asian carriers are less likely to return to South America, and thus, YVR less likely to get a South American run. The only plausible route is for a Japanese carrier resuming GRU service due to the huge Japanese community in that city. Then again, YVR might not be chosen as the midpoint. A few years ago, JL was eyeing a return at GRU via JFK. The Brazilian economy tanked and they were restructuring, so it didn't come to be. They might give it a go in the near future.

osirisboy · #**12146** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 4:59 PM**

So why hasn't there been any flights to South America? with Vancouver wanting to funnel traffic all the Asian traffic to the Americas I would have expected to see something by now. At least something before Montreal getting Lima etc

SFUVancouver · #**12147** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 5:08 PM**

I imagine that when early model 787s start hitting the used market in quantity, there could be a second wave of new route proving created by the aircraft. That might help the world's long-thin routes that don't justify new-build 787s but need that type of aircraft to be viable. I can see there being some of these routes between South America and Canada, including YVR connections to major southern hemisphere hubs.

Honestly, though, as nice as direct flights would be, nearly everything in South America is pretty much achievable with a single connection, whether that is in LAX, SFO, IAH, DFW, ATL, JFK/ERW, or MEX, or one day MIA. I flew to Quito through IAH last year and it was fine; IAH is a good airport for connections.

thenoflyzone · #**12148** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

So why hasn't there been any flights to South America? with Vancouver wanting to funnel traffic all the Asian traffic to the Americas I would have expected to see something by now. At least something before Montreal getting Lima etc

YUL got LIM because of O&D, not connections. Peru is an up and coming tourism destination (Machu Picchu, etc).

Pretty much every route AC has been launching out of YUL, YVR and YYZ is based primarily on O&D.

I think YVR - South America is still too thin of a market to warrant the interest of AC or others. Connections alone isn't enough to launch a route and expect to make money.

libtard · #**12149** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I imagine that when early model 787s start hitting the used market in quantity, there could be a second wave of new route proving created by the aircraft. That might help the world's long-thin routes that don't justify new-build 787s but need that type of aircraft to be viable. I can see there being some of these routes between South America and Canada, including YVR connections to major southern hemisphere hubs.

Honestly, though, as nice as direct flights would be, nearly everything in South America is pretty much achievable with a single connection, whether that is in LAX, SFO, IAH, DFW, ATL, JFK/ERW, or MEX, or one day MIA. I flew to Quito through IAH last year and it was fine; IAH is a good airport for connections.

Interesting

nname · #**12150** Posted **Oct 28, 2017, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

For these reasons, Asian carriers are less likely to return to South America, and thus, YVR less likely to get a South American run. The only plausible route is for a Japanese carrier resuming GRU service due to the huge Japanese community in that city. Then again, YVR might not be chosen as the midpoint. A few years ago, JL was eyeing a return at GRU via JFK. The Brazilian economy tanked and they were restructuring, so it didn't come to be. They might give it a go in the near future.

Chinese carriers do want flights to South America. And since a non-stop flight isn't possible for most routes, they have to make one-stop flights through either North America and Europe... A stop in Canada isn't possible at the moment since the bilateral restrict 5th freedoms to 2 routes, and both of them are already taken:
PEK-YUL-HAV
CAN-YVR-MEX

As far as I know, CZ had now decided to route their South America routes through Spain. Pretty much a direct competition with ME3, even more than routing it through N America...

trofirhen · #**12151** Posted **Oct 29, 2017, 4:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

YUL got LIM because of O&D, not connections. Peru is an up and coming tourism destination (Machu Picchu, etc).

Pretty much every route AC has been launching out of YUL, YVR and YYZ is based primarily on O&D.

I think YVR - South America is still too thin of a market to warrant the interest of AC or others. Connections alone isn't enough to launch a route and expect to make money.

Several years back, Johnny Aussie posted that he was surprised at the high number of O&D between Vancouver and Brazil. Don't know if that means anything. Johnny might know.

Johnny Aussie · #**12152** Posted **Oct 30, 2017, 11:53 PM**

Top 10 Airports

In thousands of tonnes total cargo tonnage.

Airport. 2016. 2015. Change. % change

YYZ 381.7 368.0 13.7 3.7%
YVR 246.8 238.4 8.4 3.5%
YHM 109.9 110.8 (0.9) (0.8%)
YUL 89.9 79.8 10.1 12.7%
YWG 84.2 65.9 18.3 27.8%
YYC 74.5 82.5 (8.0) (9.7%)
YMX 72.2 70.2 2.0 2.8%
YQM 28.8 29.0 (0.2) (0.7%)
YHZ 26.5 26.7 (0.2) (0.7%)
YEG 24.8 28.3 (3.5) (12.4%)

Decent growth for YVR holding its own in second spot again. More than double third placed YHM.

YYZ, just like passenger figures, way out in front in a league of its own.

Source: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4010045

Just have to manipulate the tables using the "Add/Remove data" function.

SFUVancouver · #**12153** Posted **Oct 30, 2017, 11:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Top 10 Airports

In thousands of tonnes total cargo tonnage.

Airport. 2016. 2015. Change. % change

YYZ 381.7 368.0 13.7 3.7%
YVR 246.8 238.4 8.4 3.5%
YHM 109.9 110.8 (0.9) (0.8%)
YUL 89.9 79.8 10.1 12.7%
YWG 84.2 65.9 18.3 27.8%
YYC 74.5 82.5 (8.0) (9.7%)
YMX 72.2 70.2 2.0 2.8%
YQM 28.8 29.0 (0.2) (0.7%)
YHZ 26.5 26.7 (0.2) (0.7%)
YEG 24.8 28.3 (3.5) (12.4%)

Decent growth for YVR holding its own in second spot again. More than double third placed YHM.

YYZ, just like passenger figures, way out in front in a league of its own.

Source: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4010045

Just have to manipulate the tables using the "Add/Remove data" function.

Thanks for the stats. Good to see YVR humming along with healthy growth (3.5%). I presume a decent amount of that is in the form of belly cargo on up-gauged aircraft and new routes?

I'm surprised that Hamilton is so high. What's the reason for that? Is it a base/hub for integrators serving the Golden Horseshoe/GTA?

moosejaw · #**12154** Posted **Oct 31, 2017, 1:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Thanks for the stats. Good to see YVR humming along with healthy growth (3.5%). I presume a decent amount of that is in the form of belly cargo on up-gauged aircraft and new routes?

I'm surprised that Hamilton is so high. What's the reason for that? Is it a base/hub for integrators serving the Golden Horseshoe/GTA?

Hamilton is mostly a largo overseas and overnight cargo airport. 36000 aircraft movements a year compared to at least 10% of YVR yet is less than half YVR's tonnage.

casper · #**12155** Posted **Oct 31, 2017, 2:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Hamilton is mostly a largo overseas and overnight cargo airport. 36000 aircraft movements a year compared to at least 10% of YVR yet is less than half YVR's tonnage.

Same with Winnipeg. Cargojet (who operate for Purolator among others) has both Hamilton and Winnipeg as hubs.

Hourglass · #**12156** Posted **Oct 31, 2017, 5:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Top 10 Airports

In thousands of tonnes total cargo tonnage.

Airport. 2016. 2015. Change. % change

YYZ 381.7 368.0 13.7 3.7%
YVR 246.8 238.4 8.4 3.5%
YHM 109.9 110.8 (0.9) (0.8%)
YUL 89.9 79.8 10.1 12.7%
YWG 84.2 65.9 18.3 27.8%
YYC 74.5 82.5 (8.0) (9.7%)
YMX 72.2 70.2 2.0 2.8%
YQM 28.8 29.0 (0.2) (0.7%)
YHZ 26.5 26.7 (0.2) (0.7%)
YEG 24.8 28.3 (3.5) (12.4%)

Decent growth for YVR holding its own in second spot again. More than double third placed YHM.

YYZ, just like passenger figures, way out in front in a league of its own.

Source: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=4010045

Just have to manipulate the tables using the "Add/Remove data" function.

nice. Just checked stats for 2017, and cargo @YVR is up 11.2% YTD, so this year is looking pretty good too.

twoNeurons · #**12157** Posted **Oct 31, 2017, 6:56 AM**

Quote:

Code:

+------+-------+-------+-------+---------+
| IATA | 2016  | 2015  |  Chg  |  %Chg   |
+------+-------+-------+-------+---------+
| YYZ  | 381.7 | 368.0 | 13.7  |   3.7%  |
| YVR  | 246.8 | 238.4 |  8.4  |   3.5%  |
| YHM  | 109.9 | 110.8 | (0.9) |  (0.8%) |
| YUL  |  89.9 |  79.8 | 10.1  |  12.7%  |
| YWG  |  84.2 |  65.9 | 18.3  |  27.8%  |
| YYC  |  74.5 |  82.5 | (8.0) |  (9.7%) |
| YMX  |  72.2 |  70.2 |  2.0  |   2.8%  |
| YQM  |  28.8 |  29.0 | (0.2) |  (0.7%) |
| YHZ  |  26.5 |  26.7 | (0.2) |  (0.7%) |
| YEG  |  24.8 |  28.3 | (3.5) | (12.4%) |
+------+-------+-------+-------+---------+

Protip: Wrapping this kind of thing in code tags and using this tool makes it easier to read.

LeftCoaster · #**12158** Posted **Oct 31, 2017, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

YUL got LIM because of O&D, not connections. Peru is an up and coming tourism destination (Machu Picchu, etc).

Still find it tough to believe LIM has better O&D out of YUL than YVR. Peru has been a big tourist destination from BC for a long time and the mining companies in BC are very active in Peru.

Would be very interesting to see the numbers.

trofirhen · #**12159** Posted **Nov 1, 2017, 3:46 PM**

High-profile Yahoo! News announced the longest flight from the USA: LAX-Singapore at 14,117 km on United Airlines.
For comparison, YVR-Singapore is 12,827 km.
That's a difference of 1290 km; a respectable savings in time and fuel costs, one could think.
Perhaps YVR-Singapore would be a better connection for airports like JFK, and ORD. Worth keeping one's fingers crossed for, anyway.
Even more, JFK -YVR is 44 km shorter than JFK-LAX. We couldn't lose out on this one, all other things being equal, it seems

mezzanine · #**12160** Posted **Nov 2, 2017, 5:11 AM**

New blog posts about upcoming construction at YVR.

The work at templeton is going to be the new long-term parking.

the short term expansion also notes a new covered walkway that sounds like it will avoid pedestrian interaction with arrivals car traffic. (the red branch-like structure on the lower right)

I think the new utilities building is going to be the teal building on the bottom left.