PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2226 times:
I am DELIGHTED to see AC is sticking with a tough route - I hope the E190 will prove to be the perfect aircraft for the route.
As was explained to me here, AC cannot schedule an RON flight to leave for YYZ because of space limitations at T1. United fully occupies the gates in T1 and cannot loan one to AC for an early morning departure, as would be most logical. Having said that, AC's response to this situation has been to shift the flight times to a fairly inconvenient time for San Diegans - connections to Canada arrive VERY late and returning requires VERY early departures. Yes, I know this flight is primarily for Canadians.
However, from a business stand-point, let me ask this: would it work better to have a late evening departure from YYZ and have the return flight from SAN be a red-eye?
dp YYZ 6:20 PM
ar SAN 8:45 PM
dp SAN 10:30 PM
ar YYZ 6:05 AM +1
While European connections via YYZ would require a whole day (and most people wouldn't do), this certainly would provide for better eastern/central Canadian connections.
AC people - has this been considered?
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 3): Since United practically dominates that T-1 rotunda,I cant see why
they wont move to T-2?At least that's where all of the other int'l flights are.
United has the AC ground handling contract in San Diego. Air Canada pre clears US customs and immigration in Canada so there's no need for their planes, one from YVR and one from YYZ, to go to T-2 in San Diego. Unless Air Canada switches ground handlers in San Diego, they have to work with United on gate availability. With Alaska dumping their SAN-SFO flights, they might have gates available earlier in the morning.
The SAN-YVR flight switched from Jazz to an AC mainline E-190 a few months ago so now SAN will have two E-190s a day.
SANMAN66 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2028 times:
Just checking the AC website,it appears that the E-190 switches back to an A319 in November 2008.There must be a passenger drop around the spring/summer for Air Canada. It would be nice if the YVR upgraded to an A319.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2000 times:
Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 5): There must be a passenger drop around the spring/summer for Air Canada.
Fall/Winter is full of snowbirds and cruisers (settle down, boys, not that kind of cruiser). Once the cruise season is over, demand to SAN drops on AC. The business/convention traffic can be handled fine by the E-190.....and they have less luggage. The E-190 often can't handle all of the suitcases from a plane full of senior citizens going to and from a cruise.
SANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 6048 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1780 times:
Thanks for the update 'Hauler. I've been watching the sked's and noticed some of these things but I wasn't sure if these were actual newly-loaded sked's or still default ones very much subject to change. It also looks to me like they added the Tuesday operation of the SAN-YYZ flight back in as of mid-February, correct? Interesting.
As long as they don't have lots of issues with winds and fuel-stops later in the year (as last year), I'm happy SAN-YYZ is continuing with any a/c. Same thing with SAN-YVR.
The question, and moot point in fact, is IF better times in SAN would help the numbers. It is true that the gate space in T1 is very tight right now and the major tenant, with all those Canyon-Blue planes flying in and out well over a 100 times a day now, is hungry and on the prowl for as many more gates as they can get. At the same time, AS, as pointed out, has reduced their schedule (not only their YVR and SFO service but the BOI flight is also gone now) and could probably easily operate from only their original 2 gates. And UA? Well last time I checked, 1/3 of their departures (that's 8 of 24) were still RONs (so even with their 5 gates at Lindbergh, they still have to remotely park about 3 a/c every night) so they aren't going to be offering AC any morning gate space anytime soon!
Does AC really care about "better" times or are they fine for the business they are after? I remember that AC originally had scheduled 2x daily YVR Jazz flights for their first summer season here (including an early morning and late afternoon departure from SAN) and it never happened. Do they feel they wouldn't pick up more SAN-originating traffic with different times?
My final question is whether any of you guys up there (LongHauler?) have heard any whispers about AC trying SAN-YYC in the not-to-distant future? A 190 would certainly work on that route and an afternoon turn in SAN would probably be as good as any... Just curious if we should even be thinking of more from the Maple Leaf?
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5863 posts, RR: 43
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1690 times:
I think it all boils down to the usual ... not being able to get gate space.
SAN appears to be a solid destination, growing steadily. We are all hoping that the YYZ-SAN-YYZ starts a second daily operation, as the evening in/morning out, was popular with crews.
YYZ-SAN-YYZ was a reasonable operation with the E190. For the record, no actual flights ever landed short of SAN due to fuel constraints. When the aircraft was new, AC put some very heavy conditions on its fuel plans, thus was always carrying far more than needed.
With experience, those conditions are now unnecessary. I always enjoyed the trip, a fun way to spend the day, AND, get 9:30 flying time in, in one day to boot! I'll wave as we pass the famed parking lot. (It DOES scare the new F/Os, as it looks closer than it really is!)
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!