Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Airlines To YYC In The Near Future?  
User currently offlineBoeingorbust From Canada, joined Oct 2011, 165 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8069 times:

With the new YYC expansion, it was constantly mentioned by the YYC Airport Authority that they wanted to have capacity for A380's to come to YYC as well as Asian carriers that have expressed interest in opening routes. I've heard JL Korean Airlines and China Airlines and others want to open up service. Why have they not already? Will they start once the expansion is done? Anyone have info on who will be in and what types after the expansion?

115 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1003 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8016 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Codeshare with WS out of YVR. Why bother opening a new station when you can get feed all across Canada with WS?


DHC1/3/4 MD88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
User currently offlineHawaiian763 From Canada, joined May 2009, 256 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7842 times:

They'll have to turn to Asia if they want the A380 to come YYC, if they have trouble filling an A340 from the Europe than what hope do they have with the A380.

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 1):
Codeshare with WS out of YVR.

As much as we would love to see new metal in YYC, its probably the best option right now, although a direct China-YYC would be great to see. AC's YYC-NRT route must be doing well, I did hear a while back they were bumping up the number of flights per week to Japan from YYC.


User currently offlineCPA62 From Canada, joined Jan 2012, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7807 times:

It would be great to see Calgary get some Asian flights! The expansion plans for YYC look fantastic, But i have to wonder
if YYC will end up being a white elephant?. With Vancouver and Seattle near by for Asia flights and a small population base even if you include Edmonton? YYC seems to have maxed out in terms of demand for European capacity?

May Be South America?


User currently offlineC172Akula From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7720 times:

Even as a local YYC'er that all seems overly ambitious. We are losing LH tomorrow, and I highly doubt YYC will see an A380 here (except for the odd diversion) for a long time. Just because the new terminal, runway, and taxiways are being designed to accommodate the A380 doesn't mean we will actually get it here.

Now there could be some potential of increased passenger traffic if the WS Regional airline gets up and running. WS has already said that the two hubs of the operation would be YYC and YYC.

The good news is that the AC NRT flight has done well and is being increased in frequency this summer, and AC says they still plan to operate it year round once they get the proper approvals from Japan. KL is also increasing frequency to AMS. Also unlike YVR Calgary has surpassed the record numbers set back in 2008, so that should speak to its future. So it's not all negative news at YYC to start the new year.

[Edited 2012-02-03 07:01:08]

User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7634 times:

Quoting C172Akula (Reply 4):
WS has already said that the two hubs of the operation would be YYC and YYC.

Not terribly efficient to operate two stations from the same hub, no?   I know what you meant.

This has been rehashed a few too many times. Just because they're building a runway and terminal that will be A380 compatible doesn't automatically mean that they 'expect' one or many airlines to fly there upon their commissioning. The gall of those Calgarians!!! Of the projects, the runway was always the more necessary of the two, but the new terminal building will allow the airport the shuffle airlines/gates and focus on renovating the older concourses with little to no impact of normal ops. There will be excess capacity when it's all done, and that's not such a terrible thing.



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlineC172Akula From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7610 times:

Busting my chops so early in the morning cyeg66? Haha!

Very good point about the new terminal allowing the ability to refurbish some of the older sections of the current YYC terminal, especially the B/C pier. After just using it en-route to OGG I was made aware of just how outdated and small it is, especially compared to the renovated A pier and much newer D pier.


User currently offlineBoeingorbust From Canada, joined Oct 2011, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7358 times:

Does Korean air And JAL still operate charters to YYC in the summer? I remember seeing them a few years ago and they were packed! I doubt the volume is an issue with the codshares with WS either. WS flys frequently to YVR and I'm sure wouldn't mind adding more if they're getting more pax. WS is getting another 30+ planes over the next few years... I wonder where they'll be utilized...?

User currently offlinealevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 915 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7318 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

One of the significant justifications for the new international terminal at YYC was to improve the service for the ever increasing traffic to southern US climes, very high and steadily growing in winter, but also increasing through the summer months.

The existing US preclearance gates in B/C are maxed out in winter peak times of day even with the swing gates, that can also service domestic flights, in use. Of course, using the swing gates for US flights means they are not available for domestic flights.

So, as said, although the new infrastructure is designed to accommodate A380's (and why wouldn't you when the incremental over not designing for A380's is tiny on the base investment), it in no way means there are imminent plans by any airline to fly them there. Instead, look for continued increase in gauge and frequency of US Airways (in the past was CRJ/A319 once or twice daily, now a mix of A319/A320 two or three times a day), United, AA, etc. and the renovation of the existing outdated B/C gate pier.

The parallel runway is needed to alleviate frequent flow control - my YMM - YYC flight on a Wednesday afternoon with a 4:20pm arrival this week was circled for 20 minutes this week for flow control.



Improvise, adapt, overcome.
User currently offlinewhiteguy From Canada, joined Nov 2003, 763 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7271 times:

The expansion in YYC isn't only for everything operating in and out of the main terminal. There is also a large amount of charter traffic at the south end of the airport. Companies like North Cariboo, Sunwest, CMA and Regional 1 account for a large number of movements in and out of YYC. Hence the flow control, especially Tues thru Thursday.

User currently offlinealevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 915 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7262 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting whiteguy (Reply 9):
There is also a large amount of charter traffic at the south end of the airport. Companies like North Cariboo, Sunwest, CMA and Regional 1 account for a large number of movements in and out of YYC.

Right you are - Suncor alone rotates its fleet of Challenger 850/890's (now 4 total with the delivery of the latest 890) several times per day out of the south end.



Improvise, adapt, overcome.
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5318 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7253 times:

The new international terminal will definitely be a huge improvement. The current international gate waiting areas are way to small to handle the larger planes normal on overseas flights.

Domestic and US ops will be able to spread comfortably spread out.

Whether or not flights will immediately increase isn't the issue. Calgary will continue to grow and capacity will be needed in the future. Better to expand while they have the chance than wait until the airport is completely surrounded by potential NIMBY's.

Planning for the future is a good move.



What the...?
User currently offlinewhiteguy From Canada, joined Nov 2003, 763 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7234 times:

Quoting alevik (Reply 10):
Right you are - Suncor alone rotates its fleet of Challenger 850/890's (now 4 total with the delivery of the latest 890) several times per day out of the south end.

That's right. North Cariboo has also added a seventh Dash 8 (4th 300 series) a B1900 and it's Bae146 should begin operating shortly. Sunwest has also added a 2nd Dash 8.


User currently offlineDavidYYC From Canada, joined Sep 2004, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 7188 times:

Queue the anti-Calgary and the anti YYC expansion crowd, posting here, hoping for lower numbers and fewer flights and with more carriers withdrawing and closing up shop.

But wait!

Perhaps we should have employed and paid for these "armchair" airport/airline specialists to guide us here with our multi-million dollar airport and runway expansion. Just what were we thinking, wasting all this money, when we could have asked all these airline/airport 'know it alls" about how any expansion is a waste of time and money, and any hope of any new routes or airlines doming here are a mere pipe dream.


User currently offlineACT7 From Canada, joined Nov 2011, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6863 times:

Quoting DavidYYC (Reply 13):
Queue the anti-Calgary and the anti YYC expansion crowd, posting here, hoping for lower numbers and fewer flights and with more carriers withdrawing and closing up shop.

I don't think there is anything anti-YYC about stating some facts (and opinions). The scale of this expansion is pushing the size of T1 at YYZ so it seems like overkill anyway you slice it. YYC's growth this year was anemic with almost all the growth in the domestic sector. International was down, and transborder was up by about 15,000 which is roughly 41 passengers a day. So if there was substantial transborder traffic growth to the southern U.S. then other American routes must have suffered. I definitely wouldn't hold my breath for an A380 anytime soon. As for Chinese carriers, I don't think YYC is on too many's radar right now. LAX, SFO, SEA, YYZ, YVR, JFK are all way more of a priority for North American destinations for Asian carriers. This is not a criticism of YYC, it's really more of a demographic and economic fact.

True that YYC passed it's 2008 pax totals and YVR hasn't, and YYC handles more domestic pax than YVR, but there is quite a long way to go before international and transborder catch up, which, again, speaks to how excessive this international expansion is. I don't think it will be a white elephant but I do think it will under-utilized for quite a long time.

Hopefully WJ's new regional carrier will allow some feeder traffic to flow through YYC but ultimately you can't force a hub. The economics and demographics have to be there for it. I'm hopeful but doubtful that YYC's growth projections will materialize in the way that's needed to justify such a massive expansion.

Just my two cents.


User currently offlineBoeingorbust From Canada, joined Oct 2011, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6802 times:

It's interesting... The new runway I can understand but the massive international terminal expansion makes no sense to me. Why not just build another wing like they did with the D Concourse and leave it at that for the increase in domestic traffic it's experience and no doubt will moreso with WS's new potential regional...?

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5318 posts, RR: 30
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6741 times:

Quoting Boeingorbust (Reply 15):

The international wing sucks. The area is much too small for even one 330 sized plane at a time. A full flight has people spread over two waiting areas and packed shoulder to shoulder in the hall.

Domestic and N.American flights use smaller planes...the current international area will work for them.

Too often, infrastructure lags behind need. Calgary WILL need the capacity in a few years at most, and if they waited until they did need it, it would cost substantially more and the funds might not be available at the time.

Expansion is inevitable...they might as well strike while the iron's hot.

Besides, this expansion also brings the LRT to the airport and having used a number of airports which had train service, I can vouch for the convenience of the concept.



What the...?
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2253 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6596 times:

In 2011, YYC, out of the top 7 busiest airports in the Nation, had the weakest increase y.o.y with a mere 1.1% increase. With the loss of LH, American Eagle, and no real growth announced by any airline to offset said losses for 2012, expect a stagnation or decrease in traffic, although most airports in the Nation (barring maybe YTZ) will face the same thing, with the European economy shrinking and the Canadian one not looking too bright either !

As for new airlines and potential service to Asia, it doesn't take an armchair CEO to figure out that YYC will not get any major Asian player for a few more years to come, if at all, besides your adhoc charter flight or two !

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-02-05 11:25:28]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinekiramakora From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6542 times:

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 5):
There will be excess capacity when it's all done, and that's not such a terrible thing.
Quoting DavidYYC (Reply 13):
Queue the anti-Calgary and the anti YYC expansion crowd, posting here, hoping for lower numbers and fewer flights and with more carriers withdrawing and closing up shop.

But wait!

Perhaps we should have employed and paid for these "armchair" airport/airline specialists to guide us here with our multi-million dollar airport and runway expansion. Just what were we thinking, wasting all this money, when we could have asked all these airline/airport 'know it alls" about how any expansion is a waste of time and money, and any hope of any new routes or airlines doming here are a mere pipe dream.

I don't think you should be this critical. Expansion of YYC supported by increases in fees is not justified in my mind. One can want "better looking facilities", but the airport is mostly functional. My friend at WS and AC tells me that the only bottleneck seems to be USCBP which the Canadians cannot control anyways.

As I have mentioned, the growth of YYC will always be closely interlinked with the growth of WS. If I were the airport authority, I would take every step to ensure that WS is happy. Their CEO has publicly stated the long haul is coming in the next few years. Maybe, it is WS that will grow service to Asia. Not what the current group of YYC planners have visioned for.


User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2253 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6522 times:

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
Their CEO has publicly stated the long haul is coming in the next few years

That's bull ! We've already established that armchair CEO's here at airliners.net have better insight into these matters, and according to them (or us  ), ain't gonna happen.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinekiramakora From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6446 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 19):
That's bull ! We've already established that armchair CEO's here at airliners.net have better insight into these matters, and according to them (or us &nbsp Wink, ain't gonna happen.

Thenoflyzone

Let us revisit this thread in 5 years then  . As I said, the major thing that will facilitate growth for YYC is WS.


User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6408 times:

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
I don't think you should be this critical.

??? My comment was critical?

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
Expansion of YYC supported by increases in fees is not justified in my mind.

Says it all, don't it, especially those last 3 words? The wait-and-see approach (when things are already far-less than ideal) would be so popular with airlines.....   

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
but the airport is mostly functional.

Again, "mostly" appears to be what you think a large business such as an airport should strive for. How about being the best mediocre, mildly adequate airport suit you for their motto?

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
My friend at WS and AC

You have 1 friend that works for both. I call espionage.  
Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
I would take every step to ensure that WS is happy

That approach would probably not go over so well with the big dogs over in AC's HQ, particularly since that is the only homegrown airline that currently offers true, scheduled, long haul flights out of YYC to a variety of places. Wouldn't make you popular among non-armchair CEO's among airlines if you offer concessions only to one of them.... Besides, WS stands to benefit greatly from the expanded airport. Illusory to think otherwise.

Quoting kiramakora (Reply 18):
Their CEO has publicly stated the long haul is coming in the next few years.

I must've missed that. I can only recall comments akin to: "we're looking at the possibility of changing strategies over the next number of years." One has already been announced. Who knows what else is in store? Perhaps Greg S. is your 'friend'; If so, do tell!



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlineACT7 From Canada, joined Nov 2011, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6341 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 17):
In 2011, YYC, out of the top 7 busiest airports in the Nation, had the weakest increase y.o.y with a mere 1.1% increase.

And second worst was YVR - ironically also doing a massive upgrade.


User currently offlineftornik From Canada, joined Dec 2009, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6269 times:

Quoting Boeingorbust (Thread starter):
the YYC Airport Authority that they wanted to have capacity for A380's to come to YYC as well as Asian carriers that have expressed interest in opening routes. I've heard JL Korean Airlines and China Airlines and others want to open up service.

YYC is also hoping that EK gets permission to fly an A380 there. However, I'm not aware of any routes that start with an A-380; YUL-CDG (AF) JFK-FRA (LH) and LHR-SIN (SQ) had all been proven by smaller aircraft (in some cases for years) before the A-380 was used.

The stand-out exception is YYZ-DXB where the Canada-UAE bilateral agreement limited the number of weekly flights but not the size of aircraft, so an A380 replaced a 773!


User currently offlinewhiteguy From Canada, joined Nov 2003, 763 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6223 times:

Quoting ftornik (Reply 23):
The stand-out exception is YYZ-DXB where the Canada-UAE bilateral agreement limited the number of weekly flights but not the size of aircraft, so an A380 replaced a 773!

Putting the A380 was strictly a PR move by EK to try and show the public that more slots were needed. It wasn't a huge increase in seats by putting the 380 on that route. If the demand for more flights was there then why didn't EK take the 6 weekly slots in the first place!

Quoting ftornik (Reply 23):
YYC is also hoping that EK gets permission to fly an A380 there.

That's never been said before. The CAA is just hoping EK will operate to YYC, they don't care which type.

The media likes to put their spin on things when talking about this expansion. My favorite line is that the new runway will enable airlines to fly direct to Asia. Funny that multiple airlines have flown charters out YYC for years and AC operates flights all summer to Asia. That's not why the new runway is being built!


25 ACT7 : The A380 wasn't a PR move, it was a capacity move. That flight averages 95% loads and as soon as EY gets their A380's it will replace the existing 77
26 Tinosky : Korean Air has a 772 come in directly from ICN once in a while. I had a good friend of mine come in from ICN. I didn't believe him at first. When I p
27 thenoflyzone : YYC should consider itself lucky to have a non-stop to Asia. A second non-stop, be it to China or not, is far fetched by any standards, with or witho
28 Boeingorbust : I agree that WS should be kept happy. Perhaps that's why they got the new D concourse that AC was so hopeful of get. I'm not a big fan of the AIF fees
29 ACT7 : But that was ALL from YYZ...
30 whiteguy : What does that have to do with expansion of YYC? WJ has already been into LGA once before and pulled out. Wait and see how it goes this time. I don't
31 Post contains images thenoflyzone : WS will be bleeding red ink with those 736s into LGA. They'll be waving the white flag soon enough. WS needs smaller metal if it wants to compete wit
32 mogandoCI : I'd avoid any Q400 (or turboprops for that matter) unless there's no choice or WS is substantially lower in price. Props are great for operators but
33 Boeingorbust : It's a statement in general... WS has expansion plans while AC is continually on the verge of bankruptcy with terrible yields and never ending pensio
34 C172Akula : There has been nothing said about this expansion bringing the LRT to the airport. The new airport trail tunnel that will run under the future paralle
35 Post contains links YOWZA : It looks like the EK marketing team did a good job getting folks in YYC all hot and bothered at the prospect of them entering the market. Let's be se
36 Post contains images cyeg66 : ^Misquoted thenoflyzone, C172Akula..... C'mon, you serious? When there's only a mitt full of markets that can support an A380 across the globe, you re
37 flyyul : Let's be honest here. Lufthansa, one of the biggest network carriers in the world, had trouble making money in Calgary to one's of the world's premier
38 Post contains links C172Akula : Article on the small growth at YYC in 2011: http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...er+traffic+mark/6101879/story.html If that is the case, why are the
39 Post contains images abrelosojos : = Oh come on. How much of that did it have to do with your route planning department ? Saludos, A.
40 flyyul : Absolutely nothing. Lufthansa marches to their own drum.
41 EddieDude : If and when the visa requirement is terminated, we might see AM start a 3 or 4 weekly YYC-MEX service with 73Ws. MX flew this route and I would imagin
42 C172Akula : It would be nice to see a Mexican route come back (that isn't just the usual "sun run" ones from AC and WS)![Edited 2012-02-06 09:18:16]
43 Post contains links ACT7 : Here is the article that states that... http://www.cbc.ca/fp/story/2011/06/03/4885026.html Here's a link stating 99% load factors to Toronto.
44 thenoflyzone : Loud, maybe. Slow, the Q400 is definately not ! The entire bottom half of that article is just hot air ! This aviation analyst needs to do some more
45 whiteguy : All that article states is that each have 3 slots. It's been talked about before on here that EK had the chance to use all 6 slots. They decided they
46 Post contains links ACT7 : Then you didn't read the entire article because it clearly states that " The UAE has granted Etihad and Emirates each three flights per week," Read m
47 ACT7 : Couldn't agree more!
48 Post contains links ACT7 : Sorry, my link didn't come through last time. So between your link and this one, assuming a 95% LF is not unreasonable. Also, the difference in capac
49 C172Akula : I couldn't believe that when I read it either, let me assure everyone here that those of us in YYC that pay attention to these things don't have drea
50 ACT7 : Not sure why my link is never coming through on this point. Sorry to make you do some leg work here but if you google 'emirates laod factor toronto' y
51 jamincan : That CBC article doesn't mesh with how I remember things. I seem to recall that either airline could have grabbed up to 6 times per week, but when Eti
52 Post contains images YOWZA : I'm a transplant my friend. Living between YTZ and YYZ now. This was also my recollection. YOWza
53 C172Akula : I too was under the impression that either EK or EY could have grabbed all 6 slots initially, but when EK waffled EY took 3 of them.
54 ACT7 : That was my impression too at the time, but it's obviously not what happened. The UAE is interested in seeing both its major airlines thrive so it mak
55 mogandoCI : Did Canada and UAE append their agreement to add a 7th slot? I kept thinking was just 6 weekly.
56 ACT7 : I have to find the reference but I'm 99% sure it has been amended to 7.
57 Post contains links ACT7 : Here's a reference to it... http://youniversityhub.com/all/war-of-the-wings/ "The existing bilateral agreement allows UAE airlines to fly to Toronto
58 Post contains links Kaiarahi : It was actually a fit of pique. EK blustered that they wouldn't take 6 unless they could get 7, so EY jumped in and took 3. EK fornicated themselves.
59 Kaiarahi : Have you actually flown a Q400? Not to be compared with DH1/2/3. Same or less block time as an E-jet on sectors up to about 500 miles. Much quieter t
60 threepoint : Nonsense. On the routes that the Q400 was designed for, the average passenger will not notice a difference in gate to gate times. The regional turbop
61 ACT7 : Thanks for posting - not sure why the other article says seven flights then. You'll also notice though that in that same paragraph outlining the numb
62 Kaiarahi : That provision was included at the UAE's request.
63 Boeingorbust : Saw it on CBC and read a news article a couple of months ago... Might be changing now, however their financial troubles are far from over and wont be
64 mogandoCI : Are you really comparing the noise of planes from the 70's to one launched in 2000 ?? What they're "designed for" and how operators abuse them are 2
65 ACT7 : Well, no it isn't because it was the UAE that seemed to request a limitation of frequency between EK and EY. THAT, I agree with!
66 whiteguy : Yes I did read the article an yes EK and EY have 3 slots each! As many have said before EK could have taken all 6 slots but didn't. They were then of
67 ACT7 : We must be reading two completely different articles and posting on different forums. They do have 3 slots each, no one is arguing that point. The UA
68 ACT7 : I meant to reply to this but caught up in all the UAE stuff... YYC actually handles more domestic pax than YVR. It's YVR's transborder and int'l pax
69 Viscount724 : Most operators rarely fly the Q400 at its maximum speed to save fuel. The use the speed reserve when necessary to catch up with delays etc. And the a
70 Kaiarahi : There are plenty of 70s jets flying, particularly in the U.S., that are noisier than the Q400. As to current generations, cabin noise in twin engine
71 saloman : Not that I disagree with much of your analysis, but isn't it important to look at these domestic numbers as they to some degree reflect a catchment a
72 Kaiarahi : True, but that's outside the 500nm range where the Q400 was designed to be competitive with RJs. Block time YOW - YTZ/YYZ is usually 5-10 minutes les
73 mogandoCI : But since props are designed for much shorter stage lengths, the percentage of cruising over total flight time is much lower than RJs or mainlines, s
74 abrelosojos : = Really? I think the perception is slightly different at LH HQ on how much "support" YUL provided - and how happy they were with LH being in the mar
75 flyyul : This is a classic case of not believing everything you hear. LH is clearly more dominant in the sense that they are on the one with the much superior
76 threepoint : I find this difficult to believe. I can't see how fewer people travel to & from metro Vancouver (the larger city) than from metro Calgary. But am
77 whiteguy : Yet myself and many others have told you that EK could have taken all 6 and declined them. That is why EY got 3. I'm done see ya, back to topic!
78 abrelosojos : = Hmm. Interesting. What I am intrigued about is why AC would not move that flight up to a different schedule hour. It misconnects to several key LH
79 whiteguy : Another point is it's necessarily the speed of the Q400 that helps, it's the fact the can remain at higher speed for longer. Most jets take a lot of
80 whiteguy : Not sure if it's still the case but AC844 YYC FRA used to be the number one flight in the AC system for connections. 95% of the pax were onward conne
81 ACT7 : Saying it five times doesn't make it so. It's not Candyman. You haven't cited a single source that says that, whereas a few of us have posted links s
82 abrelosojos : = Don't know if #1, but the flight is around 88% connections with major markets being YEG, YVR, DME, AMS, BEY, and ZRH. I personally think making the
83 Post contains links ACT7 : I don't have O&D figures yet but here are just the links to each YYC's and YVR's pax stats... http://www.yyc.com/data//1/rec_docs/33_BR_PaxTotal.
84 Post contains images whiteguy : I'm going to go with stubborn!
85 Post contains images ACT7 : That's what I figured...your English is quite good
86 cyeg66 : Interesting you mention that. As little as 9-10 years ago (approx, naturally), YVR was over 15M pax/annum while YUL was finally breaking through the
87 thenoflyzone : ^ The aviation in Quebec has really come a long way in the last 10 years. Both YUL and YQB have recorded tremendous growth recently, some of the best
88 ACT7 : True dat! I could see YUL passing YVR is about 5 years time. YVR's Asian traffic has stagnated going as far back as 2002 so it's largest internationa
89 CPA62 : It puzzles me as well. I can see MOntreal having more international traffic than Vancouver, it is more connected internationally than Vancouver and m
90 C172Akula : I thought there was substantial passenger loss to airports like SEA and Bellingham, to YVR's detriment over the last few years. Back on topic (well a
91 jamincan : I think the perception that EK could have taken all six slots may have been due to the rhetoric at the time where EK was criticizing Canada for not a
92 Post contains links thenoflyzone : SEA sees about 700,000 Canadians/year (2010), Bellingham about. 325,000. Over in Quebec, BTV saw 600,000, whereas PLB, 63,000. Pretty substantial, be
93 C172Akula : Wow, those numbers are very large! I've heard of people driving from YYC and YQL down to GTF to catch flights. However for me that much driving to sa
94 thenoflyzone : That would imply YUL sustaining 5-6% annual growth over these next 5 years, hoping YVR stagnates. Even if the latter does happen, i find it hard to b
95 cyeg66 : Here's a couple of prelim 2011 movement stats: YYC: total 237161 (+1.5%), IFR 223830 (+1.4) YEG: 136791 (+4.7%), 127209 (+4.7%) YHZ: 86874 (-0.2%), 79
96 ACT7 : Okay, maybe 5 years was a bit over zealous but I don't think Canadian airports across the board will see stagnant growth this year. AC and WJ already
97 Kaiarahi : YQB and YOW alone add more than 2 million to YUL's catchment area.
98 Post contains images thenoflyzone : Dont you worry, YYC will get it's fair share of DH8D's once WS gets its regional ops going Thenoflyzone
99 thenoflyzone : and YYZ, BTV and PLB snatch it right back out ! Which is why i'm saying i'd be nice to have official figures for comparison. Thenoflyzone[Edited 2012
100 Post contains links pnwtraveler : Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 58):The bilateral is here: http://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.aspx?id=104312 It's 6 flights per week. It states in no u
101 ACT7 : I'd be curious to know how BA is doing at YYC. I would think AC dominates that route out of YYC much like they do the FRA run. If KL is adding capaci
102 thenoflyzone : This route should have been a 772 by now. The fact that BA started YYC with a 772 shows that they had high hopes for YYC, which ultimately didn't mat
103 Post contains images Boeingorbust : Anyone been to Calgary lately? Our population could sustain high loads to just about anywhere in the middle east
104 Post contains links ftornik : Annex, Section II, Note 4 of the Canada-United Arab Emirates Air Agreement of June 17, 2001 states that the operation of more than 3 weekly flights b
105 Post contains links C172Akula : Perhaps we could sustain high LOADS, but the yields would probably be rubbish and any operators would soon realize that (and leave). Although I do se
106 Boeingorbust : How are yields calculated??
107 Post contains images point2point : ..... and they have a n/s to NRT...... Here in DEN, with the catchment of about 3M, they've been begging on they're knees with bags full of cash to g
108 thenoflyzone : YYC's catchment includes YEG, plus all the small communities in Southern Alberta, making it a catchment area of 2.5 million +. Not far off from DEN. T
109 Post contains images point2point : Okay, still, I think that the airport management is doing pretty well in terms of longer-length international nonstops.
110 jamincan : By the same logic, I'm sure DEN is quite a bit larger than 3M people in its catchment area as well.
111 thenoflyzone : If the entire state of Colorado (5 million) is in the catchment area of DEN, then I guess so. I know DEN has a metro pop. of 2.5 million, so point2po
112 threepoint : A bold claim, and one which we could debate ad infinitum, but I'll stop at saying that despite Calgary's growth of late and the shift of many head of
113 jamincan : I don't believe your interpretation is even remotely supported by facts (particularly with regard to Montreal). There are others measures of business
114 threepoint : As I said, it's an entirely subjective issue. Define "importance"...I can't. To limit the importance of "business" to how many corporate head offices
115 Post contains links and images thenoflyzone : LOL...It might be dead in 10 years.... http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/que...ould-soon-be-poorest-province.html
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
NH To IAH In The Near Future? posted Sun Dec 25 2011 17:34:16 by UAL747
Western Airlines To Florida In The Late 1970s. posted Mon Feb 6 2012 09:24:03 by doulasc
EasyJet: Alliance In The Near Future? posted Tue Oct 5 2010 06:59:23 by frenchpilot
What Will Alliances Look Like In The Near Future posted Thu Aug 20 2009 07:10:29 by Oby
Canadian Airlines To PEK In The 1990s posted Tue Feb 3 2009 16:42:59 by Naritaflyer
New Airlines To YYZ In 08-09 posted Fri Jan 11 2008 19:22:40 by Liverpool03
RTS Attacting Heavies In The Near Future posted Fri Sep 7 2007 04:06:54 by Slovacek747
Any BLR -AMS Nonstop Prospects In The Near Future posted Sat Jul 15 2006 00:45:35 by Boeing747_600
Buying Drinks Onboard-Sometime In The Near Future? posted Tue Apr 5 2005 23:48:10 by IslipWN
Continental Airlines To Expand In The Western US? posted Fri Nov 12 2004 02:32:12 by TriJetFan1