Icebird757 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 621 posts, RR: 2 Posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3705 times:
Mind you this is a RUMOR. I was told by one of our pilots tonight while pushing back that he has heard that management is looking at running LGB-YVR. I am guessing there is a market there, probably E190 to start, A320 if needed and second, all customs would be handled in Vancouver. I know that it was Western(I believe) who ran this route at one time. It would be nice! Thoughts, comments, questions?
[Edited 2008-09-06 00:05:21]
LGB....where you can watch the grass grow because the traffic is so slow.
ThirteenRight From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 340 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
B6FA4ever From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 813 posts, RR: 12 Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3541 times:
Quoting MMEPHX (Reply 2): Are there enough slots left at LGB for a new mainline flight or would something else have to be dropped?
something would have to be dropped. the new flights from LGB - SFO/PDX are coming from the reductions of JFK, IAD, and OAK.
would be really cool if this "rumor" is true. i hear YVR is a very nice city and wouldn't mind checking it out sometime!
Flyingcat From United States of America, joined May 2007, 510 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3491 times:
He might have been confused with their charter opertation that they have become authorized for. However why YVR.
It already has LCC service from AS and F9 which are a lot less expensive than most other carriers. YYZ and YUL can garner more traffic from the east where they have more pull.
Petteri From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 256 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3485 times:
I've got a feeling that B6 has greater plans for Canada than just YVR. YYZ and YUL are ripe for the picking, if you've got the right tools. B6 might just pull this off.
The above comments are my personal comments and in no way should be viewed as the views,policy or statements of JetBlue
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5534 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
AS is not a LCC carrier. F9 would be a non-factor since they do not fly up and down the west coast. And besides that, why not??? UA and AS are dropping some service to YVR. I think YVR-LGB would be a good route.
Flyingcat From United States of America, joined May 2007, 510 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3365 times:
Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 6): AS is not a LCC carrier. F9 would be a non-factor since they do not fly up and down the west coast. And besides that, why not??? UA and AS are dropping some service to YVR. I think YVR-LGB would be a good route.
Trust me AS has far lower prices than other carriers as does F9.
In fact I forgot to mention WS. Their pricing strategy is lower than even B6 would charge as they have no advance purchase restrictions.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3288 times:
Will not happen.
Bottom line is LGB is not equipped to handle international flights.
Pre-clearance or not at YVR, the arrival airport must have FIS capability itself to rescreen or detain passengers if required.
This is the same reason that has stopped Canada-SNA, and emabarasing ended Alaska's announced SNA-YVR flights.
[Edited 2008-09-06 10:03:08]
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
MtnWest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2122 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3236 times:
Correct. Will not happen. This is the same issue AS had when thy tried YVR-SNA. Regardless of pre-clearing in YVR, Customs has to be on both ends and even if JetBlue did call out Customs from LAX, there is no facility at LGB
Just another pilot rumor.
ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5534 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3132 times:
Quoting Flyingcat (Reply 7): Trust me AS has far lower prices than other carriers as does F9.
AS may have lower prices on some routes...but they are not classified as a Low Cost Carrier.
Ridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 915 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3027 times:
AS is only dropping SFO-YVR which would not affect LAX area travelers. AS still has 5 flights per day on LAX-YVR and those loads are horrible. LGB wouldn't be wise even if it was possible.
Socalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 511 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2992 times:
Quoting Hatbutton (Reply 14): AS is only dropping SFO-YVR which would not affect LAX area travelers. AS still has 5 flights per day on LAX-YVR and those loads are horrible. LGB wouldn't be wise even if it was possible.
I would not call those loads horrible. I travel quite often and those flights are normally pretty full. Especially during the summer season. They would not have kept 5-6 daily flights around for so long if the loads were so poor.
Hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2874 times:
Quoting Socalatc (Reply 15): I would not call those loads horrible. I travel quite often and those flights are normally pretty full. Especially during the summer season. They would not have kept 5-6 daily flights around for so long if the loads were so poor.
A lot of routes have high frequencies and don't show great loads. I'm looking at our numbers right now and the load factor for LAX-YVR for the last year (revenue pax only) has been in the mid 60s. I wouldn't call that great. We could easily cut a flight or two to fill those other planes.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2853 times:
Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 17): LGA have FIS then? I didnt know that.
I believe the have CBP folks on duty for business/gen av traffic, but just as importantly have a facility to hold and quarantine passengers if needed.
A while back there was a thread on this subject and as I recall the plan was to use portion of a concourse and several gates if needed to act as an FIS area. Additional staffing could also be brought up from JFK.
I can certainly remember a few occasions over the years when 'pre cleared' flights become post cleared upon arrival LAX. One time from YYZ when due to computer issues only about have the passengers were cleared necessitating full clearance for everyone upon arrival, another time some issues with baggage which required clearance at LAX, and lastly the several times when the flights operate late and off schedule outside the working hours of pre-clearance in Canada, they must be fully cleared in the US upon arrival.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5534 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2838 times:
Quoting Hatbutton (Reply 14): AS is only dropping SFO-YVR which would not affect LAX area travelers. AS still has 5 flights per day on LAX-YVR and those loads are horrible. LGB wouldn't be wise even if it was possible.
AS has flown the LAX-YVR route for quite a few years. Why are the loads so bad? Could be competition for the others? Who else flies LAX-YVR besides AC? UA? I don't think DL flies the route anymore.
Socalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 511 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2816 times:
Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 21): Who else flies LAX-YVR besides AC? UA? I don't think DL flies the route anymore.
DL used to with Expressjet, however they have sinced dropped it. US and WS have also flown this route not to long ago. Now it is just AS,AC and UA ( skywest 2 daily CR7's)
Jayce From Canada, joined Nov 1999, 520 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2576 times:
Seeing as YVR has a huge film industry, maybe B6 could tap into this market? Not all of the film business travelers need to route through LAX.
Every time I've flown AS between YVR and LAX the flights have always been full. It is possible that AS has contracts with some of the studios and flies a lot of business traffic on the route.
"Trying is the first step towards failure" -Homer Simpson
Icebird757 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 621 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2441 times:
I could see that happening as they would add the PDX-YVR route.
Quoting Hatbutton (Reply 14): AS still has 5 flights per day on LAX-YVR and those loads are horrible. LGB wouldn't be wise even if it was possible.
Why not? We go head to head against AS from LGB to SEA and both airlines have quite full loads. We also go head to head against Skywest on the LGB-SLC route and both airlines are doing well so who is to say that it would not have good loads?
LGB....where you can watch the grass grow because the traffic is so slow.
25 HikesWithEyes: I would agree. Not sure what the yields are, but typically LAX-YVR is operated with 737-400 equipment, and usually the loads are in the 110-130 pax r
26 Wedgetail737: I was a little surprised that when QF opened YVR, they flew it from SFO. I think they would have done markedly better had they flew the LAX-YVR routin
28 Socalatc: You also have to remember AS carries A LOT of mail and cargo between the two cities. The load factor may not be amazing, however that is not the only
29 Hatbutton: I understand that but then is B6 going to do the same? Or just hope for good pax loads?
30 Socalatc: I dont know about B6, I was mostly just commenting on your comment about poor loads and them being able to drop a flight to increase the pax load.
31 Viscount724: The Canada-Australia bilateral that dates from about 1949 only permits SFO and HNL as intermediate stops, not LAX. That's why AC wasn't able to start
32 FATFlyer: Or something like LGB-SMF-YVR. That would make the Sacramento folks happy.
34 SANFan: I was wondering about this routing myself. AC has just dropped their SMF-YVR route -- permanently, I believe -- probably indicating a lack of busines
35 Icebird757: Ah please refer to my opening sentence "Mind you this is a RUMOR."
36 SANFan: Absolutely; I was just agreeing with you. bb
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 621 posts, 
, 22064 posts, 
Will not happen.
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21498 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 745 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
