Greetings all,

Air Canada had announced earlier this year that they will be acquiring 5 new 777-300er's, to be configured in a high-density seating format (36 Exec First, 24 Premium Economy, 398 coach). So far, they have only said they will be using them on the YUL-CDG (summer only), and YYZ-MUC (October) routes. Besides those routes, any ideas as to where the aircraft will be used?

Perhaps some Asian destinations from YVR.

Have they already received these a/c or not yet?

Quoting LY777 (Reply 2): Have they already received these a/c or not yet?

Quote:

"In addition to two Boeing 777-300ER aircraft previously announced that will be delivered in June and August 2013, Air Canada today announced that it will add three new Boeing 777-300ER aircraft to be delivered in November and December 2013 and February 2014."

http://aircanada.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=621

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 3): Quoting LY777 (Reply 2): Have they already received these a/c or not yet? Quote: "In addition to two Boeing 777-300ER aircraft previously announced that will be delivered in June and August 2013

C-FIVW f/n 743 made its first flight on 16 May.

I hope this configuration isn't going to be used on AC flights from LHR, it will definitely downgrade the experience. I've just flown in Y on AC 77Ws LHR-YVR-LHR and I was on YYZ-NRT earlier in the year and it's a good experience, much better than most, that I hope they will maintain rather than join the "rush to the bottom" along with everyone else.

Does AF use their higher-density Indian Ocean 77W from CDG-YUL? Or is it the 3-3-3 configuration?

Quoting Boeing744 (Reply 5): Does AF use their higher-density Indian Ocean 77W from CDG-YUL? Or is it the 3-3-3 configuration?

All AF 777s, both -200ER and -300ER, are 10-abreast (3-4-3) in Y class. Some have fewer premium class seats but the configuration in Y class is the same on all and, like all 10-abreast 777s, best avoided.

Maybe S. America....esp during World Cup and Olympics.

Quoting Boeing744 (Reply 5): Does AF use their higher-density Indian Ocean 77W from CDG-YUL? Or is it the 3-3-3 configuration?

It's worse than that. YUL was the first destination that AF sent 3-4-3 non-COI aircraft on to begin with.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6): Quoting Boeing744 (Reply 5): Does AF use their higher-density Indian Ocean 77W from CDG-YUL? Or is it the 3-3-3 configuration? All AF 777s, both -200ER and -300ER, are 10-abreast (3-4-3) in Y class. Some have fewer premium class seats but the configuration in Y class is the same on all and, like all 10-abreast 777s, best avoided

Agreed. AF has really gone down further than I thought they could with those aircraft. I avoid AF altogether due to the very poor experience.

Launch YYZ-HKG anyone?

YLWbased

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 10): Launch YYZ-HKG anyone?

AC already fly YYZ-HKG daily with the 77L.

I personally doubt these high density 777's will come to any currently served Asian destinations.

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 10): Launch YYZ-HKG anyone?

I don't think that they will be going to destinations in Asia from YYZ. More than likely the newly configured 77Ws will be going to Europe from Montreal and Toronto.

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 4): I hope this configuration isn't going to be used on AC flights from LHR

It's sort of inevitable, especially on YYZ-LHR. That route is 5x daily in summer. Makes sense to use a high density aircraft on the route.

Thenoflyzone

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 13): It's sort of inevitable, especially on YYZ-LHR. That route is 5x daily in summer. Makes sense to use a high density aircraft on the route.

Interestingly, of the 5x daily YYZLHR flights this summer, only one of them is on a 77W. The rest are all 3x 763s plus 1x 77L.

I have heard YYZ HKG (yes--of course from a friend of a friend).

I can't imagine doing 15 hours in such a high density but of course if the price is right!

I recently did SYD-BKK-SYD on a high density Emirates 777-300ER. 9 hours was long enough on a cramped unit like that, I agree, 15 hours would be too much. Coming back from LHR on an SQ A380 is a far superior experience to the cramped 777W. For a quick hop like YYZ-LHR then it is probably fine

Airlines definitely want to have 10 abreast in Y on the B777, it makes sense. But it is not a matter of would they like to? It's more ... can they? And the biggest deciding factor is competition, and price sensitivity.

That is why AC's high density B777 is being introduced on YUL-CDG. It is a hugely price sensitive market and the competition (AF and TS) is equally as shitty! Last summer AC operated the A330 (with 8 abreast vs TS with 9 abreast) and the B777 (with 9 abreast vs AF with 10 abreast). (AF found the A380, while a very comfortable machine is not suited to that market with its large F and J cabins.)

AC could not charge 1 dollar more than the competition, regardless how of comfortable the ride. So ... the passenger has chosen a cheap seat over a comfortable one. Enjoy it!

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 10): Launch YYZ-HKG anyone?

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 13): It's sort of inevitable, especially on YYZ-LHR

I would be very surprised to see it on these markets, simply because there would be confusion with the product already being offered, and, while somewhat price sensitive, the competition, CX and BA, is pretty up-market!

AC has said the high density B777 will not fly to Asia right away, and if so, only on new markets. So, speculate away,

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17): AC has said the high density B777 will not fly to Asia right away, and if so, only on new markets. So, speculate away,

What about India? A high-density B77W is the right airplane for DEL or BOM. If the ME3 (EK, EY, QR) can transport huge numbers of price-sensitive VFR pax from North America to India via the Gulf, then AC should be able to make it work non-stop from YYZ or YVR. The numerous other aircraft and routings AC has tried to India have never been right, because of a combination of funky routings (via Europe) or the wrong aircraft (such as the A345). Now that AC does have the right machine for the job, I hope to see them headed back to India within a couple years.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17): That is why AC's high density B777 is being introduced on YUL-CDG. It is a hugely price sensitive market and the competition (AF and TS) is equally as shitty! Last summer AC operated the A330 (with 8 abreast vs TS with 9 abreast) and the B777 (with 9 abreast vs AF with 10 abreast). (AF found the A380, while a very comfortable machine is not suited to that market with its large F and J cabins.)

i'm booked on YUL-CDG with AC on June 4, (return 9 days later). The only reason why I chose AC is because of the 9 abreast seating in Y vs 10 with AF.

When i booked 2 weeks ago, AC and AF had the same fare, to the cent ! TS was a bit cheaper, but not worth the hassle of T3 at CDG.

I had a look a few days ago, AC had gone up by 200$ while AF hadn't moved !

Thenoflyzone

Quoting AirNovaBAe146 (Reply 18): What about India? A high-density B77W is the right airplane for DEL or BOM. If the ME3 (EK, EY, QR) can transport huge numbers of price-sensitive VFR pax from North America to India via the Gulf, then AC should be able to make it work non-stop from YYZ or YVR.

Even the new AC 77Ws have too many premium seats for the Canada-India market.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 19): i'm booked on YUL-CDG with AC on June 4, (return 9 days later). The only reason why I chose AC is because of the 9 abreast seating in Y vs 10 with AF. When i booked 2 weeks ago, AC and AF had the same fare, to the cent ! TS was a bit cheaper, but not worth the hassle of T3 at CDG. I had a look a few days ago, AC had gone up by 200$ while AF hadn't moved !

When I was looking at the route for August, AC was by far the highest, followed by AF, then TS, and finally Corsair, which I chose in the end. I am a little worried I'll have to have a leg amputated after their extreme-high density seats, but the price was right ($750 round trip, and that included my TGVAir ticket!).

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17): AC could not charge 1 dollar more than the competition, regardless how of comfortable the ride. So ... the passenger has chosen a cheap seat over a comfortable one. Enjoy it!

Makes it sound as though AC has been sending empty aircraft to CDG while the others were packed to the rafters. I somehow doubt that's true.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17): with the product already being offered, and, while somewhat price sensitive, the competition, CX and BA, is pretty up-market!

HKG isn't price sensitive? First time I've heard that.

"Up-market" carriers can command premiums because they provide consistently (and relatively) good service. I don't think anyone who's flown AC over the last few years will not have noticed the steady deterioration of the product across all cabins - international J amenity kits, international Y catering, domestic J catering. In addition, its customer relations are falling apart - the new modus operandi to any shortcoming seems to be a shrug and a polite equivalent of the apathetic teenager experession: "whatever". Oh, and the occassional 5% discount voucher (on base fare only) for enduring an 8 hour flight with non-functioning IFE in J. And so on.

Take, for example, this case:

"John (not his real name) spent more than $50,000 to buy five tickets in executive class for his family to fly from Toronto to Sydney and back over the Christmas holiday period."

"On the flight back to Toronto, they found one of the seats that should have reclined into a bed for sleeping didn’t recline at all."

"Air Canada denied a refund of the premium paid. It offered a $500 discount on a future flight — good for a year — or 20,000 non-status Aeroplan points."

“We are very sorry to have disappointed this customer. However, we believe we have offered fair goodwill compensation in the circumstances,” said spokesman Peter Fitzpatrick."

http://www.thestar.com/business/pers...s_client_dissatisfied_roseman.html

With airlines like CX and BA, you know when things aren't up to scratch, they'll make an effort to make it up to you. I can share any number of personal anecdotes about BA in this regard.

Quoting AirNovaBAe146 (Reply 18): What about India?

What about it? A low yield VFR market 15 hours away via nonstop flight. Not the best use for any high-capital cost new aircraft, whether 77W or 788.

Quoting AirNovaBAe146 (Reply 18): Now that AC does have the right machine for the job, I hope to see them headed back to India within a couple years.

AC could not make India work with ANY aircraft, whether the L15, 742, 343, 345 or 763. The 77W (whether high density ot not) is absolutely the wrong aircraft for such a low yield market.

India appears to be best left unserved by AC. It's a remote low yield market. Business traffic is minimal and the tiny Indo-Canadian community is not large enough to warrant nonstop service (or so the market is dictating).

India is simply not a typical market for Canadian vacations or business traffic, and likely never will be. To COMMENCE such a remote market with the 77W would be folly. To start it at all (with any aircraft) would likely be folly also....

[Edited 2013-05-29 19:42:32]

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 19): i'm booked on YUL-CDG with AC on June 4, (return 9 days later). The only reason why I chose AC is because of the 9 abreast seating in Y vs 10 with AF. When i booked 2 weeks ago, AC and AF had the same fare, to the cent ! TS was a bit cheaper, but not worth the hassle of T3 at CDG. I had a look a few days ago, AC had gone up by 200$ while AF hadn't moved ! Thenoflyzone

So you shop by price when you fly? No matter how cheap AC is don't fly with them. I just returned to my parents home in London, Ont. after flying to China on AC from YYZ and was absolutely disappointed. First, I had booked two tickets from YYZ-PEK in Business class and was looking forward to the flight but when I could not check in on-line like I do when I travel. I then went to the airport and was given boarding passes not for business class but in the economy section and the two seats were not even in the same cabin. I complained that at least they could have found two seats together in the Y class of the aircraft, but was told that they could do nothing about it. I checked, while I was flying in Y-class my e-mails and to my surprise an email was sent to me from AC that I was unable to secure two seats in business class and that I would be seated in Y-class, then they had compensated me by refunding me the difference plus $500 good for travel on AC for the next year, to compensate me for my trouble. This email was sent to me 10 minutes before my flight.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 24):

Difference between J and full Y or discount Y? How do they determine what the difference is and how it applies? J minus Latitude, Flex or Tango?

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 22): Makes it sound as though AC has been sending empty aircraft to CDG while the others were packed to the rafters. I somehow doubt that's true.

Nope. Everyone is full, it's a busy market. But ... AF's and TS's full aircraft were higher density, and thus generating more revenue, than AC's lower density (albeit more comfortable) aircraft.

The point I am making is that if more comfort generated a higher yield then it makes sense, but ... we all know that is not the case. And, if more comfort does not generate a higher yield, then why bother? Thus the new high density B777s for markets that can bear such an aircraft.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 22): With airlines like CX and BA, you know when things aren't up to scratch, they'll make an effort to make it up to you. I can share any number of personal anecdotes about BA in this regard.

We all can. We all have horror stories about just about every airline on the earth. And we all have horror stories about the way they are (mis)handled, by just about every airline on the earth. AC carries 100,000 passengers a day, odds are one or two a month wont be happy.

Interestingly enough, AC has higher J load factors than every international airline coming to Canada! It used to be all but CX, but that milestone was passed last year.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 22): With airlines like CX and BA, you know when things aren't up to scratch, they'll make an effort to make it up to you. I can share any number of personal anecdotes about BA in this regard.

You mean like this?

BA Abandons 140 Passengers At Venice (by raffik May 30 2013 in Civil Aviation)

(It happens at ALL airlines)

Quoting AirNovaBAe146 (Reply 18): If the ME3 (EK, EY, QR) can transport huge numbers of price-sensitive VFR pax from North America to India via the Gulf, then AC should be able to make it work non-stop from YYZ or YVR.

Good luck to AC with that. Most Indo-Canadians I know would pick the ME3 (don't forget 9W and TK....my first choice) stopover costing them 5 hours more, but getting them much better service than 14-15 hours in an AC sardine can. Keep in mind that EK sends the A380 to YYZ. And while I'm no fan of EK, that move has without a doubt garnered it a reputation for comfort and service. AC will have a very tough time competing with that.

Many here say India is too low yield for AC. So be it. AC should just keep acting as a feeder for LH. I think the first direct service to India is more likely to come from an Indian carrier serving Canada than vice versa.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 28): AC will have a very tough time competing with that.

I believe it's even a lost battle, whatever AC tries. They can't match EK et all networks in Asia to feed their flights.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 28): I think the first direct service to India is more likely to come from an Indian carrier serving Canada than vice versa.

There's already been a direct service before, although for a short time. Even nonstop if I remember correctly. It was flown by Canada 3000.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 27): BA Abandons 140 Passengers At Venice (by raffik May 30 2013 in Civil Aviation)

DIdn't say IRROPs don't happen, but I am willing to bet they got better compensation than the $500 travel voucher (not, it should be noted, cash) that AC offered for a non-reclining $8,000 J seat on a 15 hour flight. Speaking from experience, I've had many occassions where AC has simply refused to recognize EU rules, but then coughs up the money the moment a third-party organization (with the time and energy), gets involved to make them respect it. Why do they change their tune midway, after giving customers the royal runaround? I've been fortunate to only be in that situation once with BA, but it was handled very, very swiftly, with no beating around the bush. Have you ever dealt with AC as a customer? They'll sooner call you a liar than admit that they might have gotten something wrong.

Every airline will screw up. How many will pull a: "We are very sorry to have disappointed this customer. However, we believe we have offered fair goodwill compensation in the circumstances,”? Fair? All I'll say is that the refusal to acknowledge the degree to which a passenger is inconvenienced... is more prevalent at some airlines than others. Why else has CTA told AC to revise its compensation? Don't take my word for it. Try it yourself when you retire.

Incidentally, the reason I bring this case up is not because AC has 'mis'-handled the pax; its quite clear that AC thinks it has handled the situation very well. Its the blatant obliviousness to the inconvenience caused, that stands out. AC isn't trying to fix it (any more than it thinks it has, anyway); it simply doesn't care. Therein lies the difference in ... quality of customer service.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 26): AC carries 100,000 passengers a day, odds are one or two a month wont be happy.

Actually, no. If you use AC's 0.09% overbooking rate and work with the assumption that half of those result in involuntary denied boarding, you're looking at ~16,000 potentially unhappy passengers. Even if you take only half of that, you're still looking at 8,000 unhappy pax. So somewhere between 650 and 1300 and 2600 won't be happy in any given month. (All of this being said with tongue firmly in cheek)  . In December, I imagine that unhappy crowd will be ridiculously unhappy.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 28): Many here say India is too low yield for AC. So be it. AC should just keep acting as a feeder for LH. I think the first direct service to India is more likely to come from an Indian carrier serving Canada than vice versa.

Its clear that some here have an axe to grind against countries that fall outside the traditional and economic 'north'. Why bother trying to explain the inherent contradiction between claiming, on the one hand, that a market is too low yield to think about, and then demanding that that same undeserving low yield traffic should be protected onto certain carriers, since those certain carriers' survival (apparently) hinges on the ability to carry these low-yielding pax to partner hubs? Its a prime example of a disconnect between ideology and reason.

EDIT: Just noticed that Y+ is being offered on YVR-HKG. Used a random date (7 November). Did not show up for May or July. Guess the High Density 777 is going on that route after all.

[Edited 2013-05-30 14:24:04]

AC is starting to use these beasts on YVR-HKG in November...

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 29): Quoting YTZ (Reply 28): I think the first direct service to India is more likely to come from an Indian carrier serving Canada than vice versa. There's already been a direct service before, although for a short time. Even nonstop if I remember correctly. It was flown by Canada 3000.

Canada 3000's service started about a month before they went bust. AC also operated nonstop YYZ-DEL with A340-300. A fuel stop was sometimes required.

You may recall there was also a big dispute when Russia denied AC overflight rights on their YYZ-DEL flights, which prompted Canada to close Canadian airspace to Russian aircraft and forced SU to take very devious routings on their U.S. flights. That dispute was settled a couple of weeks later.

AC had also announced and were accepting bookings for new nonstop seasonal service YVR-DEL in 2001 (using A340-300) to begin in October 2001. Those plans were cancelled after 9/11.

YUL-CDG, and YYZ-MUC, according to our employee website, YUL-CDG to be first in competition with Air Transat and Air France!

As per 30MAY13 GDS timetable and inventory display, Air Canada in Winter 2013/14 season is introducing 3-class Boeing 777-300ER aircraft on Vancouver – Hong Kong route, featuring the new Business and Premium Economy Class seating. Planned High-Density 777-300ER (77WP) operational days on this route as follow.

31OCT13 – 30NOV13 Day 146 (Day 257 from HKG)
01DEC13 – 31DEC13 Day x24 (Day x35 from HKG)
eff 01JAN14 Daily

AC007 YVR1140 – 1720+1HKG 77W D
AC008 HKG1910 – 1430YVR 77W D

Operational frequencies varies in November 2013.


http://airlineroute.net/2013/05/30/ac-yvrhkg-w13/

Thats going to be one looooong flight.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 34): Thats going to be one looooong flight.

YVR-HKG is much shorter than YYZ-HKG. Many carriers with comparable 777 configurations operate longer nonstop sectors than YVR-HKG.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 35): YVR-HKG is much shorter than YYZ-HKG. Many carriers with comparable 777 configurations operate longer nonstop sectors than YVR-HKG.

Perhaps, but some airlines offer more legroom, better IFE and better catering than others. All of which will be essential in these loooong flights.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 35): Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 34): Thats going to be one looooong flight. YVR-HKG is much shorter than YYZ-HKG. Many carriers with comparable 777 configurations operate longer nonstop sectors than YVR-HKG.

Per AC PDF timetable YYZ-HKG is 7830mi and YVR-HKG is 6392mi. That's a difference of 1438mi.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 36): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 35): YVR-HKG is much shorter than YYZ-HKG. Many carriers with comparable 777 configurations operate longer nonstop sectors than YVR-HKG. Perhaps, but some airlines offer more legroom, better IFE and better catering than others.

I've always considered AC's IFE among the best, and their longhaul catering is as good as any European carrier I've flown. 31 inch pitch in Y class is also very common.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 38): I've always considered AC's IFE among the best, and their longhaul catering is as good as any European carrier I've flown. 31 inch pitch in Y class is also very common.

AC's IFE is good when it works. If it works. Between increasingly worn out sound ports and erratic consistency, not to mention the never ending adverts (I don't recall seeing any on TK on my last flight with them a month ago), its not all that great. I have a collection of compensation forms that I never bothered filling out.

Longhaul catering as good as any European carrier? Given that TK is the 'best European carrier', and I regularly fly both TK and AC, I will disagree on that statement in every cabin. That aside, one need only peruse recent trip reports on AC to note how insubstantial the longhaul Y meals are. There are plenty of pictures of TPAC and TATL AC meals as well as European airline meals. I think you'll find that AC meals are notable for being the among the most insubstantial (small portions)- a verdict repeated in many recent AC Y trip reports. There was one trip report for LHR-YVR-LHR that hihglighted how small AC's portions are for a flight of that lenght. In J, you're right, AC is industry average, though the wine selection is showing signs of costcutting.

31" seat pitch - apart from AF/KL/OS (none of which are, I notice, in good financial shape), I can't think of too many airlines that have such limited legroom with such a tight cabin. 31" with 3-4-3 is not as common as you make it out to be. The other great purveyors of 3-4-3 typically go for 32-34".

I don't think AC is wrong in taking the action that it is. It has to. The 3-4-3 configuration is a great way to generate revenue. But lets not fool ourselves into believing that AC's 3-4-3 product is no worse than all the other 3-4-3 products out there. At best, it is on par with the weakest products out there, like OS and AF, though I suspect OS' Do&Co catering would give OS an edge on catering.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 39): 31" seat pitch - apart from AF/KL/OS (none of which are, I notice, in good financial shape), I can't think of too many airlines that have such limited legroom with such a tight cabin. 31" with 3-4-3 is not as common as you make it out to be. The other great purveyors of 3-4-3 typically go for 32-34".

AA's new 77Ws are 3-4-3 and 31 inch pitch in Y.

You also have to consider the type of seat. AC's new Y seats are the thin-back design that generates about 2 more inches of effective legroom than the older builkier seats on their current 77Ws.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 40): 's new 77Ws are 3-4-3 and 31 inch pitch in Y. You also have to consider the type of seat. AC's new Y seats are the thin-back design that generates about 2 more inches of effective legroom than the older builkier seats on their current 77Ws.

If AC wants to qualify in the same category as AA, then its a step in the right direction. But is that really going to guarantee success? These comparisons began with a simple statement that AC's deteriorating product and customer service (and the perception of inconsistency associated with them) were, IMHO, two of the main reasons behind its inability to command a premium despite a superior hard product. Going the AA way isn't going to change that. AA, like AF/KL and OS, is hardly a model of financial stability.

As for these new seats, while I agree that they might be very slim, I am skeptical about the assumption that it won't come at the cost of customer comfort, which is important in the context of 10hr + flights. I mean, you could install park benches and create even more legroom, but they would be extremely uncomfortable for that duration. I believe, mistakenly perhaps, that the reduction of bulkiness will also result in a reduction of cushioning and pax comfort. Furthermore, what is the IFE going to be like? Will these be the same seats that AC is planning on using for Rouge (ie - IFE-less, but with WIFI streaming across the cabin - or something like that)?

Its a simple rule - if you take something away, you're inevitably going to offer less. What form that takes, only time will tell. But there is a loss associated with pax comfort that goes beyond seat width (which is obviously going to be lost in this case)

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 41): If AC wants to qualify in the same category as AA, then its a step in the right direction. But is that really going to guarantee success? These comparisons began with a simple statement that AC's deteriorating product and customer service (and the perception of inconsistency associated with them) were, IMHO, two of the main reasons behind its inability to command a premium despite a superior hard product. Going the AA way isn't going to change that. AA, like AF/KL and OS, is hardly a model of financial stability.

At least AA has a very decent frequent flyer program unlike AC who charges exorbitant surcharges on award tickets.

I've noticed that AA staff are markedly more friendlier too, both on the ground and in the air.

As much as I want to like AC (and I really try hard to, since I'm a proud Canadian), they let me down pretty much every time. Yes, I'm disappointed with AC's decision to go 3-4-3 like AA, but at least with AA I'll know I'm that much closer to getting an award ticket to Europe or South America (only 40,000 miles round trip off-peak, with very good availability and no hefty surcharges).

Quoting YTZ (Reply 28): I think the first direct service to India is more likely to come from an Indian carrier serving Canada than vice versa.

Jet Airways of India has had daily Delhi-Brussels-Toronto service for a number of years. This year, they upgraded from an A330-200 to an A330-300.

What is the typical demographic of travellers in Y for the YVR-HKG route? Is it predominently ethnic Chinese? Chinese are typically slimmer and shorter so that might have been a justification. Just a thought...

Quoting brilondon (Reply 24): First, I had booked two tickets from YYZ-PEK in Business class and was looking forward to the flight but when I could not check in on-line like I do when I travel. I then went to the airport and was given boarding passes not for business class but in the economy section and the two seats were not even in the same cabin. I complained that at least they could have found two seats together in the Y class of the aircraft, but was told that they could do nothing about it. I checked, while I was flying in Y-class my e-mails and to my surprise an email was sent to me from AC that I was unable to secure two seats in business class and that I would be seated in Y-class, then they had compensated me by refunding me the difference plus $500 good for travel on AC for the next year, to compensate me for my trouble.

So you booked and paid for C class, and they put you in Y? What was their explanation for why?

I generally prefer AC's C when flying North America to Asia because they have lie-flat and aisle access for all seats in C, at a reasonable price. However, the prospect of getting bumped into Y after paying for C would make me think twice.

Quoting mdavies06 (Reply 44):

Sure, but by that logic, many Asian carriers should have gone that way a long time ago. Not to mention the fact that these aircraft are being introduced first on N. America - Europe, two regions with some of the taller/wider people in the world.

Quoting Polaris (Reply 43): Jet Airways of India has had daily Delhi-Brussels-Toronto service for a number of years. This year, they upgraded from an A330-200 to an A330-300.

That's not direct service. Though really convenient, especially for folks like me heading to BOM not DEL, the 9W scissor service is still at least 3 hours longer than any direct service would be.

I'm looking forward to the day when I won't have to transit in Europe and I'll be flying YYZ-BOM direct or YYZ-DEL and then grabbing one of those hourly flights to BOM after clearing Indian immigration/customs.

YUL-CDG as mentioned, as well as YYZ-MUC during Oktoberfest. Also, YVR-HKG and YVR-LHR.

I find it interesting that other than the seasonal MUC, these are all non Star Alliance hubs.

There will also be one rotation YUL-YYZ-YUL, as well as two YYZ-YVR-YYZ rotations a day.

These aircraft have the same empty weight as the existing -300ERs, with a higher MTOW. Range is not likely to be an issue on the proprosed routes.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 30): Actually, no. If you use AC's 0.09% overbooking rate and work with the assumption that half of those result in involuntary denied boarding, you're looking at ~16,000 potentially unhappy passengers. Even if you take only half of that, you're still looking at 8,000 unhappy pax. So somewhere between 650 and 1300 and 2600 won't be happy in any given month. (All of this being said with tongue firmly in cheek)

Exactly ... 16,000 potentially unhappy passengers. Yet ... you don't hear about it. And with the press never missing an opportunity to jump on Air Canada Bashing, rest assured if it existed, it would be reported. Sounds like these issues were handled well.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 30): AC offered for a non-reclining $8,000 J seat on a 15 hour flight.

This was actually an interesting story. And as reported in the press, entirely incorrect.

The passenger was offered a fully functioning seat, but (tragedy) it was not near the rest of his family. (Odd that it was an issue, as with the herringbone cabin layout, you're not near anyone anyway, even when you are!) The seat would recline electrically, but would not go upright without assistance from a F/A.This would take about 30 seconds, and seeing it being done, its not hard to figure out what to do yourself.

Granted this is not ideal, but the F/A's did what they could with what they had. So ... this gentleman had full Executive First service, Maple Leaf Lounge access, priority boarding, priority baggage handling, full on-board service. And, as it was not reported, one has to assume his seat worked on the return flight. Do you really think that having to have a F/A raise your seat from flat to recline, say 3 or 4 times during the flight warrants having your full $8000 round trip airfare refunded?

It should be mentioned, the seat worked electrically from upright, to recline to flat, and from recline to upright. It was only the flat to recline function that required attention.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 48): Yet ... you don't hear about it.

How many people really go to the press? I have some choice stories with many airlines. I haven't thought about calling in the media cavalry even once. And some of them were pretty bad.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 48): And as reported in the press, entirely incorrect.

If that's true, they've taken a press beating over nothing. Why didn't they push back and correct the record? Presumably because the media wouldn't let them? Its a strange relationship that - the press needs AC adverts as much as it needs any other adverts. Surely that gives AC enough capital to put its version of the story out? These stories don't help with the perception of the airline, and if all they're going to try to do is compete by being $1 less...I have my doubts about how effective this strategy would be.