Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5679911/

Topic: UA LAX-YVR
Username: sptv
Posted 2013-02-03 13:53:32 and read 6472 times.

Why does United continue to operate this flight LAX-YVR-LAX using their own (albeit Skywest) metal? Alaska, Air Canada and Westjet offer a far better product and generally better-priced. UA code-shares on all AC flights, and the times of their own flights are almost identical to AS and AC flights. I've flown the UA flight a couple times. Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: RWA380
Posted 2013-02-03 13:56:15 and read 6470 times.

Connections I'd imagine.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: ORDBOSEWR
Posted 2013-02-03 14:01:56 and read 6412 times.

I am pretty sure that LAX-YVR was carved out when the authorities granted the immunized alliance between AC and UA, which means that AC and UA can't jointly plan capacity or price on the route.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-03 14:46:36 and read 6206 times.

Quoting ORDBOSEWR (Reply 2):
I am pretty sure that LAX-YVR was carved out when the authorities granted the immunized alliance between AC and UA, which means that AC and UA can't jointly plan capacity or price on the route.

No, LAX-YVR was not one of the carved out markets.

I bellieve the transborder markets carved out by the US DOT originally were the following.

Toronto - Cleveland, Houston, Chicago, San Francisco
Ottawa - New York
Calgary - Houston

As far as I know, that AC/UA transborder joint venture hasn't yet been implemented.

[Edited 2013-02-03 14:47:40]

[Edited 2013-02-03 14:49:10]

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-03 15:23:57 and read 6075 times.

LAX-YVR was not a carve out.

List of the 14 transborder carve outs were listed in recent thread.
RE: Air Canada/United Transborder JV Update (by ElPistolero Oct 26 2012 in Civil Aviation)

What AC-UA might chose to do once the JV is fully implemented is to be seen, but for now LAX-YVR remains the busiest or second busiest (neck and neck each year) city pair between the US and Canada, and a market UA obviously has wanted to keep its feet in.

Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-03 15:53:36 and read 5977 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y.

The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

........................E190..........CRJ
Cabin width.....9 ft........ 8 ft. 4 in.
Aisle height....6 ft. 7 in. 6 ft. 2 in.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-03 16:12:14 and read 5909 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
What AC-UA might chose to do once the JV is fully implemented is to be seen, but for now LAX-YVR remains the busiest or second busiest (neck and neck each year) city pair between the US and Canada, and a market UA obviously has wanted to keep its feet in.

No where near neck-and-neck with the busiest pair - New York-Toronto - which is double the size. Miami-Toronto is also a good bit larger than LA-Vanocuver, which is the third busiest just ahead of Miami-Montreal and Las Vegas-Toronto.

It's a very large local market, obviously, so it makes sense UA wants to have a presence, even if minor.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2013-02-03 16:38:15 and read 5790 times.

Having connected to UA's YVR flight several times I can tell you that staying inside the UA concourses is preferrable to me rather than trying to switch between T7/T8 and T2 at LAX.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-03 17:31:29 and read 5628 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
No where near neck-and-neck with the busiest pair - New York-Toronto - which is double the size. Miami-Toronto is also a good bit larger than LA-Vanocuver, which is the third busiest just ahead of Miami-Montreal and Las Vegas-Toronto.

Per DOT Full year 2011

YVR-LAX: 798,693
YYZ-LGA: 710,159

For 12-months ending June 2012

YVR-LAX: 786,125
YYZ-LGA: 777,261

Another top US-Canada route in enplanements is YYZ-ORD.

For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: mark8762
Posted 2013-02-03 17:54:54 and read 5540 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

........................E190..........CRJ
Cabin width.....9 ft........ 8 ft. 4 in.
Aisle height....6 ft. 7 in. 6 ft. 2 in.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-02-03 18:23:10 and read 5455 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

DOT info is passengers carried, airport pair, which isn't really relevant to determine market size.

MIDT O&D traffic FY2011:

1) New York-Toronto - 1,317,892
2) Miami-Toronto - 668,838
3) Los Angeles-Vancouver - 565,638
4) Miami-Montreal - 477,207
5) Las Vegas-Toroto - 470,478

Local market wise, NYCYYZ and MIAYYZ are the third and tenth larger international O&D markets from the United States.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-03 18:59:46 and read 5357 times.

And we are speaking about apples and oranges.

My point stands, regardless of O&D, the routes of YVR-LAX and YYZ-LGA for several years now have vied for being the busiest US-Canada route pairs.

So be it local, or connections travelers going other places the YVR-LAX route has generated the numbers it has, and maybe this large volume is a reason why UA has chosen to keep its feet in the market regardless of its AC codeshare.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: laca773
Posted 2013-02-04 04:46:55 and read 3669 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Per DOT Full year 2011

YVR-LAX: 798,693
YYZ-LGA: 710,159

For 12-months ending June 2012

YVR-LAX: 786,125
YYZ-LGA: 777,261

Another top US-Canada route in enplanements is YYZ-ORD.

For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

Quoting

Thanks for the information, LAXintl. I learned something new today. You mention a/c doesn't make a difference, and that it doesn't. AC using the smaller E90s, I would think keeps their yields and fares higher versus flying the larger A319/A320/A321s.

I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: kgaiflyer
Posted 2013-02-04 06:22:54 and read 3335 times.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 12):
I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.

Slightly off topic, I wish UA could find a CR7 for the SFO-YYJ route.

It's a long torturous trip in a CR2

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: rampbro
Posted 2013-02-04 11:29:31 and read 2119 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y

AVOD!

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: threepoint
Posted 2013-02-04 13:15:42 and read 1771 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.
Quoting mark8762 (Reply 9):

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.

What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-02-04 13:32:56 and read 1696 times.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 15):

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.
Quoting mark8762 (Reply 9):

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.

What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.

While I can appreciate your sentiment about checking luggage, I am not about to find a flight based on the amount of space for a carry on, and also I am not sure that every body is just going to LAX, but also transferring to another flight to go further than Los Angelas.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2013-02-04 14:28:38 and read 1544 times.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 15):
What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.

But if there is a connection at LAX would a passenger really be willing to lug carryons between T2 and T7/T8 just for overhead space?

Nor am I unusual about using LAX for a YVR connection. Last time I flew FAT-LAX-YVR I followed 4 other passengers off the FAT-LAX flight then thru the concourse to UAX's YVR flight (and I didn't know any of them).

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-04 18:39:06 and read 1366 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.

Agree for the once-a-year Y class passenger, but a route like LAX-YVR has many frequent flyers who do know the difference.

Topic: RE: UA LAX-YVR
Username: Aerowrench
Posted 2013-02-04 20:33:09 and read 1300 times.

Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Why does United continue to operate this flight LAX-YVR-LAX using their own (albeit Skywest) metal? Alaska, Air Canada and Westjet offer a far better product and generally better-priced. UA code-shares on all AC flights, and the times of their own flights are almost identical to AS and AC flights. I've flown the UA flight a couple times. Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Those flights are either full or close to it most every day that I'm working. Seems like a lot of folks are stuck in pre dereg times. Airlines are right sizing the routes with the proper equipment so they will actually turn a profit so investors will look at the stock as worthy.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 12):

I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.

Feeble and ignorant. You obviously are unaware that a cross country flight used to take 20+ hours and would make 3 or more stops using an aircraft that would seat 50 people and had large, loud radial engines that with flames visible shooting from the exhaust at night. These aircraft you condemn are a blessing and some of the people on here with this attitude of entitlement really ought to reconsider before the airlines downgrade more cities back to turbo prop.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/