KarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 1756 posts, RR: 6 Posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 34476 times:
Air Canada will introduce a 458-seater Boeing 777-300ER aircraft on the Montreal - Paris CDG route from July 11. The firm also announces a new Executive First Class Seating as well as the introduction of Premium Economy Class. The cabin configuration will be C36 W24 Y398 and economy class will be a 3-4-3 layout.
AC870 YUL2055 – 0945+1CDG 77W D
AC871 CDG1330 – 1450YUL 77W D
parapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1310 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 34286 times:
I once wrote on this with regard to the best economy flight I ever had was a brand new AC 773 to Toronto out of Heathrow.9 across seats (must have been 19-20 in seats) good legroom etc etc. I guess this move is simply a sign of the times.
QF15 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 14 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 34134 times:
Wow! That looks very crowded.
Anyone have seat numbers on the highest density 77W flying these days and what airline?? ..this would have to be close to it I'd imagine.
leftyboarder From Turkey, joined Apr 2008, 647 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 34078 times:
Quoting QF15 (Reply 7): Anyone have seat numbers on the highest density 77W flying these days and what airline?? ..this would have to be close to it I'd imagine.
AF has 472 seats for flights to old colonies and territories, I think. EK has 427 on two class A/C.
KarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 1756 posts, RR: 6 Reply 9, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 34029 times:
Quoting QF15 (Reply 7): nyone have seat numbers on the highest density 77W flying these days and what airline?? ..this would have to be close to it I'd imagine.
Hawaiian763 From Canada, joined May 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33656 times:
I remember flying the 77W with AC on the CDG-YUL route, it was one of the most comfortable flights I've ever had with AC in economy class. The introduction of Premium Economy would be a very attractive option for me, especially for the additional legroom. I'm sort of thinking it's like United's Economy Plus, but with a few more benefits.
In a way, yes it is. I've often argued that there is a case for the 777-9X precisely because there are airlines fitting more and more seats onto the 777-300ER. The larger size of the 777-9X will be extremely attractive to such airlines. The fact that more and more airlines are putting 400+ seats on a 777-300ER is an indication that a larger 777 is needed.
Quoting parapente (Reply 5): I guess this move is simply a sign of the times.
Indeed it is, although it is unfortunate for the traveller. A lot of aircraft have started its service life with a lower density configuration than it ends with. The original 747s were 9 across in economy, but now 10 across is standard. Likewise the 777. Smaller widebodies such as the DC10 and the L-1011 have also been equipped with more seats per row later on in its service life to minimise the per seat costs as fuel prices gradually get higher and higher.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 13, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33518 times:
Meh. AC was starting to lose me. This seals the deal. I just know AC will roll this out fleet wide. Less privacy in J. Cramped 10 abreast in Y. What reason is there to take AC anymore? 24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
Heck, at least other airlines that offer such cramped cabins participate in the Amex platinum airline program. Not AC.
Here's hoping Westjet grows and officially becomes a Oneworld member.
behramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, RR: 43 Reply 16, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 32970 times:
this is how you can make good money on long haul VFR (ethnic) routes operated with B777-300ERs by having a ultra high density configuration perfectly suited to the market demographic hence reducing your operating cost per seat unit.
Routes ideally suited to such a configuration include YUL-CMN (3 weekly), DEL (4 weekly), YVR-MNL (4 weekly), HKG (daily) and Canada-China
New configuration is 36 business class (flat beds) + 24 premium economy and 398 economy class with economy seats losing one-inch of legroom from the existing fleet at 31-inches due to their “slimline” leather seats.
Am surprised (in a good way) that they managed to squeeze in more seats on a B77W than Emirates does in a 2 class configuration ! With this layout, Air Canada thus becomes the airline with the second highest seat count for a legacy carrier operating long haul flights using a B77W as # 1 is Air France (Caribbean/BKK flights layout) which has 478 seats on board its B77Ws.
To give you an idea on how big certain long haul markets are from Canada, the list is below for 2012:
peterinlisbon From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 226 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 32956 times:
I don't think it really makes much difference to the average economy passenger how many passengers there are in the plane in total. If you are sitting in economy at the back of the plane, it doesn't matter to you whether the front has first, business class or more economy. And if you are sitting at the front in business or first class, it doesn't matter to you how many people are sitting behind the curtain behind you. You may not even see them or hear them, any you'll get off before them all anyway.
airceo From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32582 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 13): Here's hoping Westjet grows and officially becomes a Oneworld member.
All indications are that they're happy to stick to their knitting and stay within the continent only for the foreseeable future. That said I would love to see a second big international player sporting the maple leaf.
Quoting ytz (Reply 13):
24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
I'll hold of judging for now I fear you may be right.
Quoting behramjee (Reply 16):
this is how you can make good money on long haul VFR (ethnic) routes operated with B777-300ERs by having a ultra high density configuration perfectly suited to the market demographic hence reducing your operating cost per seat unit.
I'm not so sure... Just because it works for some carriers doesn't mean it will for all carriers. I realize this has worked very well for EK, but AC is not EK. Sitting 10 abreast from DXB to India is one thing, sitting 10 abreast from YYZ to India is quit another. I also worry that high yield premium pax will not like the more compact cabin and will look elsewhere.
@airceo
blogger at airceo | reach me: @airceo or fly@airceo.com
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32598 times:
The J class seat being introduced on these 5 new B77W are interim. AC will be launching a fully redesigned J class seat with the introduction of the 787s in 2014.
The J class seat on the high density 77W is the same as those found on SWISS and brussels airlines.
behramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, RR: 43 Reply 22, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32415 times:
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): I'm not so sure... Just because it works for some carriers doesn't mean it will for all carriers. I realize this has worked very well for EK, but AC is not EK. Sitting 10 abreast from DXB to India is one thing, sitting 10 abreast from YYZ to India is quit another. I also worry that high yield premium pax will not like the more compact cabin and will look elsewhere.
many airlines worldwide now have 10 abreast in Y class on board their B77W fleet of which EK was the pioneer of. These include Etihad, Air France, KLM, Jet Airways, TAM Brazil and now Air Canada.
VFR pax who use these carriers have no problem sitting in this arrangement for long haul flights as you see 1000s everyday flying EK to USA/Australia/GRU etc via DXB + KLM via AMS !
jetboytwa From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 379 posts, RR: 5 Reply 23, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32299 times:
The seats appear to be the Thompson Vantage found on Swiss, Finnair, Delta, etc.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10657 posts, RR: 100 Reply 24, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32205 times:
It always amazes me how few Y+ seats will be in any cabin. It shows how few people are willing to pay for comfort. I understand J/C is often too pricey, but this shows that only 6% of Y passengers are willing to pay for comfort.
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 12): The fact that more and more airlines are putting 400+ seats on a 777-300ER is an indication that a larger 777 is needed.
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 12): Indeed it is, although it is unfortunate for the traveller.
Why is it unfortunate they are being provided the product they wish to pay for. If someone wants more comfort, there is Y+/W. Or even the C seats. The reality is that AC must compete with bargain fairs to CDG and now they have a configuration to make money.
Everyone demands more comfort... then they go online and book the cheapest fair.
Quoting ytz (Reply 13): 24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
1.5X just breaks even on the floor real-estate. Since Y+ will have a lower load factor, 2X is very reasonable. Aircraft real estate is expensive. Since few (if any) will pay more for 9 across Y in a 777, the market is moving to 10 across Y and offering Y+/W for those who care enough to pay for space.
Considering how cheap flights are versus 30 years ago... I'm not complaining. Pick your seat and enjoy!
thenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 1964 posts, RR: 12 Reply 26, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 33231 times:
So YUL-CDG gets a 30% seat increase......!
This new J class product looks good. Same 180% lie-flat recline, same seat length (longer in lie-flat mode), Only half an inch less wide. AVOD is 3 in wider. All in all, Not too bad, even if just interim. One would think the new ones coming online in 2014 with the 787s will be even better !
As for 10 abreast in Y, i've done JFK-DXB-MLE-DXB-JFK in that config with EK, and it's not too bad (and i'm 6 foot, 210 lbs). I've done it with AF as well on YUL-CDG-YUL. I guess most majors will eventually get there on their B77Ws. Just a matter of time. Average Joe wont even notice.
Thenoflyzone
[Edited 2013-02-07 07:33:21]
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
I understand that the re-design of the J product was in response to passenger suggestion. While the herringbone arrangement was state-of-the-art 10 years ago, it is dated now, with better options.
Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 26): I guess most majors will eventually get there on their B77Ws.
As sad as I am to see this trend, I have to grudgingly admit, it IS the future. While by percentage, currently flying 9-abreast B777s outnumber 10-abreast B777s, the fact is on new build B777s, the ratio is 5:1 for 10 vs. 9 abreast configurations.
It really becomes a matter of when, not if, currently flying B777s are re-configured. And ... each airline has to assess if it can attract a "premium" in fare by remaining at 9 abreast, as otherwise it will be at an economic disadvantage. To date, only very very few airlines have been able to do this, and even that is changing.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
Kaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2578 posts, RR: 24 Reply 28, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 33371 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): To date, only very very few airlines have been able to do this, and even that is changing.
Witness NZ, which is a 4 star airline with longhaul routes. The 77Ws being delivered are 10 abreast Y. They're not even trying to get a premium on their 9 abreast 77Es.
intermodal64 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 101 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 32537 times:
Quoting swallow (Reply 18): I don't think it really makes much difference to the average economy passenger how many passengers there are in the plane in total. If you are sitting in economy at the back of the plane, it doesn't matter to you whether the front has first, business class or more economy. And if you are sitting at the front in business or first class, it doesn't matter to you how many people are sitting behind the curtain behind you. You may not even see them or hear them, any you'll get off before them all anyway.
It sort of does make a difference when you get to baggage claim, and it takes an hour to retrieve your luggage. This is one reason I prefer smaller aircraft in general.
It looks like their strategy is to make economy class so unbearable that business travelers will simply refuse to fly if their companies won't pay for some kind of an upgrade.
Hawaiian763 From Canada, joined May 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 31902 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 13): Here's hoping Westjet grows and officially becomes a Oneworld member.
WestJet growing yes, joining Oneworld, wouldn't be too happy about that. I would be more happy if they stayed on the course that they are on right now and not join an alliance. I am curious to see how their plans to also roll out a Premium Economy product will play out
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15722 posts, RR: 47 Reply 31, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 31621 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): To date, only very very few airlines have been able to do this, and even that is changing.
I don't think any carrier is getting a "premium" on a 9 across, so much as estimating that the cost to refit a frame into 10-across is higher than the incremental revenue they'd get.
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 28): They're not even trying to get a premium on their 9 abreast 77Es.
That gets you companion tickets on several major carriers for long-haul flights, in J or F. AC does not participate in this program.
Quoting behramjee (Reply 16): this is how you can make good money on long haul VFR (ethnic) routes operated with B777-300ERs by having a ultra high density configuration perfectly suited to the market demographic hence reducing your operating cost per seat unit.
Sadly, this is true. I guess now AC may finally be able to serve places like India directly. Or maybe they're holding out for the 350 pax 787-9 before they serve DEL.
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): I'll hold of judging for now I fear you may be right.
It's AC. One should never hold out hope they won't disappoint. They've done innovative things in the past to be sure. But I have no confidence in AC today being anything more than another carrier engaged in the race to the bottom.
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): Sitting 10 abreast from DXB to India is one thing, sitting 10 abreast from
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): I also worry that high yield premium pax will not like the more compact cabin and will look elsewhere.
This also. Like I said, I fail to see what AC offers at this point. You get better cabins flying an Asian carrier. You often get better service flying a European carrier. And most of those are often more competitively priced too. The only people regular filling J on AC these days are probably Canadians who want to maintain status at domestic/north american travel as well.
Quoting chrisa330 (Reply 21): Not at bad as I thought it would have been.
TK gives me a return ticket from BOM via IST, with Y+ on the 10 hr IST leg and Y on IST-BOM legs for about $1800. And TK's Y+ offering will still be substantially better than what AC apparently has on offer. Nearly $2000 on a return Y+ fare from YUL to CDG? That's horrendous.
The only people who say this is reasonable are those who think AC's base fares are reasonable to begin with.
Quoting behramjee (Reply 22): VFR pax who use these carriers have no problem sitting in this arrangement for long haul flights as you see 1000s everyday flying EK to USA/Australia/GRU etc via DXB + KLM via AMS !
EK sends A380s to Toronto. 18" wide seats, even though they are 10-abreast. And with the amount of A380s EK has on order, you can bet that most markets more than 10 hours from DXB will get A380 service. Meanwhile, AC will pack you on a 17" seat in Y and then transfer you to another *A carrier likely to do the same as well.
Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 25): The answer to this is to search out A380 flights, and then enjoy the extra shoulder room from having an identical 10Y layout on a much wider plane
Bingo. I predict that lots of transfer pax/VFR will try out AC's service initially and then run back to EK. At least for South Asia. But maybe it'll help AC compete for Europe bound tourists.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): It really becomes a matter of when, not if, currently flying B777s are re-configured.
Exactly.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): And ... each airline has to assess if it can attract a "premium" in fare by remaining at 9 abreast, as otherwise it will be at an economic disadvantage. To date, only very very few airlines have been able to do this, and even that is changing.
I agree. But what saddens me is the extremely limited Y+ cabin. It's almost like AC is mostly targeting the upgraders rather than actually hoping to sell Y+ seats. And it also sucks that in addition to going 10-abreast, they dropped the pitch by 1". I'd be far less hostile if they had kept the 32" pitch.
Sign of the times, I guess.
How will the public know whether it's a 2-class or 3-class bird? Is it just by the availability of Y+ when booking?
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9605 posts, RR: 10 Reply 34, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 31339 times:
Surely a plane to avoided in Eco. The 777 seems perfectly suited to become a sardine can. A trend thats getting worse.
Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 25): The answer to this is to search out A380 flights, and then enjoy the extra shoulder room from having an identical 10Y layout on a much wider plane
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 31050 times:
Can anyone comment on what impact to range a capacity increase like this would have? Wondering if this change still allows for these aircraft to fly Asia routes.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 38, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 31068 times:
Quoting na (Reply 34): The 777 seems perfectly suited to become a sardine can. A trend thats getting worse.
Not just the 777. The 787 has hit sardine can status just after launch. I loved the idea of the 787. But in the future, I'll look for carriers operating A350s. If travelling in Y, you know you'll get an 18" wide seat. Thankfully, Airbus didn't make it possible for the airlines to go 10-abreast.
skipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 2372 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 30754 times:
Having flown on a ten abreast Emirates model, I realised that unless you're, well shall we actually say fat, it's fine.
For an economy product, for what we pay, it's perfectly acceptable, for those who want more, pay more.
But so very few will pay out of their own pockets if course.
When I fly long haul my first choice is Y+ which is why NZ currently gets all my business from AKL. If the AC Y+ cabin works out cheaper via SYD and YVR to North America with a good offering then AC could very well be getting my North American business. Plus its a good way to try the B772LR also
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 42, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 30526 times:
Quoting chrisa330 (Reply 37): Can anyone comment on what impact to range a capacity increase like this would have? Wondering if this change still allows for these aircraft to fly Asia routes.
109 more pax? Should reduce payload by 30 000 lbs. Range can stay the same at a reduced payload. Or they pack up the plane to the gills and only have enough gas to get to Europe.
I am willing to bet that AC will retrofit all the 77Ws. In this configuration, at max payload (or close to it), AC would probably still be able to reach IST, GRU and GIG from YYZ and ICN, NRT, PVG, and PEK from YVR. And that's assuming near to max payloads. For less, AC could go further.
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 43, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 30030 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 42): I am willing to bet that AC will retrofit all the 77Ws.
I agree that they'll at some point retrofit Y class to 10 abreast as well as introduce Y+ across the whole 777 fleet. I wouldn't be surprised if they have two seperate J class configs, with one more premium heavy than the other.
Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2582 posts, RR: 2 Reply 44, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 29927 times:
This is why I now look for long haul f;lights using A330,A340,767 as equipment. With the 2-3-2 or 2-4-2 seating I can get into those window/aisle seats and not worry if the pitch is a little cramped because I only have to climb over my wife to get out. I've done a few ANZ flights in their 777s, and the long hauls are 3-3-3 which is bearable. But they also have 3-4-3 layouts on their AKL-Australia 777 flights -- which are bearable only because they are mostly under 5 hours.
This sardine can trend is very worrisome. I'd cheerfully pay more for a little extra space. Anything over 10 hours is torture.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
rampbro From Canada, joined Nov 2012, 62 posts, RR: 0 Reply 45, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 29462 times:
I was under the impression that AC was going to get Rouge to do this kind of flying? Or are they are going after the CDG CNXs (M-E, Africa), for which there is a strong market ex-YUL?
I wonder what the O&D/CNX ratio is like on that YUL-CDG time slot.
The key point in that statement is "for what you pay". Any Canadian resident who's travelled on an itinerary not originating in Canada (that they themselves have paid for) will know that the value-for-money proposition involving flights originating in Canada is amongst the worst, if not the worst, in the world.
There is a massive difference between the value-for-money between different carriers. To put it in perspective:
YUL-CDG in AC Y: $1100 round trip, 50% miles, mediocre catering, 31" legroom, 3-4-3 6884 miles
LHR-DEL in 9W Y: $900 round trip, 100% miles, good catering, 32" legroom, 3-4-3 8200 miles
Two similar products with different value for money propositions.
Take Y+. In theory, I belong to the crowd that will spend a little bit extra to fly Y+. In theory. Outside Canada, I actually put it into practice (just had a pleasant experience with VS a month ago). The same reason applies:
YUL-CDG: ~$1900 rt, 2-4-2, 6884 miles (priority baggage, extra miles, dedicated check-in?)
Even if they're identical products, you're still getting a different value for the money paid. All of which is to say that Canada is a unique market in the worst possible way - we just pay more than everyone else for the same product.
I m happy to pay that $700 premium on LHR-DEL. On YOW/YUL-LHR? You're having a laugh.
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2434 posts, RR: 5 Reply 47, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 28574 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 33): TK gives me a return ticket from BOM via IST, with Y+ on the 10 hr IST leg and Y on IST-BOM legs for about $1800. And TK's Y+ offering will still be substantially better than what AC apparently has on offer. Nearly $2000 on a return Y+ fare from YUL to CDG? That's horrendous.
Well, actually, the same TK gives you IST-BUD in Y+ for about $ 2000 too. Not much difference compared to AC.
CPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4759 posts, RR: 26 Reply 49, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 28361 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 40): Having flown on a ten abreast Emirates model, I realised that unless you're, well shall we actually say fat, it's fine.
For an economy product, for what we pay, it's perfectly acceptable, for those who want more, pay more.
I beg to differ. I'm not fat, but large (6'3" / 200 lbs). I have broad shoulders, which I can't do anything about, even if I lost 50 pounds. On the 9W 77Ws I flew LHR-BOM and DEL-LHR, the flights were extremely uncomfortable. My shoulder protruded about 2-3 inches into the aisle, and I was being bumped by pax and trollies the entire flight. If I was in a middle or window seat, I'd be significantly invading the personal space of the pax next to me.
In fact, it's enough to put me off flying 9W's 77Ws (and any others like EK, AF, KL) in the future. I'd rather have the somewhat subpar product BA offers, but 9 across.
sankaps From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1265 posts, RR: 0 Reply 50, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 27741 times:
Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 49): I beg to differ. I'm not fat, but large (6'3" / 200 lbs). I have broad shoulders, which I can't do anything about, even if I lost 50 pounds. On the 9W 77Ws I flew LHR-BOM and DEL-LHR, the flights were extremely uncomfortable. My shoulder protruded about 2-3 inches into the aisle, and I was being bumped by pax and trollies the entire flight. If I was in a middle or window seat, I'd be significantly invading the personal space of the pax next to me.
Has Jet already converted their 77Ws to 10 abreast? Their seat maps still show them as 9 abreast...
reffado From Brazil, joined Feb 2012, 75 posts, RR: 0 Reply 51, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 27660 times:
Just when I thought TAM was already squeezing people in on their 362 seater 77W's. On a side note, do the "regular" AC 77W aircraft have first class? Or just business and premium economy?
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 53, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26942 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): As sad as I am to see this trend, I have to grudgingly admit, it IS the future.
I guess so. When we reflect on how it was with wide-bodies at their beginning, 8 or 9 abreast Ten years later, it was 9 or 10 for the same aircraft to cope with trends of lower fares. Some scheduled DC-10 or L-1011 operators even went for 10 seats across. After all, the 77W was seen as a 747 replacement, and with airlines such as TS on certain routes, the pressure is growing.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 54, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26834 times:
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 47): Well, actually, the same TK gives you IST-BUD in Y+ for about $ 2000 too. Not much difference compared to AC.
TK offers Y+ on short-haul? Since when? And when I checked for May, a rtn J ticket IST-BUD is around 2200 TYR or about CA$1240.
If you meant to say YYZ-BUD via IST, well it's $1500 restricted, $2000 unrestricted. The main difference here is that you are taking two flights. And YYZ-IST is a 10 hr long flight.
AC wants you to pay $2000 for premium economy on a 7 hr flight. TK charges $1500 for Y+ on a 10 hr flight, followed by a 2 hr flight. It's only $2000 if you go for an unrestricted ticket.
TK offers 46" seat pitch and 19.3" seats with a 2-3-2 layout in Y+. AC offers you 38" seat pitch with 20" seats in a 2-4-2 layout. AC has 24 seats on their 77W. Turkish has 63.
Not much difference compared to AC? You gotta be kidding. They aren't even in the same league.
TK has now become my default carrier to South Asia out of Toronto. Get my aeroplan points and get to enjoy a real Y+ service at a rather reasonable price. By the way, if I were choose to fly out of New York, by spending the night at my cousin's place there, I could get Y+ fares to BOM as low as $1400. The only way I'd pay $2000 for Y+ on AC, would be if AC offered direct service from YYZ to BOM. Otherwise, I'd rather fly TK and travel in Y from IST to BOM (a 6hr flight). The hard and soft product offered on TK in Comfort Class approaches J on several carriers. I can remember when J was actually exactly what TK offers in Y+ today, before today's lie-flats. And getting that for 10 hrs, makes up having to sit in Y for 6 hrs. And TK still gives you a 17.5" seat and 33" pitch in Y on the 332s and 333s they use on IST-BOM. Compare that to 17" seats and 31" pitch in Y on these new AC 77Ws.
The limited number of seats makes it clear to me. Y+ on AC is meant for the upgraders. This way they can avoid handing out too many J upgrades to Elites and Super Elites, and compel this crowd to actually pay for J more often. I'm curious how this game plan works out for AC. Anybody who travels internationally substantially would be far better off seeking a status match on another carrier and using a carrier that offers better service or a better cabin. AC is only worthwhile if you fly a lot inside North America.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8737 posts, RR: 52 Reply 55, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26950 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 36): One more concern. Number of washrooms. Imagine the lineups and the ummm comfort level....
6 lavatories for 400 economy passengers is going to create a mess. Currently they have 8 lavatories for 300 economy passengers on the 77Ws.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 6869 posts, RR: 7 Reply 56, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26631 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 24): Why is it unfortunate they are being provided the product they wish to pay for.
That would be true if the prices would be going down for the traveler but they aren't because air fares are not dictated by how many seats you can cram into a plane. Last time i checked no one asked for less room and more expensive air fares. I bet all you want that AC will charge at least the same, probably more on this plane than it charges today for the same ticket on a 9-abreast 77W. And that is why it's bad for consumers.
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2434 posts, RR: 5 Reply 57, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26523 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 54): If you meant to say BUD via IST, well it's $1500 restricted, $2000 unrestricted. The main difference here is that you are taking two flights. And IST is a 10 hr long flight.
Yes, my apologies. That's exactly what I meant. Now, I have to say that I could never find an Y+ fare under 2k. But I have to admit that I was always looking for tickets in July.
Quoting ytz (Reply 54): TK has now become my default carrier to South Asia out of Toronto.
As they are now able to tag on a flight from/to
Quoting ytz (Reply 54): Y+ on AC is meant for the upgraders.
As an AC Elite (or now Altitude E50K) I'm afraid you're right. And since I seldom manage to get domestic upgrades, I could as well switch to Miles&Smiles.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 58, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26501 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 55): 6 lavatories for 400 economy passengers is going to create a mess. Currently they have 8 lavatories for 300 economy passengers on the 77Ws.
It ain't great for the upper cabins either. I am assuming 3 washrooms for 60 pax in J and Y+. Certainly not the ratio that most AC J pax are used to.
If you're in Y though, better pack the nose clips and/or be prepared to hold it till you reach the destination. 78% increase in demand per washroom. I predict that at least one or two washrooms go out of service prior to arrival on the really long routes.
krisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1575 posts, RR: 0 Reply 59, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26446 times:
I've flown on AC's B77W a few times and have always considered them to be very comfortable planes, so I'm pretty disappointed at this new config. If this change becomes fleet wide on the 777s, can we expect to see frequency reductions on routes like YYZ-FRA or LHR where AC operated more than 1 daily flight in addition to other carriers flying the same route?
Quoting ytz (Reply 54): If you meant to say YYZ-BUD via IST, well it's $1500 restricted, $2000 unrestricted. The main difference here is that you are taking two flights. And YYZ-IST is a 10 hr long flight.
I just paid $950 for YYZ-BUD on KL, and in my opinion KL's service far exceeds that of AC. Not to mention the very convienent connection time at AMS.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 60, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26340 times:
Looking in the past, I can't think of any time where AC "misjudged" its Customers, and introduced a product that was a "bomb". The bottom line is just that ... the bottom line. With mid 80% load factors, there is room to grow, and if it does reflect in the bottom line, it will be changed quickly. The last thing I can think of is the 5 abreast Y product on the Viscount 700s. It did not last long, as was reconfigured after customer complaints.
But think about it, look at the routes AC flies, by a huge margin, the vast majority of Y passengers choose by price. As I have said many times before, Air Transat owes its very existence to the fact the comfort comes after price. I also have to assume that KLM, Air France and Air New Zealand know what they are doing.
I am going to assume the B77Ws will all eventually be reconfigured to this cabin layout. I am curious about the B77L, as nothing has been announced. Also, will this new J product be introduced on the A330 and B767?
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 61, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 26076 times:
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 57): As an AC Elite (or now Altitude E50K) I'm afraid you're right. And since I seldom manage to get domestic upgrades, I could as well switch to Miles&Smiles.
If you ever have time, you should simply visit the TK office in TO and chat with them about it.
I will admit that the one area where TK seriously lags is their call in centres. English skills aren't great. That said, the fares and service more than make up for it.
And here's another curious thing I discovered. Planning a trip to India for May. Decided I stop in Istanbul for the weekend. Never been, but it's been on my bucket list before I discovered TK. So I select a multi-city trip. YYZ-IST-BOM-IST. Choose Comfort class. The booking engine charges me about $10 less and books me on J for the IST-BOM. I don't know if I'll actually end up on J, but if I'm saving $10 and getting a stopover in IST, that's the cherry on top.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8737 posts, RR: 52 Reply 62, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 25997 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 58): It ain't great for the upper cabins either. I am assuming 3 washrooms for 60 pax in J and Y+. Certainly not the ratio that most AC J pax are used to.
They might fit two in front of 1L. Not sure about that.
The number of lavatories on planes seems to be going down. LH only has 2 for their main deck business class section of 60 seats on the 748. At least with LH you can go up stairs and use one of those lavs.
Quoting ytz (Reply 54):
TK offers Y+ on short-haul? Since when? And when I checked for May, a rtn J ticket IST-BUD is around 2200 TYR or about CA$1240.
If you meant to say YYZ-BUD via IST, well it's $1500 restricted, $2000 unrestricted. The main difference here is that you are taking two flights. And YYZ-IST is a 10 hr long flight.
AC wants you to pay $2000 for premium economy on a 7 hr flight. TK charges $1500 for Y+ on a 10 hr flight, followed by a 2 hr flight. It's only $2000 if you go for an unrestricted ticket.
TK offers 46" seat pitch and 19.3" seats with a 2-3-2 layout in Y+. AC offers you 38" seat pitch with 20" seats in a 2-4-2 layout. AC has 24 seats on their 77W. Turkish has 63.
Not much difference compared to AC? You gotta be kidding. They aren't even in the same league.
TK certainly has the best premium economy out there. You could argue for Air New Zealand, but that seat is kind of a unique oddity. I think TK is facing inadequate demand at the price point they need to break even. I've heard rumors that they will adjust their premium economy configuration since it isn't paying for itself.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 63, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 25688 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): But think about it, look at the routes AC flies, by a huge margin, the vast majority of Y passengers choose by price.
Agreed. However, this will only work if AC actually reduces its fares to try and steal more marketshare from TS. Why would any price sensitive customer choose AC if the prices are still higher and he/she is getting virtually the same product as TS?
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): I am curious about the B77L, as nothing has been announced.
Me too. 31" pitch for a 15 hr flight? No way I'd do it. But I'm sure there are enough penny pinchers who will.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): Also, will this new J product be introduced on the A330 and B767?
Curious that they didn't fill in the staff first. I don't see the point of retrofitting the 333s and 767s when some will move to Rouge and eventually get some kind of Rouge layout or get replaced by 787s.
By the way, is it safe to assume that AC Rouge will operate with similar standards? So 8-abreast Y and 6-abreast Y+ on Rouge 767s?
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 64, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 25617 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 63): Why would any price sensitive customer choose AC if the prices are still higher and he/she is getting virtually the same product as TS?
I was only using Transat as an example. Substitute AF, or KL in there.
Quoting ytz (Reply 63): By the way, is it safe to assume that AC Rouge will operate with similar standards? So 8-abreast Y and 6-abreast Y+ on Rouge 767s?
No. Rouge will be 7 abreast in Y, and the new Premium Economy product at the front of the aircraft will 6 abreast, on the B767.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2434 posts, RR: 5 Reply 65, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 25568 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): Also, will this new J product be introduced on the A330 and B767?
According to AC's representative on FT, no.
Quoting ytz (Reply 63): By the way, is it safe to assume that AC Rouge will operate with similar standards? So 8-abreast Y and 6-abreast Y+ on Rouge 767s?
The first two Rouge planes should be the "pineapples", meaning ex HA planes. Domestic J-like seats in the front cabin, 7 abreast Y. I don't know, however, the seat pitch. It won't be too much though, since they are talking about 29" on Rouge 319's.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 66, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 25448 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 62): TK certainly has the best premium economy out there. You could argue for Air New Zealand, but that seat is kind of a unique oddity.
IMHO, NZ does it best because they actually target Y+ as a "premium" economy experience, as opposed to an economy plus experience, which most american carriers sell. NZ's fares do reflect that though. But it is impressive that they actually spent time targeting and developing the premium economy experience as separate from economy or J-lite.
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 62): I think TK is facing inadequate demand at the price point they need to break even. I've heard rumors that they will adjust their premium economy configuration since it isn't paying for itself.
To be honest, I do think TK could and should scale back a bit. I for one would mind if they added an extra row in that cabin or went to 2-4-2. Or even both, 19" wide seats and 40" of legroom is still a great product for Y+ given their Comfort class service. Might let them reduce fares just a little bit to attract more pax. In my most humble opinion, a 5% fare cut would work wonders for this cabin, by placing it exactly in the price point that many pax might be able to impulse upgrade on the last screen when booking.
Adding an extra of 7 is a 11% capacity bump.
Going to 2-4-2 is a 14% bump.
Doing both? 27% capacity bump.
I would not mind TK going to 2-4-2 and 40" pitch and dropping the fares 10%. That said, I don't know if TK is concerned about cannibalizing J.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 67, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 25300 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 24): Everyone demands more comfort.. then they go online and book the cheapest fair.
And they do that even if the difference is only 5%. This is the free market at work, folks. The customers are getting exactly what their behavior shows they want.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): As sad as I am to see this trend, I have to grudgingly admit, it IS the future.
I believe every 777 in service in 2025 will have 10-abreast economy.
Quoting ytz (Reply 38): But in the future, I'll look for carriers operating A350s. If travelling in Y, you know you'll get an 18" wide seat.
17.5" (in place of the 787's 17.2"). The A350 is only a few inches wider than the 787, and 18" won't fit.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 68, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 25145 times:
Let me correct information from AC internal:
-The 5 B777-300ER with 458 seats will not do ultra long haul flying - this will not be the end state configuration for the balance of the 777s
-The business class product is not our end state product for the current 773s/772s and the B787s
Air France in the summer sends a daily 472 seater on YUL-CDG. Instead of investing multiple assets and frequencies to one route - why not make better use of the real estate onboard to address demand and cost at the same time. The deployment of these aircraft are done on a strategic basis, and again are not reflective of the end state Air Canada widebody onboard product.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 69, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 24829 times:
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 67): 17.5" (in place of the 787's 17.2"). The A350 is only a few inches wider than the 787, and 18" won't fit.
As per my understanding, the 350 would be closer to 18. In any event, something better than nothing. For me personally, I've got slightly broader shoulders. It's not the butt room, I find restrictive, it's the fact that I just can't move my torso much lest I impact my neighbours.
But I guess, this gives us a good idea of what to expect from AC going forward. Especially on the 787s. AC will be LCC service without LCC fares.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2476 posts, RR: 35 Reply 70, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 24425 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 24): It always amazes me how few Y+ seats will be in any cabin. It shows how few people are willing to pay for comfort. I understand J/C is often too pricey, but this shows that only 6% of Y passengers are willing to pay for comfort.
It amazes me how poorly most airlines sell Y+. Another problem is that the package varies significantly between airlines so what is a good deal on one isn't nearly as good on another even though the price is essentially the same.
From what I see airlines see it as a way to lose C customers instead of up-sell Y.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
cschleic From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1030 posts, RR: 0 Reply 72, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 23876 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 38): Thankfully, Airbus didn't make it possible for the airlines to go 10-abreast.
But don't some 330 operators have 9 across, instead of the usual 8? Air Transat comes to mind. Seat width is 16.5 (per seatguru) vs. 18.0 for their "usual" 330. Others?
Qantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1251 posts, RR: 4 Reply 73, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 23299 times:
New J seat. They are naming this one "Executive First Seat" with the herringbone seat being the "Executive First Suite"
The 12 77W's currently in the fleet will maintain their current config.
The 5 new 77W's will come in the new config with the first aircraft arriving in July 2013.
jreuschl From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 412 posts, RR: 0 Reply 74, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 23042 times:
How does this high-density seat width compare to say a regular 73x/A32x seat? Actually, it appears it would be the same, correct? So some passengers who do not fly a lot may not notice any difference.
LondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 75, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 22911 times:
Quoting cschleic (Reply 72): But don't some 330 operators have 9 across, instead of the usual 8? Air Transat comes to mind. Seat width is 16.5 (per seatguru) vs. 18.0 for their "usual" 330. Others?
Air AsiaX has 3-3-3 seating on both its A330s and A340s. Not sure if the A340s are in service right now (since Air AsiaX withdrew from Europe) but the A300s operate longish routes within the region, including Australia.
By the way, when Air AsiaX acquires A350s, it will configure them with a dense 10-across Y cabin.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 77, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 22109 times:
Quoting LondonCity (Reply 75): Air AsiaX has 3-3-3 seating on both its A330s and A340s. Not sure if the A340s are in service right now (since Air AsiaX withdrew from Europe) but the A300s operate longish routes within the region, including Australia.
Compare Air Asia's fares for the same distance though.
Air Canada is increasing passenger capacity on its 77W by 31%. I can't even picture AC dropping YUL-CDG fares by 10%. If AC were to drop round trip fares for YUL-CDG to under $1000 (not including taxes), then it might be worth supporting. From the looks of it though, AC's fares will still be 40% than TS. So what's the point? Surely, non-status aeroplan points and marginally better food can't cost hundreds of dollars?
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 78, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 21757 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 77): From the looks of it though, AC's fares will still be 40% than TS. So what's the point? Surely, non-status aeroplan points and marginally better food can't cost hundreds of dollars
The intention is for Air Canada to match TS pricing. This is a clear message that Air Canada intends on being a serious competitor in the Montreal-Paris market (also the largest international citypair in Canada) and compete with lower cost carriers such as TS/SS.
This type of decision is not made without a careful review of our commercial strategy for this market.
I much prefer the staggered J seats as on the new AC 77Ws to the herringbone layout. Many passenges prefefer to face forward, and the new seats (like those on LX A330/340s and others) make better use of the floor space since your legs fit into the space between the offset seats in front.
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): 24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
I'll hold of judging for now I fear you may be right.
Enough passengers will be willing to pay the higher fares. 24 seats at twice the Y fare is the same as 48 seats at 150% of the Y fare, and it leaves room for more Y seats. The routes where these high-density 77Ws are intended to be used also probably aren't the routes with the highest premium Y demand. If demand proves higher than expected it's not difficult to expand the W cabin.
Quoting airceo (Reply 19): Sitting 10 abreast from DXB to India is one thing, sitting 10 abreast from YYZ to India is quit another.
Many 10-abreast 77Ws operate nonstop sectors much further than YYZ-India, for example EK LAX/SFO-DXB, more than 1,000 miles further than YYZ-DEL.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 26):
I guess most majors will eventually get there on their B77Ws.
As sad as I am to see this trend, I have to grudgingly admit, it IS the future. While by percentage, currently flying 9-abreast B777s outnumber 10-abreast B777s, the fact is on new build B777s, the ratio is 5:1 for 10 vs. 9 abreast configurations.
Fortunately AC 767s and A330s will still be around for a few years.
Quoting reffado (Reply 51): On a side note, do the "regular" AC 77W aircraft have first class? Or just business and premium economy?
AC dropped F class at least 20 years ago if not longer.
Quoting krisyyz (Reply 59): I just paid $950 for YYZ-BUD on KL, and in my opinion KL's service far exceeds that of AC
I doubt you were on a KL 10-abreast 77W on that trip.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): The last thing I can think of is the 5 abreast Y product on the Viscount 700s. It did not last long, as was reconfigured after customer complaints.
If memory correct AC converted the Viscounts from the 2-class layout (12 F 4-abreast, 39 Y 5-abreast except last row 4-abreast) to 4-abreast all-Y (48 seats), with slightly less pitch than the original all-F class 44-seat layout but basically the same seats that were originally sold as F class, about the the time the DC-9 was introduced. It gave passengers the option of a faster 5-abreast DC-9 or a more comfortable but slower Viscount for the remaining years of Viscount service. And there was very little demand for the 12 F class seats on the routes being operated by the Viscounts by then. They were probably empty on many flights. Made economic sense to both improve Y comfort whille having another 9 Y seats to sell.
Quoting ytz (Reply 63): By the way, is it safe to assume that AC Rouge will operate with similar standards? So 8-abreast Y and 6-abreast Y+ on Rouge 767s?
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 80, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 21588 times:
Quoting flyyul (Reply 68): The deployment of these aircraft are done on a strategic basis, and again are not reflective of the end state Air Canada widebody onboard product.
I don't buy that very easily. Interim till the 787? And they were willing to spend millions and yet another configuration? I could see this layout becoming standard for all TATL and all TPAC flights less than 12 hours (basically excluding HKG). I am willing to bet that we'll see 77Hs on YYZ-LHR/CDG/FRA/MUC/GRU/GIG and on YVR-INC/NRT/PEK/PVG
And what a fragmented mess. Executives suites are the old J. Executives Seats are the new J. And two different Y products and a whole different class (Y+) on the same aircraft type.
This should do wonders for AC's reputation with the flying public, especially when equipment changes happen and patrons soon discover that an AC 77W doesn't mean the same thing all the time.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 81, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 21412 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 80): This should do wonders for AC's reputation with the flying public, especially when equipment changes happen and patrons soon discover that an AC 77W doesn't mean the same thing all the time.
Different routes often have vastly different characteristics. Other carriers cope with similar situations. For example KL 77Ws are 10-abreast and their 77Es are 9-abreast. Do you think many KL passengers know the difference?
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 82, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 21378 times:
Quoting flyyul (Reply 78): The intention is for Air Canada to match TS pricing.
You should let the people who run your websites know. The numbers I quoted were for end march and end August.
Now if AC is dropping Y fares by 25% then you'll find many of us will happily support the configuration change. But despite what you say, I have my doubts that the fare cuts will be that substantial. With TS, you can fly YUL-CDG for $800 return, all in. AC is at least 30-40% higher at any given time of year. Not even in the ballpark of TS.
I am curious to see when this change to match TS will happen.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 83, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 21120 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 81): Do you think many KL passengers know the difference?
Your frequent fliers most certainly will. And if they don't like the product, well....
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 81): Different routes often have vastly different characteristics. Other carriers cope with similar situations. For example KL 77Ws are 10-abreast and their 77Es are 9-abreast.
If that's the case, what's the point of Rouge? AC can clearly degrade mainline service sufficiently so that it can charge less. Effectively, this 77H is nothing more than a Rouge bird with a J cabin (one in which AC is fitting 50% more seats than its other 77W)?
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 84, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 21017 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 83): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 81):
Different routes often have vastly different characteristics. Other carriers cope with similar situations. For example KL 77Ws are 10-abreast and their 77Es are 9-abreast.
If that's the case, what's the point of Rouge? AC can clearly degrade mainline service sufficiently so that it can charge less. Effectively, this 77H is nothing more than a Rouge bird with a J cabin
Difference is that the high-density 77Ws are intended for routes that have strong price-sensitive Y class demand but also significant premium demand, while Rouge is directed at markets with little or no premium demand.
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 85, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20913 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 80): I don't buy that very easily. Interim till the 787? And they were willing to spend millions and yet another configuration? I could see this layout becoming standard for all TATL and all TPAC flights less than 12 hours (basically excluding HKG). I am willing to bet that we'll see 77Hs on LHR/CDG/FRA/MUC/GRU/GIG and on YVR-INC/NRT/PEK/PVG
And what a fragmented mess. Executives suites are the old J. Executives Seats are the new J. And two different Y products and a whole different class (Y ) on the same aircraft type.
This should do wonders for AC's reputation with the flying public, especially when equipment changes happen and patrons soon discover that an AC 77W doesn't mean the same thing all the time.
AC doesn't want to invest more assets in terms of frequency but rather better use of existing frequency offering in heavily slot restricted airports.
YTZ - i'm commenting based on the fact that i'm involved in this particular project. Would be wise for you to hear me about before you start doubting what I'm saying in this particular thread.
This WILL NOT be our end state product nor configuration for the remaining fleet. More noise will be made about this at a later date.
Let me take you through the Delta Airlines widebody product(s)
Sub-fleets are very healthy and normal practice in the airline industry. As mentioned, these aircrafts are aimed at markets where it's much more economical to enhance seating density rather than adding costly frequency (more fuel, more pilots, more staff, more maintenance etc etc.). On a market like Montreal-Paris the comparables are;
Air France - 10 abreast non lie flat C
Air Transat - 9 abreast on an A330-200
Corsair - 586 seats on a B747-400
krisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1575 posts, RR: 0 Reply 86, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20847 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 79):
I doubt you were on a KL 10-abreast 77W on that trip.
No, on a 10 abreast 744.
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 81): . For example KL 77Ws are 10-abreast and their 77Es are 9-abreast. Do you think many KL passengers know the difference?
I even found KL's 3-3-3 772 a bit a bit tight. AKAIK, most airlines that switched their 777s to 10 abreast took most of the space from the aisles, so the FA's would probably notice more than the pax.
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 87, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20626 times:
Quoting cschleic (Reply 72): Quoting ytz (Reply 38): Thankfully, Airbus didn't make it possible for the airlines to go 10-abreast.
But don't some 330 operators have 9 across, instead of the usual 8? Air Transat comes to mind. Seat width is 16.5 (per seatguru) vs. 18.0 for their "usual" 330. Others?
Indeed some airlines have a 9 across. Doing that, is a bit like cramming 10 across on a DC-10 or MD-11 comfort-wise, as some airlines have done, and not just charter airlines.
CF105Arrow From Canada, joined Oct 2007, 317 posts, RR: 0 Reply 88, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20410 times:
Flyyul, why does the Executive First seat pitch differ, isn't it possible to use a more uniform seat pitch rather than 3 inches difference between two seats? is it 2 different seat pitches or even more?
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 89, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20378 times:
@flyyul
Fair enough. The comment wasn't specifically directed at you personally.
========
Overall, I think I'm most disappointed by the size of the Y+ cabin. I can understand going 10-abreast in J to reduce costs. But the tiny Y+ cabin seems almost entirely directed at reducing the number of non-paying status upgraders in J, rather than an attractive new proposition to entice some Y flyers (say those on corporate travel) to upgrade.
Oh well, I guess AC has crunched the numbers and believes this is what will pay the bills.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 90, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20269 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 60): But think about it, look at the routes AC flies, by a huge margin, the vast majority of Y passengers choose by price. As I have said many times before, Air Transat owes its very existence to the fact the comfort comes after price. I also have to assume that KLM, Air France and Air New Zealand know what they are doing.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 64): I was only using Transat as an example. Substitute AF, or KL in there.
AF/KL and TS are very different entities. One has a global network - the other caters to folk for whom time isn't an issue. For AC to match AF/KL on anything other than YUL-CDG, it will have to tap into a bigger network provided by the LH group. Presumably they have some input on how low fares can go for points east/south of Europe?
Quoting flyyul (Reply 68): The deployment of these aircraft are done on a strategic basis, and again are not reflective of the end state Air Canada widebody onboard product.
Those aircraft could theoretically show up anywhere as an equipment swap - what happens to Y+ pax then? I mean, you might get out of it on the Canada-EU leg, but on the EU-Canada leg, there are very clear rules about involuntary downgrades. Given AC's reticence to honour EU laws on cancellation, those involuntary downgrade compensation rules could get expensive. (I am sure AC will deny any reticence, but anyone who's been in that situation knows the kind of straight-faced lies that AC uses - until a third party in the EU is engaged to go and collect the money, in which case AC suddenly does an about face 'determines' that it owes you the compensation, and lets you know about this in an email that also revokes those pitiful 5-10% discounts they initially try to peddle as compensation.)
Quoting flyyul (Reply 78): The intention is for Air Canada to match TS pricing.
$800 tickets on mainline AC? If that is the end state, I support it wholeheartedly. Of course with the flight costing $1060 right now, the sight of a 20% decline would make a believer out of even the most cynical of us.
Quoting ytz (Reply 69): AC will be LCC service without LCC fares.
I take it you haven't flown AC transborder? AC is already LCC service without LCC fares. Its just being rolled out system wide.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 64): No. Rouge will be 7 abreast in Y, and the new Premium Economy product at the front of the aircraft will 6 abreast, on the B767.
I suppose I can thank my lucky stars that I fly mostly out of YOW and there's no real threat of one of these 3-4-3 birds ending up here. Long live the 767.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 91, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 20115 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 90): Quoting ytz (Reply 69):
AC will be LCC service without LCC fares.
I take it you haven't flown AC transborder? AC is already LCC service without LCC fares.
But who isn't within North America these days, leaving aside the odd niche operator like Porter? In my experience AC's service on domestic/transborder flights is fully competitive, and usually better, than their direct competitors.
9252fly From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 1342 posts, RR: 0 Reply 92, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 19985 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 89): Oh well, I guess AC has crunched the numbers and believes this is what will pay the bills.
In very general terms,I find a.net postings tend to question decisions by airlines to make changes as if they haven't the slightest clue what they are doing. You can be very assured that they've "crunched the numbers". The business is all about change and adapting, to do nothing in a dynamic marketplace would spell doom.I personally don't like the new 10 Y configuration,but if it means AC will stay viable and has a vision of the future,then so be it. Rouge is another attempt to adapt to today's realities and it's AC signal that they are done with having their market share eroded and lunch eaten. Just consider the significant capacity and service increases in the western Canada regional market;a clear message to WS Encore that the gloves-are-off. Will AC be successful with their strategy? Hard to say,they must try though as the alternative is an inevitable death by a thousand cuts.
WildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2434 posts, RR: 5 Reply 93, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 19555 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 89): But the tiny Y+ cabin seems almost entirely directed at reducing the number of non-paying status upgraders in J, rather than an attractive new proposition to entice some Y flyers (say those on corporate travel) to upgrade.
Currently it's impossible to upgrade from Y to O using E-upgrades. As far as upgrading from O to J is concerned, the same rules apply as for the M fare bucket. Of course, this may change with time. However, I'm afraid that the rare op-ups will be now to O instead of J.
Quoting ytz (Reply 77): Surely, non-status aeroplan points and marginally better food can't cost hundreds of dollars?
Those Aeroplan points are in fact AQM's, but they still aren't worth hundreds of dollars.
brilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3168 posts, RR: 1 Reply 95, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 19269 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 91):
But who isn't within North America these days, leaving aside the odd niche operator like Porter? In my experience AC's service on domestic/transborder flights is fully competitive, and usually better, than their direct competitors.
I agree.
Quoting flyyul (Reply 68):
Let me correct information from AC internal:
-The 5 B777-300ER with 458 seats will not do ultra long haul flying - this will not be the end state configuration for the balance of the 777s
-The business class product is not our end state product for the current 773s/772s and the B787s
Air France in the summer sends a daily 472 seater on YUL-CDG. Instead of investing multiple assets and frequencies to one route - why not make better use of the real estate onboard to address demand and cost at the same time. The deployment of these aircraft are done on a strategic basis, and again are not reflective of the end state Air Canada widebody onboard product.
Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 73): The 12 77W's currently in the fleet will maintain their current config.
The 5 new 77W's will come in the new config with the first aircraft arriving in July 2013.
That is what I was told by a gentleman I was sitting beside on my last flight to LHR.
I much prefer the J seats as on the new AC 77Ws to the herringbone layout. Many passenges prefefer to face forward, and the new seats (like those on LX A330/340s and others) make better use of the floor space since your legs fit into the space between the offset seats in front.
Quoting airceo (Reply 19):
24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
I'll hold of judging for now I fear you may be right.
Enough passengers will be willing to pay the higher fares. 24 seats at twice the Y fare is the same as 48 seats at 150% of the Y fare, and it leaves room for more Y seats. The routes where these high-density 77Ws are intended to be used also probably aren't the routes with the highest premium Y demand. If demand proves higher than expected it's not difficult to expand the W cabin.
Quoting ytz (Reply 80): I don't buy that very easily. Interim till the 787? And they were willing to spend millions and yet another configuration? I could see this layout becoming standard for all TATL and all TPAC flights less than 12 hours (basically excluding HKG). I am willing to bet that we'll see 77Hs on YYZ-LHR/CDG/FRA/MUC/GRU/GIG and on YVR-INC/NRT/PEK/PVG
We won't see the changes on the Asian routes as they will remain with the existing aircraft, from what I am to understand.
[quote=ytz,reply=83]
If that's the case, what's the point of Rouge? AC can clearly degrade mainline service sufficiently so that it can charge less. Effectively, this 77H is nothing more than a Rouge bird with a J cabin (one in which AC is fitting 50% more seats than its other 77W)?[/quote
Rouge is being used by the tourists and non business travelers, by the looks of their routings from what I have read.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 96, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 17326 times:
Quoting davidCA (Reply 94): Why? YUL-CDG could have sufficient point-to-point traffic to fill a high density aircraft. So might other markets.
That post was a response to a post comparing AC to AF/KL. Most ex-Canada traffic on KL is not headed to AMS - it feeds other airports.
Which markets are you thinking of? Apart from the LHR routes (some, not all of them), I doubt theres too many point-to-point markets that would need a high density 777. AC sends a lot of its metal to FRA which definitely doesn't have the point-to-point traffic required (85%+ of the YOW-FRA flight is transit). Most of the European routes are generally leisure heavy, and many of them are slated to go to Rouge 767s.
Which begs the question, as alluded to by some posters: are these 777s going to go to Rouge eventually?
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 97, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 17263 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 96): AC sends a lot of its metal to FRA which definitely doesn't have the point-to-point traffic required (85%+ of the YOW-FRA flight is transit).
However Canada-Germany is a very large O&D market and many passengers on FRA flights are connecting to other cities in Germany.
YVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2084 posts, RR: 0 Reply 100, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16386 times:
Oh well, as a leisure traveller with not a lot of spare change, may as well continue to save $500-1000 each and stick with TS. Same difference.
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 40): But so very few will pay out of their own pockets if course.
Maybe some of us dont have it in their pockets. We are fairly well off, but I would still rather spend the $900 I saved while on vacation. Not to mention fares in Canada are pretty high compared to most other markets to start with.
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 55): 6 lavatories for 400 economy passengers is going to create a mess
Thanks for the amusing visual Bring your own diaper!
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 3): I guess they are taking a page from AF's book?
behramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, RR: 43 Reply 101, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16156 times:
Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 100): They will get eaten alive by CX (more than they are...)
LOL...you are blindly stating a fact without knowing the actual truth. FYI in 2012, out of the YYZ-HKG total market size of 293,000 pax, the market share split was as follows:
CX 48%
AC 42%
UA 7%
Others 3%
So unfortunately for you, AC will not and are currently not "being eaten up alive" on the YYZ-HKG route. In fact credit should go more to AC here because they are operating this route using a smaller 260 seater B777-200LR versus CX who use a 360 seater B777-300ER !
Carfield From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1727 posts, RR: 9 Reply 102, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16070 times:
I really don't think it is fair to compared Air Asia X with Air Canada. Air Asia X is a LCC (despite one can argue it possible has friendlier staffs all around), but it makes itself clear that Air Asia X is a low cost airline, and of course, they can squeeze in as many seats as they want. When most customers choose to fly Air Asia X, they know what they are buying into. It is a budget airline and what do you expect? Plus Air Asia X is not doing super long haul as of now... they give up on the European markets, and only go to Middle East, North Asia, and Australia now. New Zealand is possibly the furthest.
However I am very disappointed with Air Canada's new 777-300ER configuration. It is a major downgrade in economy class, and the new business class seat is not particularly impressive, especially there will only be six solo seats now. Most people travel solo up front, and the previous herringbone seats seem to be make more sense. Plus the problem with this staggering seat is the lack of foot space for the solo seats. It is really not an improvement from the previous herringbone configuration. I think AC should have just do a quick refreshing of its old suites, and that will be sufficient. Air Canada does not have a big premium market and the current suites are good enough.
The only positive is the introduction of Premium Economy but I will reserve my judgment till I see the real product in action, and see what kind of meals are offered. Will the F/As give special attention to this cabin, or treat it just like economy anyway but with a fancier meal tray and hot towel before each meals? However I like the Power Port installation, but I am curious if Y will at least power port or USB port now or an improved PTV!
Maybe I am old school - but I really feel that full service airlines should not go the LCC track. Ten abreast in 777s are reserved for charter and LCC airlines, not for full service airlines. Unfortunately that is the trend in 2013 and I am sure Air Canada will just be the second airline introducing ten abreast seating in 2013 so far (AA first). More to come! I am sure United will get the idea soon. 787 is a beautiful plane but nine breast seating in Y just kills it. Despite better humidity and larger windows, the 17 inch wide seat will destroy all the positive aspects. Premium Economy is a good business product, but the price is very "high" when economy is further deteriorated to 17 inch width.
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 103, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 15861 times:
It's disappointing to see service standards drop in the industry - but as air travel becomes more commoditized this will become the norm.
The biggest controllable item in the CASM calculation - is seating density. How can AC compete when carriers like TS, AF, KL, TK, EK - all have much lower CASMs than AC at base density.
Air Canada is being very pro-active, i'm sure the 77Hs are going to be an overwhelming success as are AF's COI 77W product.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 96): Which markets are you thinking of? Apart from the LHR routes (some, not all of them), I doubt theres too many point-to-point markets that would need a high density 777. AC sends a lot of its metal to FRA which definitely doesn't have the point-to-point traffic required (85% of the YOW-FRA flight is transit). Most of the European routes are generally leisure heavy, and many of them are slated to go to Rouge 767s.
The only existing route slated to go to Rouge is ATH. Rouge 767s are otherwise to operate new routes to VCE and EDI.
As for the 77H, we're only talking about 5 aircraft. CDG might make use of 2 of them from YUL and YYZ. Otherwise, some LHR frequencies as you suggest. Japan-Western Canada in summer and/or ski seasons. Caribbean and maybe Florida beach destinations during off-peak periods for TATL.. AC previously operated 496-seat 747s to BGI, Jamaica, FLL, MIA and TPA. The 77W was at one time supposed to be deployed on some CUN frequencies, although it didn't actually happen.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3211 posts, RR: 9 Reply 105, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 15568 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 96): Which markets are you thinking of? Apart from the LHR routes (some, not all of them), I doubt theres too many point-to-point markets that would need a high density 777. AC sends a lot of its metal to FRA which definitely doesn't have the point-to-point traffic required (85%+ of the YOW-FRA flight is transit).
As said earlier in this thread there is probably not enough business traffic on a lot of these Euro routes and the South American ones to warrant a huge amount of frequencies and using a 77W like this reduces the amount of flights you need.
This saves maintenance costs by reducing the amount of cycles an aircraft uses as well as the additional costs of putting multiple crews in FRA for their rest cycle. It also allows AC to expand a limited fleet to new destinations such as in Asia where the existing 77W's can be sent.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 96): Most of the European routes are generally leisure heavy, and many of them are slated to go to Rouge 767s.
Rouge will be basically mimicking TS and Sunwing's model where it will serve very seasonal leisure routes to Europe in the summer and sun destinations in the winter (many of these not being daily).
Quoting Mikey86 (Reply 98): No need for an A380 when you can pack people in a 77W to this amount - who cares about space and comfort AC says :P!
You can and the YYZ-Europe wouldn't be weight restricted either as it uses 50-60% the available range of a 77W. It sucks for passengers but this is the way things are going and AC is not using this layout on YVR-SYD in the near future.
I don't even think YYZ-Europe is really long haul as I could deal with 10x abreast for about 9 hours and any longer I will be paying for that A380.
Quoting Carfield (Reply 102): Maybe I am old school - but I really feel that full service airlines should not go the LCC track.
I tend to agree but is the marketplace going to pay those costs and the answer is a resounding "NO". In the current economic climate even J isn't as common with business travellers have to fly Y as well, also how many are paying for J.
Hopefully a sustainable balance is reached before we are flying like on WN across the pond.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3130 posts, RR: 4 Reply 107, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14726 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 40):
Having flown on a ten abreast Emirates model, I realised that unless you're, well shall we actually say fat, it's fine
depends. I'm wider than a 17.2" Y class seat regardless of how fat or skinny I am. Shoulder width doesn't care about that.... And EK's 777 requires a special cutout on the window seat to match the sidewall curve. So for someone used to using the extra space between the seat and window on narrowbodies to fit at all... well I'm not going to fit on a 10Y 777 unless its a aisle seat.
questions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 108, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 14730 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 40): that unless you're, well shall we actually say fat, it's fine.
Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 49): I'm not fat, but large (6'3" / 200 lbs). I have broad shoulders, which I can't do anything about, even if I lost 50 pounds. On the 9W 77Ws I flew LHR-BOM and DEL-LHR, the flights were extremely uncomfortable. My shoulder protruded about 2-3 inches into the aisle, and I was being bumped by pax and trollies the entire flight.
Narrower seats and more pax abreast also mean your knees can't spread naturally. If you have big balls, it's REALLY uncomfortable flying with your legs together. With narrow seats your natural spread will cause your knees to go into your seat mate's space and/or into the aisles.
YVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2084 posts, RR: 0 Reply 111, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 14254 times:
Quoting behramjee (Reply 101): LOL...you are blindly stating a fact without knowing the actual truth. FYI in 2012, out of the YYZ-HKG total market size of 293,000 pax, the market share split was as follows:
CX 48%
AC 42%
UA 7%
Others 3%
So unfortunately for you, AC will not and are currently not "being eaten up alive" on the YYZ-HKG route. In fact credit should go more to AC here because they are operating this route using a smaller 260 seater B777-200LR versus CX who use a 360 seater B777-300ER !
Sorry, I am not in the center of the universe, I am in YVR - should have been clearer thats what I was referring to when this seat plan becomes the inevitable across the fleet.
Skydrol From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 859 posts, RR: 11 Reply 113, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 13365 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 112): Forget the heads. Competition for overhead bins is going to be a contact sport!
While the overhead space will create chaos during boarding, the lack of lavatories is ignorant, irresponsible and unsafe. For safety, Air Canada (and other airlines) recommend passengers remain in their seats with their seat belts fastened, even without the fasten seatbelt light on. But with this super-high density 777 layout, significanty raising the passenger to lav ratio, increasing both the number of passengers standing in line ups, and the length of time they will be standing. And these flights are expected to be operated trans-pacific, where sudden, severe turbulence has been known to happen? Wow, what a great idea!
abrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 4915 posts, RR: 55 Reply 115, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 10921 times:
Amazing isn't it. When you have poor service and bad employee morale, no matter what you do, it turns negative. I can't believe the difference in the 2 results in Canada.
AC's sub par management needs to go. Why have the same team lead key commercial planning and sales teams when they make losses? RM is good at AC; but their network choices remain uninspiring.
LondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 116, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 10691 times:
Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 114): Unless I know an airline has 9Y 777s, it's getting to the stage where I will soon have to make sure my flights aren't on that plane, which is a shame.
There are still some 9-abreast B777 certainties like BA, JAL, CX, SQ and UA. But for how much longer ?
Fair enough, but if they're connecting onto other flights, AC's pricing flexibility is still limited by how much or how little a partner airline is willing to charge - an issue which AF/KL doesn't face. Will LH be happy to sell seats to AC at cut rate prices when it can command more on a route?
I was thinking Rouge long term, not Rouge as it is now (4 aircraft). Many EU leisure routes will end up becoming Rouge 767 destinations, no? Putting a 77H on Florida will be quite a sight.
The issue a lot of posters are alluding to is the sharp degradation of this so-called 'mainline' product even as the LCC line is rolled out. This 77H is actually more uncomfortable than the 767s that will go to Rouge, which begs the question: how much are they going to gut the Rouge product to allow AC mainline to maintain its distinctness. If these 77Hs go to Rouge, then those concerns will be moot, but if this is the way AC is going on mainline, then Rouge ... I shudder to think what it will become.
To be fair, AC's service from check in to deboarding is relatively smooth (baggage reclaim being the exception - its awfully slow at times). It's the very poor value-for-money component and the utterly disingenuous handling of IRROPS (think poorly informed ground staff and deliberate obfuscation by customer service) that grates us the most.
That said, AC's value for money ex -US is very good compared to its ex-Canada fares. It all boils down to competition. Open Canada's skies and watch AC whip itself into shape. Or so we hope. Management has been nothing short of atrocious - after objecting to ME carriers on the grounds that they would cost Canada 10,000 aviation jobs, AC has somehow contrived to eliminate 2000+ high skilled jobs anyway, which isn't helping perception much.
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 118, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10616 times:
Quoting abrelosojos (Reply 115): AC's sub par management needs to go. Why have the same team lead key commercial planning and sales teams when they make losses? RM is good at AC; but their network choices remain uninspiring.
Saludos,
A.
I'm sorry Abrelosojos. Did you want us to launch Whitehorse - Paris service? I would love to hear your views on our uninspiring network
AirCanada787 From Canada, joined Nov 2010, 260 posts, RR: 0 Reply 119, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10364 times:
Quoting Carfield (Reply 102): However I like the Power Port installation, but I am curious if Y will at least power port or USB port now or an improved PTV!
In Y AC already has power ports, usually two for every three seats or when there are just groupings of two seats at every seat. Every seat also has a USB port.
The mind, like a parachute, functions only when open.
Looking at the seat map,I'll guess that each lavatory position has more than one. Typically it's at least two,or possibly four depending on the location in the cabin.
Kaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2578 posts, RR: 24 Reply 121, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 10139 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 41): If the AC Y+ cabin works out cheaper via SYD and YVR to North America with a good offering then AC could very well be getting my North American business.
If you go that way, become an Aeroplan member as well - it's a 'real' FF program that's much better than NZ's, with rewards/upgrades that you can actually use.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 41): thankfully the Y+ cabin is getting a change
It's certainly not currently worth the premium, which is a pity as YOW-YVR-AKL is the best route for me, but the 772 does YVR-AKL.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3211 posts, RR: 9 Reply 122, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 10130 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 117): The issue a lot of posters are alluding to is the sharp degradation of this so-called 'mainline' product even as the LCC line is rolled out.
People have decided with their wallets that being cramped for 8 hours is worth saving $50 also if you hop on EK you have the same layout on a 77W and so do many other airlines.
The elasticity of demand on airline tickets is one of the highest for any given consumer product and unless that trend changes this is what airlines are going to do in order to stay competitive. A fare difference of even $10 means a potential customer is not flying AC and going with a competitor or vice-versa.
Perhaps niche airlines will emerge in the future to fill that gap of people wanting a decent Y class but it will be somewhat limited.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 117): Open Canada's skies and watch AC whip itself into shape. Or so we hope.
I know you don't want to believe it but AC has competition on many of its routes and more airlines are or will be coming in, especially from Asia.
The comparison with EK is a bit odd. Last I heard, they have 33"+ legroom in Y to compensate for seat width. AC has actually reduced its seat pitch. Throw in catering and IFE and it's pretty clear that the comparison does not hold. Simply put, EK offers a superior product in every respect. You would be better off comparing AC with AA - they're roughly the same level now.
As for competition, prices ex-Canada speak for themself. High prices = low competition. Low prices = high competition. I don't think it's any great secret that prices ex-Canada are amongst the highest in the world in comparison to flights of similar duration elsewhere. However I accept that my views on Canada's competitiveness are likely only limited to those of us who have lived/travelled outside Canada on our own dime and have a frame of reference that we can use to gauge the value an airfare gives us.
When the prices start looking like the rest of the world, I will admit that Canada is as competitive as the rest of the world. Wouldn't hold my breath though.
The comparison with EK is a bit odd. Last I heard, they have 33"+ legroom in Y to compensate for seat width. AC has actually reduced its seat pitch. Throw in catering and IFE and it's pretty clear that the comparison does not hold. Simply put, EK offers a superior product in every respect. You would be better off comparing AC with AA - they're roughly the same level now.
FWIW, I eagerly await the day AC actually starts offering EK prices (although the value for money proposition will still be weaker - what with paying an EK fare for a subpar product).
As for competition, prices ex-Canada speak for themself. High prices = low competition. Low prices = high competition. I don't think it's any great secret that prices ex-Canada are amongst the highest in the world in comparison to flights of similar duration elsewhere. However I accept that my views on Canada's competitiveness are likely only limited to those of us who have lived/travelled outside Canada on our own dime and have a frame of reference that we can use to gauge the value an airfare gives us.
When the prices start looking like the rest of the world, I will admit that Canada is as competitive as the rest of the world. Wouldn't hold my breath though.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3211 posts, RR: 9 Reply 126, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 10016 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 123): I don't think it's any great secret that prices ex-Canada are amongst the highest in the world in comparison to flights of similar duration elsewhere.
Flight length has nothing to do with price its all about supply and demand at the end of the day and what the market can support. In terms of flights to Europe and the US any airline at any time can challenge AC on any of its routes if they feel that they are raking it in. The biggest reason that prices in Canada are higher are taxes, and the fact that there isn't simply the market size to add a large amount of competition in sustainable manner (they all will lose money).
It sucks but Canada has 34 million people in such a large area and the US has 312 million people in a slightly smaller area and we just don't have the market size to get those economies of scale that the US enjoys. This isn't just limited to airlines but most consumer products.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 123): The comparison with EK is a bit odd. Last I heard, they have 33"+ legroom in Y to compensate for seat width. AC has actually reduced its seat pitch.
Fair point, I would referring to the 3-4-3 in Y on a 77W. Also EK could never do this because if they put 450 seats in a 77W and wanted to fly it to North America or Australia it would be well over its MTOW.
flyboy22 From Canada, joined Nov 2012, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 127, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 9889 times:
Glad to see this change to AC's 77W's. The herringbone layout of the Executive First cabin was a nuisance, especially when trying to chat with another passenger, and although the staggered layout offers less privacy, it's much more convienient when traveling with family or friends.
Also nice to see that the gap between Y and J has been bridged with Y+, although 24 seats is unrealistic if AC expects to make a niche market out of this. Presumably it's for the upgraders.
The only low note with the new layout is the Y configuration. 3-4-3 is a tight squeeze and going from a 32" pitch to a 31" pitch is disappointing.
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, although an article by Canada Newswire also announced that the cabin will feature refreshed modern, neutral tones. Hope to see this fleetwide - the old seat covers were hideous.
I don't think airport taxes explain it all away. It's not that airlines aren't taking it on Canada - it's more that they have to use their resources carefully. This is, of course, completely acceptable until you get situations like ET and TK who do want to dedicate resources here are stopped from doing so, which throws that supply and demand argument off kilter. It's not competitive precisely because supply and demand are not allowed to work out their own dynamic. While any EU airline can fly to Canada, the fact that they don't consider it worthwhile is not indicative of the Canadian market - there are airlines that do find it worthwhile. Ultimately, competition requires that demand and supply be allowed to interact, but that's not the case. FWIW, i honestly doubt that the taxes account for the majority of the 20% + fare discrepancies. The UK has the worst taxes by far, but there are better deals to be had from there than here.
As for 'not enough room to add more competition - they will all lose money' - that is a very odd thing to say. The entire benefit of competition is its ability to root out inefficiency. Poor products will disappear. Sound products will survive. The point of competition is not to foster token competition (how's that working out in telecoms here in Canada?) - the point is to award suppliers who provide what the consumer wants. And force those who don't to get on with it. As the AF/KL country head in Canada so succinctly put it at yet another Senate hearing, the IATA chief compared Australia and Canada and came to the conclusion that Australia was outperforming Canada in every aspect, but we did trump them on airport taxes. Australia, as I recall, is a country with just 2/3rds our population.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 129, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9720 times:
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 93): Currently it's impossible to upgrade from Y to O using E-upgrades.
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 93): Of course, this may change with time. However, I'm afraid that the rare op-ups will be now to O instead of J.
AC's way of ensuring that elites will pay to play aerolotto on 77H routes. No more booking Flex fares to get an upgrade. PE fares will now be the minimum price of admission to the game. And just to incentivize elites to play, they'll make sure that the Y cabin is a little less bearable.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 130, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9693 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 126): It sucks but Canada has 34 million people in such a large area and the US has 312 million people in a slightly smaller area and we just don't have the market size to get those economies of scale that the US enjoys. This isn't just limited to airlines but most consumer products.
This BS gets thrown out everytime to defend companies from Air Canada to the Robellus telecom oligopoly.
It's nonsense.
Canada may have a small population, but it's concentrated in dense pockets. Southern Ontario is as dense as many parts of Europe. Ditto for the Southwestern BC or the St. Lawrence corridor in Eastern Ontario and Quebec.
And if local population size is relevant, why is it that SQ, EK, EY, and CX are all so successful?
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3211 posts, RR: 9 Reply 131, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9654 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): how's that working out in telecoms here in Canada?
If you look at their bottom lines, really well.
Also the free market is the reason that the telecommunications industry in Canada is overpriced as the big 3 gobble up the competitors and Canadians are demanding the government to reign in very anti-competitive practices.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): the IATA chief compared Australia and Canada and came to the conclusion that Australia was outperforming Canada in every aspect, but we did trump them on airport taxes.
In what regard?
I do know that QF's international product bleeds money which is why they eventually signed a deal with EK. Something I think AC should do with EK and EY and serve DXB or AUH and complement the current capacity restrictions.
With the airlines working together it might entice the government to add capacity for the gulf carriers.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): I don't think airport taxes explain it all away.
Never said it did, but I would reckon if you looked at a lot of similar distance fares without taxes included and well served routes you wouldn't see much of a difference.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): This is, of course, completely acceptable until you get situations like ET and TK who do want to dedicate resources here are stopped from doing so, which throws that supply and demand argument off kilter.
Show me evidence that they have lobbied for more frequencies and been denied by the government.
Regarding TK I would think with AC starting IST in the spring/summer of this year and with both airlines being in *A there is a capacity increase as both airlines will codeshare with each other and have pretty consistent fares.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): As for 'not enough room to add more competition - they will all lose money' - that is a very odd thing to say. The entire benefit of competition is its ability to root out inefficiency. Poor products will disappear. Sound products will survive.
I know this but has it occurred to you that in the largest air travel sections in and out of Canada that an effective equilibrium price is reached and you are upset because that price is above what you think should be acceptable.
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 132, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9623 times:
Quoting Carfield (Reply 102): Maybe I am old school - but I really feel that full service airlines should not go the LCC track. Ten abreast in 777s are reserved for charter and LCC airlines, not for full service airlines.
As Mark (flyyul) said, the industry is being commoditized. There is really no such thing a full service carrier anymore, nor such a thing as an LCC. They are blending into each other in terms of service offerings and service standards. Westjet (a former and arguably current LCC) has Y service as good if not better than AC, for instance. Same with WN over UA, AA etc etc etc.
AC's primary (but not sole) competition is actually WS (an LCC with good service) on shorthaul routes and TS (yes, Air Transat) on the LH routes. So AC is correct to "pack em in" in Y. Anyone who doesn't like it, can either not travel or fly F or Y+. Air travel is always voluntary.....anyone who doesn't like the new 77W layout can choose to avoid it.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 125): I don't think it's any great secret that prices ex-Canada are amongst the highest in the world in comparison to flights of similar duration elsewhere.
I don't think so. I just did some sample fare comparisons on expedia for a few Asians and EU destinations from YYZ, BOS, and EWR -- YYZ fares were comparable.
Quoting abrelosojos (Reply 115): Amazing isn't it. When you have poor service and bad employee morale, no matter what you do, it turns negative. I can't believe the difference in the 2 results in Canada.
The market agrees with you -- the stock price is still down about 90% from the IPO.
Quoting questions (Reply 110): Six lavs for 458 passengers? On a long haul flight? Gross.
That is gross. Very gross. Even for large bladder sailors such as me who are used to having no facilities nearby. Perhaps 458 members of AC mgmt should fly the new 6-lav layout on a 12-hour flight together sometime and see how much they like it (and each other, afterwards).
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 133, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9637 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 122): People have decided with their wallets that being cramped for 8 hours is worth saving $50 also if you hop on EK you have the same layout on a 77W and so do many other airlines.
Have you actually flown EK? They had seatback IFE nearly a decade and a half before AC. Their food and drinks are top notch. I haven't flown them in a few years. But when I last flew them, they used to have a drink menu for Y pax. And I mean actual cocktails. Today, they sell champagne in Y on request.
They have a multi-national and as a result, multi-lingual staff that can cater to passengers in half a dozen or more languages usually (with a varying mix on different routes). And the staff are young and attractive (native-born Canadians really underestimate the value of this for people from the old country).
And most importantly, 33" pitch. Air Canada is now giving TATL pax only 1" more pitch than Ryanair and a fraction of an inch more in seat width. Ponder that.
Oh, and EK is not always the cheapest fare. Actually, they rarely are. AI or SU are usually cheaper. But EK's service has earned a strong reputation among South Asians, to the point that most are willing to pay more to travel on EK.
Here's the thing. Most assume that it's about fares for South Asia VFR. And to some extent it is. But a lot of it is about perceived value. And very few people have issues paying $100 more to travel on EK because the perceived value is there. AC on the other hand? Many South Asians I know are starting to associate AC with the same image they have of Air India: state-run airline that offers sub-par and unreliable service. Some of that is unfair myth-building to AC. But when you put up AC to EK, unfortunately, that's the idea that most South Asians have of AC.
Oh and it doesn't help that AC for the longest time would dump South Asia bound pax on to LH at FRA, who then put them on 744s without IFE for another 8-10 hours. People remember stuff like that.
Unfortunately AC, EK, 9W, EY and QR have strong brands, which are only getting stronger in key markets (like Indo-Canadians traveling to South Asia). AC is going to have a tough time winning them back. And $50 or $100 less isn't going to get them to switch. But good luck to AC if management really thinks that's what will do it.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 134, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9617 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): Also the free market is the reason that the telecommunications industry in Canada is overpriced as the big 3 gobble up the competitors and Canadians are demanding the government to reign in very anti-competitive practices.
You're losing credibility. Canada has a free market for telecom?
Why is it that the government won't allow 100% foreign owned telecom operators in here? No Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange or AT&T.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3211 posts, RR: 9 Reply 136, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 9510 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 134): Why is it that the government won't allow 100% foreign owned telecom operators in here? No Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange or AT&T.
Fair point but that also goes both ways, does the UK and the US allow our companies to operate there?
Let them in on the condition that our companies operate can operate in their countries.
Quoting ytz (Reply 133): Have you actually flown EK? They had seatback IFE nearly a decade and a half before AC. Their food and drinks are top notch. I haven't flown them in a few years. But when I last flew them, they used to have a drink menu for Y pax. And I mean actual cocktails. Today, they sell champagne in Y on request.
I haven't flown EK but I have flown other airlines that gets probably higher ratings than AC which are QF and NZ and I'm not arguing the point about quality of service.
My point is that the public at large will take the best deal over what the service is. Look at the US when WN came into the market, you knew what you were going to get with WN and would get better service with the legacies and who's product today is the standard among North American travel.
In Australia Jetstar and Virgin are the model for domestic routes as well which have the same LCC model as WN.
There is a tipping point where people will decide with their wallets and perhaps it isn't $50 as I mentioned earlier but the economics says that air travel is incredibly price sensitive.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 132): AC's primary (but not sole) competition is actually WS (an LCC with good service) on shorthaul routes and TS (yes, Air Transat) on the LH routes. So AC is correct to "pack em in" in Y. Anyone who doesn't like it, can either not travel or fly F or Y+. Air travel is always voluntary.....anyone who doesn't like the new 77W layout can choose to avoid it.
You can pay more for the competitor who gives the nice pitch in economy and if I were going to Australia I would take UA with no seatback IFE over this AC layout but for Europe I could deal with this.
LanPeru From Peru, joined Jun 2001, 633 posts, RR: 10 Reply 137, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 9424 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 40): Having flown on a ten abreast Emirates model, I realised that unless you're, well shall we actually say fat, it's fine.
For an economy product, for what we pay, it's perfectly acceptable, for those who want more, pay more.
I LOVE the honesty here. It's so true. LOL. I am big but not so big that I spill into your seat or that I need an extension...
Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 49): I beg to differ. I'm not fat, but large (6'3" / 200 lbs). I have broad shoulders, which I can't do anything about, even if I lost 50 pounds. On the 9W 77Ws I flew LHR-BOM and DEL-LHR, the flights were extremely uncomfortable. My shoulder protruded about 2-3 inches into the aisle, and I was being bumped by pax and trollies the entire flight. If I was in a middle or window seat, I'd be significantly invading the personal space of the pax next to me.
I am about the same size, however I am only 6'1 but 250...here is the point. If I am a big person, then it's almost like you have to expect to be uncomfortable. If I am flying, I still get excited to fly on a plane but I accept that I will be somewhat UNcomfortable especially in economy. The longest I have flown was 13hrs, and I was in a middle seat of 2-4-2 on LAN with decent pitch, but I was still uncomfortable because it was a long trip.
Here is the point, and I think it is like the VFR mentality or something: "I will endure this flight, which is just a few HOURS out of the DAYS or WEEKS that I will be doing everything else that makes it a vacation/trip!!" T
he only thing that I really would really complain about is that even with the 3-4-3 on the 777 or (in LAN's case 3-3-3 on the 787) fares DON'T drop. In the end, as much as I LOVE to fly and still get into the planning and all that before the trip...I just look at it as another form of public transit. If they told me I could sit in the cargo hold (and not freeze to death of course) I'd bring my own food and my own entertainment...AS LONG AS I GET THERE!
I think that if more seats are available, and it means lower fares, this is a GREAT change.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 138, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9335 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 128): the IATA chief compared Australia and Canada and came to the conclusion that Australia was outperforming Canada in every aspect, but we did trump them on airport taxes. Australia, as I recall, is a country with just 2/3rds our population.
You can't compare Australia with Canada due to the very different geography. To go anywhere from Australia you have to fly. There's nothing comparable to the huge and highly-competitive Canada-U.S. transborder market where you also have the option of driving or using other modes of surface transportation.
Quoting flyboy22 (Reply 127): 3-4-3 is a tight squeeze and going from a 32" pitch to a 31" pitch is disappointing.
Fair enough, but if they're connecting onto other flights, AC's pricing flexibility is still limited by how much or how little a partner airline is willing to charge - an issue which AF/KL doesn't face. Will LH be happy to sell seats to AC at cut rate prices when it can command more on a route?
AC/LH have had a revenue/profit-sharing joint venture for years. Everything, including pricing, is coordinated and as far as I know it makes no difference whether you're on an AC or LH aircraft.
pnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2046 posts, RR: 12 Reply 139, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9228 times:
Wow. A lot of discussion for 5 aircraft. Clearly seems that these are for high volume lower yield routes that are not long distance but are too valuable to go all LCC/Rouge. If AC is correct, the 787 will launch a new product (about a year away). That product will go into the existing 777's. It will be interesting to see what routes they will be put on. Many airlines have multiple configurations of 777's and other aircraft. Again the bulk of flyers don't give a rats patootie as long as they got a good fare. AC will know quickly how successful the product is on the route. Better to loose a few primadonna flyers (who are the vast minority) and fly profitably, then to try to please everybody and lose money. AC has always been one of the last to squeeze their cabins.
Who cares? Maybe people who think that employers here Canada should be able to discriminate based on age, gender, attractiveness etc the way Emirates apparently does should have stayed in the "old country". We don't do that in Canada.
anrec80 From Canada, joined Jan 2011, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 141, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 8904 times:
Quoting behramjee (Reply 101): So unfortunately for you, AC will not and are currently not "being eaten up alive" on the YYZ-HKG route. In fact credit should go more to AC here because they are operating this route using a smaller 260 seater B777-200LR versus CX who use a 360 seater B777-300ER !
It's because their 77L doesn't have 10-abreast yet. Let's see if this stands once they actually put 10-abreast into 77L on like 15 hr flight.
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 142, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8885 times:
Quoting anrec80 (Reply 141): It's because their 77L doesn't have 10-abreast yet. Let's see if this stands once they actually put 10-abreast into 77L on like 15 hr flight.
The 10 abreast config is not making it's way into the rest of the fleet. It's meant for specific markets only.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 143, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8780 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): If you look at their bottom lines, really well.
A pleasant side effect for companies operating in oligopoly situations. It would take quite some doing for them not to be profitable.
In any event, Canadian koolaid is good and all, but its not accurate. To put things in perspective:
.
"You need to ask yourself, why isn't Rogers in the U.K., like Vodafone or France Telecom," he said.
"Why aren't they everywhere if they're so good? The answer is simple, here they're protected. They can be inefficient, their cost structure can be expensive."
'He' is Naguib Sawiris, the Egyptian backer of Wind Mobile. Think he might know a thing or two about the industry?
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): Also the free market is the reason that the telecommunications industry in Canada is overpriced as the big 3 gobble up the competitors and Canadians are demanding the government to reign in very anti-competitive practices.
Umm... again, I ll let that chap do the talking
Canada is the only country in the world, besides China, that hasn't opened up to foreign direct investment for foreign capital, Sawiris said. "I don't know why Canada wants to be matched with China," he said. "There's only two countries [with] very ridiculous old laws, and nothing is happening."
"There's no real political will here to introduce competition into this closed market," he said.
I don't know what rationale you're using to call Canada a 'free market' for telecoms. What we do have is a handful of companies that have very good balance sheets, but then again, in oligopolistic conditions, who wouldn't? Needless to say, unlike the big telecom players in other countries, none of these companies dare set up shop outside Canada for one simple reason - they can't compete. Which is a nice way of saying they aren't very good, even if they do well in captive markets. Notice a theme here? Protected markets with poor products perhaps?
"The IATA secretary general recently compared Canada and Australia, countries that have similar air transportation needs. The results were self-explanatory. Australian air transportation finished ahead across the board in terms of growth and quality. The only category in which Canadian air transportation rated higher was airport taxes."
Fabien Pelous, Vice-President and Chief Executive Officer, Air France-KLM in Canada
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): I do know that QF's international product bleeds money which is why they eventually signed a deal with EK. Something I think AC should do with EK and EY and serve DXB or AUH and complement the current capacity restrictions.
Don't think AC would risk upsetting LH like that. But in principle, I agree.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): Show me evidence that they have lobbied for more frequencies and been denied by the government.Regarding TK I would think with AC starting IST in the spring/summer of this year and with both airlines being in *A there is a capacity increase as both airlines will codeshare with each other and have pretty consistent fares.
Theres a lot of stuff posted in the ET Canada thread, including quotes by the ET CEO. TK wants to open up YUL but can't even get daily to YYZ three-four years after starting service here. Unfortunately, for all our commitment to democracy, its nigh on impossible to find out who our air negotiator is meeting with and what is being said. I can't see AC matching TK on prices.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 131): I know this but has it occurred to you that in the largest air travel sections in and out of Canada that an effective equilibrium price is reached and you are upset because that price is above what you think should be acceptable.
In a globalized world, paying $1.50 for a product that costs $1.25 everywhere else in the world is not just unacceptable - its plain stupid. If we're trying to compete on a global scale (and our PMs globetrotting ways suggest we are) we might have to be a lot more efficient at home. And that won't work if we keep paying more than what our competitors pay for the same product/service.
So yes, I find it unacceptable. But not just for myself. I find it unacceptable on a national scale. Nor am I being unreasonable - as is best evidenced by the Senate's recent report comparing the price of goods in Canada and the US. I suppose theres two ways to look at it - you can be happy with what you have and not look into it any further. Or you can study it and figure out a way to improve it. If we can do it in retail, we should be able to do it in aviation too, no?
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 136): Fair point but that also goes both ways, does the UK and the US allow our companies to operate there?
US Telecoms
T-Mobile - T Mobile AG (Germany)
Tracfone - America Movil (Mexico)
Verizon - 45% owned by Vodafone (UK)
Sprint Nextel (Softbank Japan will complete a deal for a 70% stake in 2013)
UK
Orange - France
T-Mobile - Germany
O2 - Spain
Hutchison - Hong Kong
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 136): Let them in on the condition that our companies operate can operate in their countries.
Canadian telecom companies are allowed to operate in their countries. They don't bother because they would get chewed up and spit out.
I really don't know what kind of alternative reality some people think Canada exists in.
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 138): You can't compare Australia with Canada due to the very different geography. To go anywhere from Australia you have to fly. There's nothing comparable to the huge and highly-competitive Canada-U.S. transborder market where you also have the option of driving or using other modes of surface transportation.
I've heard that a million times on this board, but for whatever reason, the IATA Sec General and now the AF/KL country head for Canada feel that it is an appropriate comparison. I don't know what horse the IATA Sec Gen has in the race, but I think I'm increasingly inclined to trust his and the AF guy's judgment on this. You can make any number of excuses, but to the few folk who are clued in, these excuses clearly don't amount to much.
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 138): The new thin-back seats often have more effective legroom at 31" than the old bulkier seats did at 33". Comparing pitch alone isn't very meaningful.
If they put plastic fold up chairs, then the effective legroom would be even more. No matter how you spin it, there is a loss in comfort. Those thin back seats are compromising comfort one way or the other. You can't replace a padded chair with bench and insist that the comfort level is exactly the same. Something has got to give. In this case, its comfort.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 144, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8811 times:
Quoting chrisa330 (Reply 142): The 10 abreast config is not making it's way into the rest of the fleet. It's meant for specific markets only.
If AC goes 3-3-3 on the 787 (and they have explicitly stated that they are considering it), then its only a matter of time before this config makes it way into the rest of the fleet - probably around the same time as AC introduces its 787 and new J cabin. Can't see them going 2-4-2 like JAL or NH...not after these 777s.
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 145, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8642 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 133): They have a multi-national and as a result, multi-lingual staff that can cater to passengers in half a dozen or more languages usually (with a varying mix on different routes).
Sounds democratic and peaceful/friendly, but EK is based in a country with some of the world's worst human rights abuses: endemic discrimination against women, gays, Jews. Why is Canada even allowing EK ANY landing rights in Canada? Dubai does not share our values.....we do not need to trade with this barbaric nation.
Quoting ytz (Reply 133): And the staff are young and attractive
And in 30 years......these same EK FA's will be old and overweight and unattractive....or will they have long since been fired? AC cannot fire old FA's and only hire young and attractive ones....we have labour laws preventing this and our country respects humans rights.
Quoting ytz (Reply 133): Oh and it doesn't help that AC for the longest time would dump South Asia bound pax on to LH at FRA, who then put them on 744s without IFE for another 8-10 hours. People remember stuff like that.
It doesn't sound like such a bad way of travelling from Canada to India. AC and LH provide good service.
Quoting ytz (Reply 133): Unfortunately AC, EK, 9W, EY and QR have strong brands, which are only getting stronger in key markets (like Indo-Canadians traveling to South Asia). AC is going to have a tough time winning them back.
South Asia is really not a key market for AC, and likely never will be. AC's key markets today are the same as they were 40 years ago: YYZ-YUL/YVR/YYC/LGA/LHR etc etc. .....and in 2050, AC's key markets will likely be the same....
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 143): Unfortunately, for all our commitment to democracy, its nigh on impossible to find out who our air negotiator is meeting with and what is being said. I can't see AC matching TK on prices.
I wish democracy WOULD dictate what our air negotiators did....airlines from barbarcic, undemocratic nations such as the UAE, Pakistan, Egypt, China, Turkey etc etc would all be banned from Cdn airports (until their governments improved their human rights records).
ah....so it's only the 5 new 77W's that are getting the 3-4-3-6 treatment (ie, 3-4-3 across with 6 lavs). So the remaining 12 77W's and the 77L fleet will remain.....civilized.
Quoting DavidCA (Reply 140): Quoting ytz,reply=133And the staff are young and attractive (native-born Canadians really underestimate the value of this for people from the old country).:
Who cares? Maybe people who think that employers here Canada should be able to discriminate based on age, gender, attractiveness etc the way Emirates apparently does should have stayed in the "old country". We don't do that in Canada.
Well said. Id rather be served by an ugly 55yo AC FA whose human rights are upheld by federal government standards than by some smokin' hot 25yo EK FA who was hired for his/her looks and will be fired in 10 years for getting old.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Skydrol From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 859 posts, RR: 11 Reply 146, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8559 times:
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): ah....so it's only the 5 new 77W's that are getting the 3-4-3-6 treatment (ie, 3-4-3 across with 6 lavs). So the remaining 12 77W's and the 77L fleet will remain.....civilized.
That may be the case, for now... but the concern is it will likely set a precedent.
And while a few have commented 6 lavs for 400 passengers would be 'gross', I believe the increased potential for injury in case of unexpected clear air turbulence with more passengers standing in line for longer periods of time far outweighs concerns of trashed, filthy lavs or bladder discomfort from longer than normal wait times. (regardless if there will only be 5 airplanes with this pathetic layout)
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9605 posts, RR: 10 Reply 147, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 8330 times:
I think the fact that the 777 is so easily possible to be turned into the tightest sardine can is a major factor for some airlines when deciding to buy, surely its high on the list when beancounters propose it to their board. Sad for us passengers...
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): Id rather be served by an ugly 55yo AC FA whose human rights are upheld by federal government standards than by some smokin' hot 25yo EK FA who was hired for his/her looks and will be fired in 10 years for getting old.
Fully agree here...
...but a cattle car 777 will never see me on board.
nrt1011 From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 100 posts, RR: 0 Reply 148, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8146 times:
Good news to hear the AC 77L's will stay 3-3-3, I travel the YYZ-SYD route often and I sure would not like to be 10 abreast on the YVR-SYD leg.
I assume the SQ's 777's are 3-3-3, I hope so, I fly SYD-LHR with them in a few weeks (380 coming back). Let's keep it 3-3-3 for those long distance ones please
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 149, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7961 times:
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): It doesn't sound like such a bad way of travelling from Canada to India. AC and LH provide good service.
Compared to the alternatives on the route (particularly the ones who can't seem to get daily frequencies to one city four years in), the products in Y are middling-to-poor. Its not bad service. Its just either on par or worse than most, if not all, of the other airlines operating Canada->east of Europe.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): South Asia is really not a key market for AC, and likely never will be.
Amen. However, India is a key market for LH. And we all know who wears the pants in the AC/LH relationship. After all, its the India/South Asia angle that the ME3 threaten LH on.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145):
I wish democracy WOULD dictate what our air negotiators did....airlines from barbarcic, undemocratic nations such as the UAE, Pakistan, Egypt, China, Turkey etc etc would all be banned from Cdn airports (until their governments improved their human rights records).
League of Democracies! All for it. Don't think AC, TS or Sunwing are though. If you take China and the majority of sun destinations (Central America, Cuba etc) out of the equation, not to mention a couple of Latin American countries for good measure, I think you'll find the airlines will not be happy at all.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): Well said. Id rather be served by an ugly 55yo AC FA whose human rights are upheld by federal government standards than by some smokin' hot 25yo EK FA who was hired for his/her looks and will be fired in 10 years for getting old.
Would this be the same 55 y/o FA whose right to engage in collective bargaining was given short shrift by the Government? Or would it be the one who had to take her employer to arbitration to stop them from degrading working conditions? Or would it be the one whose pension outlook looks dodgy because AC now wants the Govt to limit its contribution to the pension fund - which the Govt will probably do?
Incidentally, ever notice how some stores here in Canada only hire young, good looking women? Is that discrimination? Or does it not qualify as discrimination simply because companies come up with creative ways to screen out older/unattractive applicants. For all EK's 'unfair' policies, they are pretty honest about what they're looking for: 'non-careerists' who want to see a bit of the world over a couple of years. The high turnover has costs associated with it as well. I half suspect EK folk will soon have better working conditions than new recruits at Rouge.
Quoting Skydrol (Reply 146): That may be the case, for now... but the concern is it will likely set a precedent.
The 3-4-3 all but confirms the likelihood of a 3-3-3 787, and once they go down that route, the upcoming cabin 'refresh' thats associated with the induction of the 787 will probably see 3-4-3 rolled out on the 777 whenever they go through their J, Y+ makeover.
Kaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2578 posts, RR: 24 Reply 150, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7878 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 143): Unfortunately, for all our commitment to democracy, its nigh on impossible to find out who our air negotiator is meeting with and what is being said.
You can keep repeating this all you like, but international relations and negotiations (like Cabinet meetings) are not going to be conducted in public. It's not a Canadian thing - the countries we're negotiating with wouldn't accept it either.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 151, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7785 times:
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 150): You can keep repeating this all you like, but international relations and negotiations (like Cabinet meetings) are not going to be conducted in public. It's not a Canadian thing - the countries we're negotiating with wouldn't accept it either.
It was in response to a demand to prove that TK and ET had asked for more frequencies, not a standalone post in itself.
I simply pointed out that it is impossible to access those records for whatever reason. Why we can't know how many slots a country asks for (without divulging the reason behind providing or not providing it - God knows we love making opaque announcements about it) may or may not be a threat to national interests. I don't dispute that.
Take, for example, this gem of an opaque statement:
Saudi Arabia
December 28, 2012 – The amendments to the bilateral air transport agreement between Canada and Saudi Arabia, which were recently negotiated during the ICAO Air Services Negotiation Conference in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, will give additional flexibility for airlines of both countries to determine routings and pricing, and allow them to respond to market developments more rapidly.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 152, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7762 times:
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 150): You can keep repeating this all you like, but international relations and negotiations (like Cabinet meetings) are not going to be conducted in public. It's not a Canadian thing - the countries we're negotiating with wouldn't accept it either.
It's funny you should say this, as I keep seeing the same people repeating the same thing over and over, as if a discussion on here is going to change Governmental policy. I also notice that they tend to segue existing threads in that direction so that they can trot out the old arguments again.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): so it's only the 5 new 77W's that are getting the 3-4-3-6 treatment (ie, 3-4-3 across with 6 lavs). So the remaining 12 77W's and the 77L fleet will remain.....civilized.
That is the plan, so far. When a demand for a low yield/high density ship for certain markets was realized, and with 5 B777s already coming, the decision made sense. YUL-CDG is prime for this type of configuration ... but I am curious where we will see the rest of the 5 fly.
...but a cattle car 777 will never see me on board.
And that is it exactly. As, I have said above, I can't recall a cabin configuration change that was so "wrong" that business was lost. So it is unlikely you would ever find yourself on one of these ships, and if you did, (barring equipment substitutions) it is because you are flying in a market that dictates it.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 149): Incidentally, ever notice how some stores here in Canada only hire young, good looking women? Is that discrimination?
As does AC. You should see the new-hire F/A's of which there are thousands! The difference is that AC can not fire them because they are old and ugly. And with Canadian labour laws, neither can the stores you mention.
Quoting Skydrol (Reply 146): And while a few have commented 6 lavs for 400 passengers would be 'gross'
I am not sure about the 6 lavs. And the "drawing" above doesn't cut it. I am awaiting the revision to the B777 FCOM, with engineering plans of the new cabin until I believe it.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 153, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7705 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): am not sure about the 6 lavs. And the "drawing" above doesn't cut it. I am awaiting the revision to the B777 FCOM, with engineering plans of the new cabin until I believe it.
Exactly. The seatmap for the new config doesn't have the same detail as with other fleet types. With the exception of the lavs at the very back, each blue box on the seatmap represents at least two lavs - there could be three where the stand up bar used to be. So by my count, there are 10 lavs, maybe 11.
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 154, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7714 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): I also notice that they tend to segue existing threads in that direction so that they can trot out the old arguments again.
It isn't as tangential as you think.
AC takes out a high density 777.
This is done supposedly to compete with high density carriers like TS, who also offer lower prices.
AC claims this will allow it to offer lower prices, but the prices on YUL-CDG for the introduction of these aircraft look abotu the same as they do right now.
I think its fairly inevitable that the lack of downward movement on the prices will result in discussion, and I (quite explicitly) belong to the school of thought that says that prices are as much a function of competition as they are of anything else. You know, the whole demand/supply equilibrium and the need for letting suppliers adjust to the market unimpeded by artificial barriers.
And, of course, the other side of the usual suspects and I (and perhaps one or two who agree with me) point engage in exchanges about competition.
All of which is to say that if you roll out a high density 777 in Canada and link it to the need to offer lower prices without actually offering lower prices, its only inevitable that people will wonder why. Competition is inevitably a part of this equation. Now if we were discussing Australia or the US, it wouldn't be. But in Canada, it is. Make of that what you will.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): That is the plan, so far. When a demand for a low yield/high density ship for certain markets was realized, and with 5 B777s already coming, the decision made sense. YUL-CDG is prime for this type of configuration ... but I am curious where we will see the rest of the 5 fly.
You don't think this is a precursor to 3-3-3 787s?
And FWIW, who is responsible for baggage handling at YUL - AC or YUL authorities?
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): The difference is that AC can not fire them because they are old and ugly.
No, but it shows them the door by making it quite clear that their jobs aren't sustainable in the long run. McDonalds doesn't fire people for getting old either - it just disincentivizes them from staying by offering the bare minumum, which, it appears, is what AC management wants to do.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 155, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7705 times:
Quoting chrisa330 (Reply 153): Exactly. The seatmap for the new config doesn't have the same detail as with other fleet types. With the exception of the lavs at the very back, each blue box on the seatmap represents at least two lavs - there could be three where the stand up bar used to be. So by my count, there are 10 lavs, maybe 11.
That is what I find confusing with that "cartoon" posted. Behind the cockpit, the lav is blue, the galley is white, between rows 7 and 12, it is reversed, the galley is blue and the lavs are white. I am not sure what those blue blocks are at 29/31 and 45/50, are they lavs or are they galleys? Then in the tail, the galley is white with two lavs blue. What are those 4 white squares? I think people here are assuming they are lavs, when we know that one of them can be neither a lav nor galley as it is the entrance to the crew rest facility.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
chrisa330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 617 posts, RR: 0 Reply 156, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7676 times:
On the fleetmap pages, the 'legend' says that blue = lavs which is what I was basing my count on. But you're right - it's not completely clear. Wondering...if AC is saying these won't be used on ultra long haul flying, will they be equipped with the overhead crew rest?
But seriously - as much as people want to slam AC for any decision they make - there is no way they would do 6 lavs on this aircraft. They even equipped the high density B767s with more than that...
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 157, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7660 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 154): You don't think this is a precursor to 3-3-3 787s?
Actually, I think the biggest precursor to a 3-3-3 B787, is that it seems that it is how most are being delivered. Honestly, with the vast majority of new B787s having a 3-3-3 Y cabin, I would wonder more if AC's were planned with a 2-4-2 cabin, as I can't see a Canadian market where it would garner a higher fare.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 154): No, but it shows them the door by making it quite clear that their jobs aren't sustainable in the long run. McDonalds doesn't fire people for getting old either - it just disincentivizes them from staying by offering the bare minumum, which, it appears, is what AC management wants to do.
Yes, the new-hire F/A contract appears to be geared toward F/A's not staying long. And they don't! Which in my opinion is a shame, give me a well experienced F/A any day!
The other day, I was giving a pre-flight safety briefing to the F/A's and one of the "early 20s new-hire pretty F/A's" was texting on her phone. I very politely asked that she be a part of this conversation. Her answer ... "Yeah, whatever, (rolling her eyes) I have to like text my bf, ok, so just chill, you're lucky I'm even here, I got called out at the last minute".
While I had the authority to remove her from the crew, I don't think she was smart enough, nor experienced enough to understand why. Nah ... give me an "old and ugly" but competent F/A any day. Look at my picture on my profile, I'm old and ugly too, but competent, and I would never treat another crew-member without respect.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 158, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7523 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 157):
Actually, I think the biggest precursor to a 3-3-3 B787, is that it seems that it is how most are being delivered. Honestly, with the vast majority of new B787s having a 3-3-3 Y cabin, I would wonder more if AC's were planned with a 2-4-2 cabin, as I can't see a Canadian market where it would garner a higher fare.
My take on this, as I imagine that of many, is that once you put 3-3-3 on 787s, some of which will likely be used for ULH, its only a matter of time before 17 inch seats seep onto the remaining 777s (whenever the new 787 J is revealed and the cabins across the fleet are refurbished).
Quoting longhauler (Reply 157): Nah ... give me an "old and ugly" but competent F/A any day.
Truthbetold, I think the vast majority fliers would prefer the professional and competent type to the pretty-with-attitude type.
That said, everything about the world has changed significantly in the last 10-15 years and I think its clear that some types of professions are being revised to match the changes. I know a few F/As in India who joined western airlines in their early 20s and quit when they got married in their mid-20s. Those cultural mores seem to be seeping through here because some bean counter realized its cost-effective (aging staffs get expensive over time). Such is globalization. And now western airlines can get away with it largely because the pool of unemployed workers is growing larger in the western world.
Can't beat 'em? Imitate 'em. As we are seeing with the 777s. I'm not against the 3-4-3 777 per se. As long as airfares come in line with the rest of the world. The cost of living/travellling in a country inevitably has an impact on the cost of doing business in that country.
Kaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2578 posts, RR: 24 Reply 159, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 7330 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 154): AC claims this will allow it to offer lower prices, but the prices on YUL-CDG for the introduction of these aircraft look abotu the same as they do right now.
Yeah, but we're almost 6 months out from introduction. The price on any given day closer to the flight will be whatever is right to fill the plane - like every other (non-subsidized) airline.
multimark From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 745 posts, RR: 0 Reply 160, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7209 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 13): Meh. AC was starting to lose me. This seals the deal. I just know AC will roll this out fleet wide. Less privacy in J. Cramped 10 abreast in Y. What reason is there to take AC anymore? 24 Y+ is a pittance and knowing AC they'll charge 2x Y for those.
Agreed. I'll be seeking out other carriers and routes to avoid these steerage birds.
Quoting rampbro (Reply 45): I was under the impression that AC was going to get Rouge to do this kind of flying? Or are they are going after the CDG CNXs (M-E, Africa), for which there is a strong market ex-YUL?
AC's brand management is a disaster. You're absolutely right, isn't the cramped leisure market supposed to be Rouge's? And there's the whole issue of tying Rouge's livery so closely to mainline. I'm always amazed AC has survived this long with the bozos they have running it.
pnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2046 posts, RR: 12 Reply 161, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6964 times:
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 150): Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 143):
Unfortunately, for all our commitment to democracy, its nigh on impossible to find out who our air negotiator is meeting with and what is being said.
You can keep repeating this all you like, but international relations and negotiations (like Cabinet meetings) are not going to be conducted in public. It's not a Canadian thing - the countries we're negotiating with wouldn't accept it either.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): It's funny you should say this, as I keep seeing the same people repeating the same thing over and over, as if a discussion on here is going to change Governmental policy. I also notice that they tend to segue existing threads in that direction so that they can trot out the old arguments again.
I agree please not again!. Why does any thread about AC become this tiresome over and over and over again argument, with the same people fanning the EK stuff again and again. Write Transport Canada, call your MP, write Harper, go camp on the front porch of External Affairs or any number of government agencies, do something but until there is something concrete new to say all this rehashing is meaningless.
This whole idea of squeezing seats is not new. The whole discussion happened when AC and everyone else squeezed their L1011s and DC10s from 8 across to 9 across, and 747's from 9 across to 10 across. It is cyclical. New aircraft come out and everyone touts their comfort and space, then later the market forces airlines to take out the luxury in favour of more efficiency. AC had those 4 lounge seats with coffee table in L1011's that converted into a dining/card table where you could eat restaurant style. Those got removed for revenue seats. All the lounges and piano bars that were upstairs in the 747 got removed and revenue seats put in. All of it is driven by what people will pay for. In business frugality is the new black so their is pressure on airlines to make up for revenue lost. I am not sure about Economy Plus or whatever you call it, for AC. It will be an interesting test.
Such ridiculous OT trolling. But I'll indulge you because I find such ridiculous screed deserves to be countered.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): Sounds democratic and peaceful/friendly, but EK is based in a country with some of the world's worst human rights abuses: endemic discrimination against women, gays, Jews. Why is Canada even allowing EK ANY landing rights in Canada? Dubai does not share our values.....we do not need to trade with this barbaric nation.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): I wish democracy WOULD dictate what our air negotiators did....airlines from barbarcic, undemocratic nations such as the UAE, Pakistan, Egypt, China, Turkey etc etc would all be banned from Cdn airports (until their governments improved their human rights records).
As a serving member of the CF I actually am fully cognizant and supportive of our human rights regime and do wish such ideals would spread. And you'll find I am quite critical of the UAE in several other threads (having grown up there). However, our governments (both Liberal and Conservative) have been falling all over themselves to trade with China (one of the most illiberal regimes on the planet....although slowly opening up). And Canadian corporations have been following suit.
So let's have consistency. Surely you don't believe in hypocrisy right? So you'll be supportive of not just banning their companies but also prohibiting ours from doing business there right? No EK, EY or QR to Canada. But in return AC gets to give up PEK and PVG. You sure AC wants to do that?
And why just aviation? I have huge reservations about selling our oil to China given that country's environmental record as well. What's your thoughts on restricting oil sales to China? Or are you only interested in restricting trade in aviation? And if so why?
Last on this....since when did Turkey get clubbed in with the UAE? You are aware that Turkey is a democracy and a NATO member right? And surely you are also aware that Turkey does not have any legal discrimination against Jews, gays or women (other than to actually prohibit head covering in certain places...think about that for a majority muslim country). Indeed, Turkey is quite a popular destination for many Israeli Jews. Oh and we also routinely have Canadian Forces personnel both transiting through and posted to Turkey on exchange. But I am sure you knew all this before spouting off....
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): And in 30 years......these same EK FA's will be old and overweight and unattractive....or will they have long since been fired? AC cannot fire old FA's and only hire young and attractive ones....we have labour laws preventing this and our country respects humans rights.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): Well said. Id rather be served by an ugly 55yo AC FA whose human rights are upheld by federal government standards than by some smokin' hot 25yo EK FA who was hired for his/her looks and will be fired in 10 years for getting old.
Have a look online. You won't find too many cases of FAs being fired for being old. Seriously, go look. And young people flock from all over the world to get those jobs. If the working conditions are as poor and discriminatory as you say, I would ask you why it is that young people from all over developed world flock to work for EK or EY or QR (TK is rather restrictive in this regard and prefers Turks)?
I know several Canadians (all with university degrees) who have chosen to be flight attendants for EK and EY. Not one of them applied to work for AC. Not a single one has complained about their jobs. The key difference is that they don't view being an FA as employment for life. It's a fun time for a few years. Then they'll be back in Canada looking at real careers. And the companies incentivize them as such. Older FAs are moved to jobs in the office or as counter staff (losing per diems, flight pay and the nice hotels (EY puts up staff at the Leela in Mumbai for example)). This is no different than what many Canadian companies do. How many Moxie's waitresses expect to do that for life?
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): It doesn't sound like such a bad way of travelling from Canada to India. AC and LH provide good service.
It was great service. In 1995. Seriously. LH has only just finished installing AVOD on all their aircraft. In 2013. EK had AVOD carrier wide in the late 90s. And LH birds without AVOD? Always put on India routes. The complaints from South Asians are endless. It seems like the only ones who fly these routes are those beholden to Star Alliance or those who don't know about LH putting geriartric aircraft on India routes. The minute they experience this, they run right back to EK/EY/QR.
Sure, AVOD is not essential. But this goes right back to the value for money argument. Those airlines simply give you more.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): South Asia is really not a key market for AC, and likely never will be.
Really? Then why is AC and LH fighting so hard to keep EK/EY/QR and TK from expanding? These airlines largely cater only to South Asians bound for South Asia and some pax bound for the UAE and Qatar. If it's not a key market to AC why are they so concerned with restricting their expansion?
I really do want an answer to my question.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145): So the remaining 12 77W's and the 77L fleet will remain.....civilized.
I don't buy that one bit. There might be a few left in today's config. But it won't be as high as 18 777s. I'll put money on that.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 163, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6611 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 162): It seems like the only ones who fly these routes are those beholden to Star Alliance or those who don't know about LH putting geriartric aircraft on India routes. The minute they experience this, they run right back to EK/EY/QR.
Sure, AVOD is not essential. But this goes right back to the value for money argument. Those airlines simply give you more.
LH has nothing comparable to a cramped 10-abreast EK/EY 777. And many people much prefer LH's consistent and reliable service to the often very inconsistent service of the Gulf carriers which is unavoidable with cabin crews comprised of 100 or so nationalities.
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5003 posts, RR: 29 Reply 164, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6584 times:
From a business standpoint, this totally makes sense. The effect on reputation to an airline's bottom line is often overblown. The worst thing that happens is AC can't fill the seats and they try another configuration. That's one beauty of the 77W...it can be configured with a staggering number of layouts.
It may be difficult for some to accept, but 10 wide is fast becoming the default Y configuration on the 777. The airline would be foolish not to try experiment with seating scenarios which seem to be money makers for others.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 165, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6587 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 152): but I am curious where we will see the rest of the 5 fly.
LHR, GIG, GRU, SCL and maybe EZE, if I had to guess. FRA will depend on what LH decides the service standard will be. We all know that AC is LH's b***h on TATL.
This. If some are going to keep arguing that AC deserves to be protected for reasons that used to include higher service (and I used to be one of these people), then AC's declining standards should include discussions about opening the country up to alternatives as well.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 157): he other day, I was giving a pre-flight safety briefing to the F/A's and one of the "early 20s new-hire pretty F/A's" was texting on her phone. I very politely asked that she be a part of this conversation. Her answer ... "Yeah, whatever, (rolling her eyes) I have to like text my bf, ok, so just chill, you're lucky I'm even here, I got called out at the last minute".
While I had the authority to remove her from the crew, I don't think she was smart enough, nor experienced enough to understand why.
Right. And you can bet this would not have happened on EK or EY or QR (since we are talking about those airlines). No unions. And termination results in cancellation of residency as well. The staff are quite motivated to work, and work hard.
And you can bet her attitude carries through on service to the customers as well.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 157): Nah ... give me an "old and ugly" but competent F/A any day. Look at my picture on my profile, I'm old and ugly too, but competent, and I would never treat another crew-member without respect.
You could be a toad and it wouldn't matter. You're not serving passengers. But a flight attendant is a waiter/waitress with some emergency management training. Appearance is absolutely part of the service package, whether people are willing to discuss it or not. Same thing goes for restaurants. And it's not just Hooters. You ever seen an unattractive server at Moxie's? Not just attractive. They are perfectly groomed all the time.
Now, while I personally don't care which stud or hag brings me my food, I assure you that lots of people out there do. Flying is still a glamorous thing for many South Asians. And attractive, young staff improve the image of the airline in their minds. They associate older FAs with ye olde government run airline (Air India). Same idea: old, tenured, disinterested, unionized staff. AC's FA's directly contribute to the AC = AI mindset that I see becoming more and more prevalent among South Asians. Westjet to many is Canada's Jet Airways in their minds. And with a community that's a few million strong, AC can ignore this demographic at their peril.
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 159): Yeah, but we're almost 6 months out from introduction. The price on any given day closer to the flight will be whatever is right to fill the plane - like every other (non-subsidized) airline.
Yet, they rushed to put the Premium Economy fares on there. So while doing that they couldn't lower Y fares? I don't buy that.
So clearly AC is not interested in competing for Y pax planning trips in August. Apparently, they'd rather pass it up to TS, whose prices are 30-40% lower.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 166, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6556 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 163): LH has nothing comparable to a cramped 10-abreast EK/EY 777.
Yeah. But you only get that for 2-3 hours DXB-BOM/DEL, etc. Not 8-10. From
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 163): And many people much prefer LH's consistent and reliable service to the often very inconsistent service of the Gulf carriers which is unavoidable with cabin crews comprised of 100 or so nationalities.
You view that as inconsistent. But if you're a 70 year old Indian man, it's quite a relief to find a flight attendant who speaks your specific Indian dialect (Punjabi or Marathi or Gujarati, etc.) or flat out a pleasant bonus for a Portugese traveler to find out that there's a portugese speaking flight attendant on their DXB-DPS leg.
This kind of service is absolute gold when it comes to the premium cabins.
And they all speak English quite well actually. So I have never had an issue with the various nationalities. I am curious, what about the various nationalities you think yields inconsistent service. Please be specific.
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 167, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6530 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 162): Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145):
South Asia is really not a key market for AC, and likely never will be.
Really? Then why is AC and LH fighting so hard to keep EK/EY/QR and TK from expanding? These airlines largely cater only to South Asians bound for South Asia and some pax bound for the UAE and Qatar. If it's not a key market to AC why are they so concerned with restricting their expansion?
I really do want an answer to my question.
That is just one of many active AC lobbying efforts going on at any one point in time. There are many others. Not EVERYTHING AC does or or lobbies about is focused on South Asia. Let's repeat that last thought: not everything is about South Asia.
Quoting ytz (Reply 162): And LH birds without AVOD? Always put on India routes.
Why not, if those are the low yielding routes? Makes sense to me.
Quoting ytz (Reply 162): The complaints from South Asians are endless.
So? Complaints from low yield markets are really not important to legacy carriers who need to focus on high yield markets. Let them complain.
Quoting ytz (Reply 162): Quoting yyz717 (Reply 145):
So the remaining 12 77W's and the 77L fleet will remain.....civilized.
I don't buy that one bit. There might be a few left in today's config. But it won't be as high as 18 777s. I'll put money on that.
Perhaps, but you have a choice to fly other carriers. And when all carriers piss you off, you can choose not to fly. Or you can choose not to complain. I find AC service excellent actually, generally. The 3-4-3 plan and the 787 3-3-3 (if this happens) mght actually be fine (the lav issue aside).
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 168, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6521 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 166): And they all speak English quite well actually. So I have never had an issue with the various nationalities. I am curious, what about the various nationalities you think yields inconsistent service. Please be specific.
I have no reason to fly those carriers but I know many people who have flown them extensively and have stopped based on their inconsistent service. It can be very good or very bad, and I've been told it usually depends on the mix of cabin crew nationalities. It's often small things, like offering to hang up your jacket on one flight and not on the next.
It's more difficult to ensure consistency when your staff comes from such a wide variety of backgrounds and cultures, no matter how much you focus on training.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10657 posts, RR: 100 Reply 169, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6541 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 122): The elasticity of demand on airline tickets is one of the highest for any given consumer product and unless that trend changes this is what airlines are going to do in order to stay competitive.
Exactly! That is an economic point I make that then is ignored. I fly far more often today than before. Partially as airfare is no longer $1,400 for a business trip so that the cost is no longer prohibitive. Heck, a half dozen of my
Quoting Arrow (Reply 44): This sardine can trend is very worrisome. I'd cheerfully pay more for a little extra space. Anything over 10 hours is torture.
Please do so. Right now too many just search for the lowest fair. Those who will pick a little more room for say $50 or $100 would reverse the trend. But too many airlines will not break even in Y without packing them in.
Quoting airbazar (Reply 56): That would be true if the prices would be going down for the traveler
They are driven by oil. Fuel is now ~40% of the cost of long haul travel. Prices are far lower than not too long ago.
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 67): The customers are getting exactly what their behavior shows they want.
DavidCA From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 63 posts, RR: 5 Reply 170, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6463 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 165): Flying is still a glamorous thing for many South Asians. And attractive, young staff improve the image of the airline in their minds.
Again, who cares? If someone is stupid enough or shallow enough to choose an airline based on whether the age of their F/A is likely to be 22 or 47 that's their problem.
Many people immigrate to Canada because Canada is a place where everyone is protected under law from discrimination. If people who benefit from protection against discrimination themselves then turn around and praise a company for its practice of the kind of discrimination they themselves are free from by virtue of living in Canada, then they chose the wrong country to live in, and they should go back to where they came from. On Emirates, of course.
aircanada014 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 1492 posts, RR: 0 Reply 172, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6311 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 54): And TK still gives you a 17.5" seat and 33" pitch in Y on the 332s and 333s they use on IST-BOM. Compare that to 17" seats and 31" pitch in Y on these new AC 77Ws.
Did you forget AC A330 still gives you 31-33 in seat pitch with 18in width seat as well. how about 77L with 18in seat width with 32 in pitch..and similar with B767 with 32inch pitch with 18in width seat too..
flyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, RR: 53 Reply 173, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6257 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 165): LHR, GIG, GRU, SCL and maybe EZE, if I had to guess. FRA will depend on what LH decides the service standard will be. We all know that AC is LH's b***h on TATL.
Where do you come up with this stuff? We all know or you just know - because you somehow know better than us?
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 174, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6085 times:
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 167): That is just one of many active AC lobbying efforts going on at any one point in time. There are many others. Not EVERYTHING AC does or or lobbies about is focused on South Asia. Let's repeat that last thought: not everything is about South Asia.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 167): Why not, if those are the low yielding routes? Makes sense to me.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 167):
So? Complaints from low yield markets are really not important to legacy carriers who need to focus on high yield markets. Let them complain
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 167): Perhaps, but you have a choice to fly other carriers.
Again. If it's low-yielding and so irrelevant, why is AC lobbying so hard. You had the government going to bat for AC and giving up our only airhead in the Middle East in the middle of a war over this. So again. If this is so irrelevant and low yielding, why is AC fighting so hard and why was the government risking actual lives over this?
Simple question. If it's low yielding then they can afford to give up the traffic, right? After all, by your assertions is so low yielding that putting AVOD on planes is not worthwhile. So is the traffic important to AC or not? Simple flipping question. Answer it.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 167): And when all carriers piss you off, you can choose not to fly. Or you can choose not to complain.
Ahh yes. You're all about democracy. Except when the opinions of others aren't in line with yours. Then they should just shut it?
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 169): Exactly! That is an economic point I make that then is ignored. I fly far more often today than before.
That economic argument is not relevant when you have a market that is so distorted by regulation. We know for a fact that air fares would be a lot lower if there was more competition. Industry watchdogs, competition bureaus, IATA, etc. have all said it.
Now I actually am not as much of an absolutist as El Pistolero. And I have argued tons with him before. I have no issue with the government protecting AC where Canadian interests are at stake. But looking at the evolution of AC, I am starting to get his point. The government is increasingly lobbying for AC's interests, not the interests of Canadians. After all, they put AC's interests before those of our troops on the ground in Kandahar.
Plenty of paying customers. And that's all that should matter to any business. Then again, when you're protected from competition maybe you don't have to actually care about serving every customer.
Quoting DavidCA (Reply 170): If someone is stupid enough or shallow enough to choose an airline based on whether the age of their F/A is likely to be 22 or 47 that's their problem.
You seem to believe that's the sole reason people choose those airlines. Like I've said, repeatedly. It isn't. The old lady syndrome is just part and parcel of an overall AC impression that reminds many people of the government run airlines at home that they all love to hate. Those airlines also have long tenured, unionized staff who aren't all that interested in serving their customers. But it's not just the FAs. It's old planes. Outdated or old AVOD. Poor quality food. FAs who don't speak their language (matters a lot for older folks). Disinterested counter staff.
Quoting DavidCA (Reply 170): If people who benefit from protection against discrimination themselves then turn around and praise a company for its practice of the kind of discrimination they themselves are free from by virtue of living in Canada, then they chose the wrong country to live in, and they should go back to where they came from.
Ahh yes. If they complain, they aren't Canadian and should go back where they came from. How nice. You should look up the stats on who contributes more economically, naturalized or native-born Canadians. It'll be enlightening for you.
More importantly, could you please explain to me why Canadians of South Asian descent are wrong to insist that they have the same level of service choice as Canadians of European descent? Why is that if we insist on the same, we should go back?
In any event, all those South Asians (particularly the 750 000 in the GTA) are concentrated in several strategic federal ridings. And they aren't about to drop air service as an issue of critical concern. For those who are running growing businesses involving South Asia, it's even more critical. And they are quite likely to link donations to these issues. I have confidence that in a few elections cycles, the politicians who run in these ridings will increasingly start wondering aloud why their constituents aren't being served properly by current aviation policies.
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 171): The standard per passenger with baggage is 210lb so the reduction in cargo capacity would be about 22900lb. But who is counting
I'm counting the seats, the AVOD gear, the additional galley carts, etc.
Quoting aircanada014 (Reply 172): Did you forget AC A330 still gives you 31-33 in seat pitch with 18in width seat as well. how about 77L with 18in seat width with 32 in pitch..and similar with B767 with 32inch pitch with 18in width seat too..
How long as those 333s going to be around? And can you guarantee they won't get "upgraded"....to Rouge?
Quoting flyyul (Reply 173): Where do you come up with this stuff? We all know or you just know - because you somehow know better than us?
You're right. I should qualify. It's my opinion (shared by many) that AC is LH's house boy. It really isn't ambitious much beyond that. Corporate vision really consists of reruns of LCC launches. The variations are markets they serve. So Zip and Jazz when And now Rouge gets to join the creative legacy.
I want everybody here to look through my post history. You'll see lots of defence of AC. And long arguments with El Pistolero. But with this move, I've lost all interest in defending AC. Why defend an airline that's only interested in offering the same service as Air Transat? I want better, nay, the best, for Canadians. AC may not be state-run, but it's actually worse. A poorly run carrier protected by the State. Air Canada: airline version of "Too Big to fail". Canada's version of Air India. The government goes to bat when they negotiate with the unions. The government imposes ludicrous conditions on them (total bilingualism) but then doesn't follow through on others (loss of Aveos jobs). And the government will risk diplomatic relations and give up our only strategic airhead, against the advice of our commanders just to avoid a few more slots for the competition? I can't support this any more. I'm done.
abrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 4915 posts, RR: 55 Reply 175, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5968 times:
Quoting flyyul (Reply 118): I'm sorry Abrelosojos. Did you want us to launch Whitehorse - Paris service? I would love to hear your views on our uninspiring network
= I would want you to actually be bold to try new things and drop old ones. Get new blood into the shop, poach from WS, shake things up. All the stuff you guys are doing doesn't seem to all work. And stop blaming the CASM issue for everything!
DavidCA From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 63 posts, RR: 5 Reply 176, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5901 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 174): Ahh yes. If they complain, they aren't Canadian and should go back where they came from
Never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.
What I suggested is that if they believe that an employer should, under law, be able to discriminate based on age, looks, gender, religion or sexual oreientation as Emirates does then they chose the wrong country to live in and should leave.
CXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2183 posts, RR: 4 Reply 177, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5867 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
Quoting na (Reply 147): but a cattle car 777 will never see me on board.
You wouldn't fly on a 777 even if it was 9-across anyway, so what's your point?
The overall percentage of travellers who choose flights based on aircraft type are infinitesimal compared with travellers who choose based on price and schedule. By launching a higher density seating configuration, AC like many other airlines are catering to the demand of the travelling market.
ytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 178, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5447 times:
Quoting DavidCA (Reply 176):
What I suggested is that if they believe that an employer should, under law, be able to discriminate based on age, looks, gender, religion or sexual oreientation as Emirates does then they chose the wrong country to live in and should leave.
Surely, since you are not a hypocrite, you have an issue when Moxies and Hooters discriminate based on age, gender and appearance right? Diito for all the offices that hire attractive young women as receptionists in Canada. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that there are far more attractive and young women working as receptionists than there are unattractive old males on Bay Street.
So when can we expect you to file a human rights complaint against Earl's?
Oh, by the way, what evidence do you have of systemic discrimination at EK? I've seen more male flight attendants on EK, EY crews than AC. In fact, those airlines insist on hiring a percentage of males as cabin crew since the beginning. (They can double as security in s sense).
Discintenvizing workers from making a career out of being an FA isn't the same as discrimination. And thankfully for the ME3, nobody signs up with that intention. They join to travel, stay in 5 star hotels (most Canadians would never spend the rack rate for the Leela which is standard even on a 4 hr layover for EY staff) and get paid well (relatively for young people) and party it up for a few years. And this isn't just EK. Ditto for all the smaller airlines in Europe. How many 40 year old flight attendants on Ryanair or Easyjet or Virgin? Only in North America is serving plastic trays of food considered a career option. Quite simply, it's unionization that has made this possible and is costing AC dearly. Flight attendants getting a pension? Seriously? My brother, an aerospace engineer at Pratt and Whitney doesn't get one. But a dude handing out trays of food and drinks does? Sorry, but they are the only waiters and waitresses that I know of that think they deserve lifetime tenure and professional status. It's ridiculous to defend them on arguments of discrimination. It makes a mockery of the complaints of those that face actual discrimination.
aircanada014 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 1492 posts, RR: 0 Reply 179, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5410 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 174): Quoting aircanada014 (Reply 172):
Did you forget AC A330 still gives you 31-33 in seat pitch with 18in width seat as well. how about 77L with 18in seat width with 32 in pitch..and similar with B767 with 32inch pitch with 18in width seat too..
How long as those 333s going to be around? And can you guarantee they won't get "upgraded"....to Rouge?
That depends on AC and the B787 at least they are still around for awhile so even if no upgrades the seat pitch and width won't change a bit unless they decided to put them on high density.. The point is we still have other a/c still flying with those comfort seats and leg room..if they were to be removed right now then yes its a shame but its still in AC's fleet.
AustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1264 posts, RR: 0 Reply 180, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5353 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 163): LH has nothing comparable to a cramped 10-abreast EK/EY 777.
LH 346 seat width: 17.0 in
LH 346 seat pitch: 31.0 in
EK 77W seat width: 17.0 in
EK 77W seat pitch: 34.0 in
Which one is more cramped?
Btw, I prefer AC's 763 to LH's 346 or LX's 343 simply because of the 18 in width instead of the 17 in - thus, the new 77W is not really to my liking, but thankfully, we still get the 763 or 333 in ZRH. Pitch is not a problem for me .
WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
I don't know how reliable seatguru is but here are the stats from there:
LH A380 width:17.0
LH A380 pitch: 31.0
EK A380 width:18.0
EK A380 pitch: 32-34.0
The good news for LH is that their 748s boast an 18.5" width in Y, alebit with the same 31" pitch.
EK's "cramped" 10-abreast 777s are on par with LH's A346s and 380s, though the comparability goes out of the window when you consider the pitch - LH, and now AC are what, 1" more pitch than Ryanair and with the same seat width? I somehow suspect you didn't expect that comparison to turn out the way it did.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 182, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5254 times:
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 182): I don't know how reliable seatguru is but here are the stats from there:
I have always had my suspicions of seatguru, as often I have notified them of errors, (even sending pictures) only to be ignored ... so I just assume they are incorrect.
With regard to what you quote, it appears incorrect, only because I can see no reason why LH would have a 17" wide Y class seat in an A380, then an 18.5" Y seat in the narrower B748.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
ElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 183, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5203 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 183): With regard to what you quote, it appears incorrect, only because I can see no reason why LH would have a 17" wide Y class seat in an A380, then an 18.5" Y seat in the narrower B748.
LH's website doesn't help with clarity:
"On long-haul routes a seat cushion width of over 40 cm, as well as the individually adjustable headrests on every seat, ensure your comfort." 40 cm is 15.75"
behramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, RR: 43 Reply 184, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5103 times:
Since 5 B77Ws are being reconfigured and already one aircraft going to be dedicated for YUL-CDG, the other 4, I would suggest should be:
YVR-HKG for which 2.5 aircraft would be required
YUL-FRA for which 1 aircraft would be required
However, if this concept works out and I really hope so it does as it has all the necessary tools to succeed, I think AC can easily do with 11 B77Ws configured in this layout to be operated in the following manner:
2.5 for daily YVR-HKG
1 for daily YVR-LHR
1 for daily YUL-CDG
1 for daily YUL-FRA
1 for daily YYZ-LHR
2.5 for daily YYZ-PEK
New Routes:
0.5 for 3 weekly YUL-CMN (new route) ...to be replaced by B789 when it gets delivered and increased to 4 weekly by that time
1 for 4 weekly YVR-MNL (new route)
Some of you might say that YYZ-DEL is also a feasible option, but after doing some rough calculations, it is not especially since DEL-YYZ sector on a 458 seater will be severely payload restricted. Note that when AI operated DEL-YYZ nonstop with a 340 seater B77W it could not carry any cargo so I would expect AC's B77W too have a payload penalty of 100 pax at least on DEL-YYZ flight portion. In comparison, Canada-MNL market size is more or less the same as Canada-DEL but the average fare is 30% higher to MNL versus DEL and its a shorter flying distance. Plus unlike Canada-DEL which actually has major seasonal demand i.e. majority of travel is between OCT-FEB, Canada-MNL is year round. Last but not least, Canada-MNL has way less in-direct one stop competition versus Canada-DEL hence more easier for AC to fill up the plane.
YVR-HKG and YYZ-PEK, I think are required as these are long haul routes where the operating costs of flying B77Ws shall remain the same but the extra potential revenue that 109 seats brings to the table on these 2 very high volumetric routes shall definitely come in handy. There are 36J class seats on board which would translate into a 86% S/F on the current 42J B77W which is adequate as well.
According to seatguru, SQ A380's seat width is 19.0". I find it hard to believe that LH''s A380 seats are two full inches narrower than those of SQ, both being 10 abreast. 10 seats x 2" = 20" = 50.8 cm. Where do they go? Is each of the two aisles 25.4 cm wider in LH? I doubt it.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 186, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4992 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 183): Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 182):
I don't know how reliable seatguru is but here are the stats from there:
I have always had my suspicions of seatguru, as often I have notified them of errors, (even sending pictures) only to be ignored ... so I just assume they are incorrect.
I ignore SeatGuru data of that type. Seat width can be measured various ways (between armrests, including armrests, including/excluding the gap between seat cushions etc. All they do is publish the information the carriers have provided.
Even seat pitch isn't very useful information these days with so many different types of seats. Many of the lightweight thin-back seats have more effective legroom at 30 inch pitch than older bulkier seats at 32-33 inch pitch.
The only meaningful seat width comparisons in SeatGuru and similar sites involve the number of seats abreast on the same aircraft type, for example a 9-abreast 777 vs. 10-abreast. Regardless what they show for seat width, I highly doubt anyone is going to notice any meaningful difference on two carriers operating the same aircraft type with the same number of seats abreast.
In comparison, Canada-MNL market size is more or less the same as Canada-DEL but the average fare is 30% higher to MNL versus DEL and its a shorter flying distance. Plus unlike Canada-DEL which actually has major seasonal demand i.e. majority of travel is between OCT-FEB, Canada-MNL is year round.
Ahh.....but all of those go against received wisdom on this boards.
Quoting behramjee (Reply 185): Last but not least, Canada-MNL has way less in-direct one stop competition versus Canada-DEL hence more easier for AC to fill up the plane.
For such a heavily configured 77H YYZ route to work, a stop in Japan or South Korea is a must.....
Mikey86 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 137 posts, RR: 0 Reply 189, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4707 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 105): You can and the YYZ-Europe wouldn't be weight restricted either as it uses 50-60% the available range of a 77W. It sucks for passengers but this is the way things are going and AC is not using this layout on YVR-SYD in the near future.
I don't even think YYZ-Europe is really long haul as I could deal with 10x abreast for about 9 hours and any longer I will be paying for that A380.
All it comes down to these days is profitability - which is fair enough. If an airline can do this with keeping their PAX loads up there they will. Just smart business practice thats all
DavidCA From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 63 posts, RR: 5 Reply 190, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4716 times:
Quoting ytz (Reply 179): [Discintenvizing workers from making a career out of being an FA isn't the same as discrimination. /quote]
Forcing people to leave when they reach whatever age it is that you say they should be forced to leave is discrimination, actually. Our courts say so.
[quote=ytz,reply=179][Europe. How many 40 year old flight attendants on Ryanair or Easyjet or Virgin? Only in North America is serving plastic trays of food considered a career option. /quote]
What nonsense! I guess you have never flown on BA, Qantas, Icelandair, SAS, El-Al, South African.
[quote=ytz,reply=179It's ridiculous to defend them on arguments of discrimination. It makes a mockery of the complaints of those that face actual discrimination.]
I'm defending Canadian law which rightly prohibits discrimination on the basis of age, sex, race, religion, sexual orientation etc etc. Those values (shared throughout the civilized world) obviously drive you crazy given your obsession with the ages of F/As, so perhaps you'd fit in better in a place like the UAE. Civilized, democratic nations aren't going to move in the direction you'd like.
Maybe you should start a thread on F/A age instead of harping on it on this thread. It doesn't have anything to do with the configuration of AC's new 777.
Devilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4424 posts, RR: 1 Reply 191, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 4642 times:
Quoting behramjee (Reply 189): no i wrote YVR-MNL not MNL so it should be ok i reckon
Yes, sorry...my brain is a bit slow on the uptake today. I was thinking that AC would get a lot of the MNL bound passengers between YYZ and YVR thus PR's load factor could suffer onward to the tech stop at YVR. Unless plenty of people from the eastern seaboard connect with PR at YYZ for a nonstop... or they could somehow be given traffic rights between YYZ and HND/ICN on the way to MNL to compensate.
But to echo the others...a full plane in that configuration would mean a long, crowded, stinky flight with only six lavs!
Skydrol From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 859 posts, RR: 11 Reply 194, posted (3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4490 times:
Quoting Devilfish (Reply 192): But to echo the others...a full plane in that configuration would mean a long, crowded, stinky flight with only six lavs!
Quoting flyyul (Reply 193): AC will have more than 6 LAVs on the 77H - for the record...
I believe the concern from the original poster was only 6 lavs for 398 Y passengers. Whether there are one, two, or four additional lavs for J is irrelevant when the FAs will not let the Y passengers access them.
And even with 6 lavs for 398 Y passengers, the ratio (1:66) is about the same as WestJet's 737-700s, with 2 lavs for 136 passengers (1:68). Both better than AC's useless 1 lav for 84 Y passengers layout of their E-190s, but the nine J passengers get their own, and even with this stupid layout I have witnessed FAs turning Y passengers back with five or six passengers lined up for the single aft lav, while the forward lav gets used once or twice during the entire flight.
Not happening non-stop with this config, it would put the plane very overweight with the amount of fuel needed to pull that off.
Quoting behramjee (Reply 185): 2.5 for daily YVR-HKG
1 for daily YVR-LHR
These ones are toss ups I think YVR-LHR can be done with this config but YVR-HKG is tight as it's around 5500nm.
These configs will be used on Euro routes and South American routes because they do not come close to the range of a 77W which will be pretty heavy without fuel in this config.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 1756 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 1497 posts, 
From Turkey, joined Apr 2008, 647 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1310 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 14 posts, 
From Canada, joined May 2009, 239 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 226 posts, 
From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 544 posts, 
Witness NZ, which is a 4 star airline with longhaul routes. The 77Ws being delivered are 10 abreast Y. They're not even trying to get a premium on their 9 abreast 77Es.
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9605 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11308 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Feb 2012, 75 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4930 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2104 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 4915 posts, 
From Peru, joined Jun 2001, 633 posts, 
From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1264 posts, 
From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2321 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4424 posts, 
Yes, sorry...my brain is a bit slow on the uptake today. I was thinking that AC would get a lot of the MNL bound passengers between YYZ and YVR thus PR's load factor could suffer onward to the tech stop at YVR. Unless plenty of people from the eastern seaboard connect with PR at YYZ for a nonstop... or they could somehow be given traffic rights between YYZ and HND/ICN on the way to MNL to compensate.
){kind=link}