daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Airports and Aviation > Airports

Airports discussions about existing airports



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 19th, 2010, 01:40 AM   #1281
killerk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,516
Likes (Received): 1116

I am surprised the aviation body in Canada does not realize the immense potential the country has, to be a transit hub for the North American and South American continents.....

Everyone, especially foreigners know how complicated it is to transit in US. One has to finish up passport control and immigration at the port of entry and if they are a half an hour late, they miss the next connecting flight and given the customer service of the airline companies in US (for the ignorant...they would put bus companies from opposite corner of the world to shame) they end up shelling a lot or getting stuck at the airport for hours...

Canadian airports can easily become transit hubs with no visa requirements for flights to US mainly and South America... though many European Airlines fly to S.America, they are all as part of one of the 3 major alliances....Air Canada can complement the Star Alliance of which it has become an integral part...

In addition to that, Canadian airlines have an extensive US network. They fly to almost all the major cities in US (no other international carrier can boast of such an extensive US network). Plus they are reputed for their relatively higher standards....

Instead of playing crybaby with Gulf based Airlines, they themselves should venture out and give them a run for their money....They are extremely well positioned to do that....
killerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 19th, 2010, 02:44 AM   #1282
gnzlnho
Buenos Aires
 
gnzlnho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Argentina
Posts: 6,019
Likes (Received): 719

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
That's only for South America's winter season...summer is back to YYZ-SCL-EZE. I know because I'm on it in December.
Really? That sucks. It should be alwats YYZ-EZE-SCL cuz I'd say most of the pax go to EZE...
gnzlnho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2010, 04:17 AM   #1283
GlasgowMan
AirGlasgow.com
 
GlasgowMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: GLA, ALC, AYT, SSH, KGS, FAO
Posts: 2,644
Likes (Received): 88

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
Glasgow man,
I grabbed the list from USairways.com's route map.
Therefore assumed it was complete. Feel free to update.
US Airways serve the following European destinations.

Belgium
Brussels - Brussels National Airport

France
Paris - Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport

Germany
Frankfurt - Frankfurt Main Airport
Munich - Munich Airport

Greece
Athens - Athens Airport

Ireland
Dublin - Dublin Airport

Italy
Rome - Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino Airport
Venice - Venice Marco Polo Airport

Netherlands
Amsterdam - Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

Norway
Oslo - Oslo Gardermoen Airport

Portugal
Lisbon - Lisbon Airport

Spain
Barcelona - Barcelona Airport
Madrid - Madrid Airport

Switzerland
Zürich - Zürich Airport

United Kingdom
Glasgow - Glasgow International Airport
London - London Gatwick Airport
London - London Heathrow Airport
Manchester - Manchester Airport
__________________
AirGlasgow.com | Fly direct from Glasgow to 120 worldwide destinations

As your Scottish airport to the world, you can fly direct from Glasgow to 120 worldwide destinations, more than any other Scottish Airport. As well as listing all flights and destinations on offer from Glasgow's Airports, you can also view all the latest news and see a full list of all new routes on offer from Glasgow. You can also view our tourist guide to Glasgow, Scotland's largest city.
GlasgowMan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2010, 04:32 AM   #1284
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,870
Likes (Received): 18149

Quote:
Originally Posted by killerk View Post
I am surprised the aviation body in Canada does not realize the immense potential the country has, to be a transit hub for the North American and South American continents.....

Everyone, especially foreigners know how complicated it is to transit in US. One has to finish up passport control and immigration at the port of entry and if they are a half an hour late, they miss the next connecting flight and given the customer service of the airline companies in US (for the ignorant...they would put bus companies from opposite corner of the world to shame) they end up shelling a lot or getting stuck at the airport for hours...

Canadian airports can easily become transit hubs with no visa requirements for flights to US mainly and South America... though many European Airlines fly to S.America, they are all as part of one of the 3 major alliances....Air Canada can complement the Star Alliance of which it has become an integral part...

In addition to that, Canadian airlines have an extensive US network. They fly to almost all the major cities in US (no other international carrier can boast of such an extensive US network). Plus they are reputed for their relatively higher standards....

Instead of playing crybaby with Gulf based Airlines, they themselves should venture out and give them a run for their money....They are extremely well positioned to do that....
I don't think the Canadian carriers are aggressive enough to capture a meaningful slice of the transit market, especially when the fast-expanding Gulf carriers knock on their doors and all they can do is whine to the regulators. Who knows how long can the regulators hold back before they have to give in. The problem is even if the Gulf countries reciprocate and give Canadian carriers equal access or even 5th freedom, none of the Canadian carriers would be willing to spare the capacity to start these routes.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2010, 06:02 PM   #1285
yyzhyd
Registered User
 
yyzhyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 646
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlasgowMan View Post
US Airways serve the following European destinations.

Belgium
Brussels - Brussels National Airport

France
Paris - Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport

Germany
Frankfurt - Frankfurt Main Airport
Munich - Munich Airport

Greece
Athens - Athens Airport

Ireland
Dublin - Dublin Airport

Italy
Rome - Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino Airport
Venice - Venice Marco Polo Airport

Netherlands
Amsterdam - Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

Norway
Oslo - Oslo Gardermoen Airport

Portugal
Lisbon - Lisbon Airport

Spain
Barcelona - Barcelona Airport
Madrid - Madrid Airport

Switzerland
Zürich - Zürich Airport

United Kingdom
Glasgow - Glasgow International Airport
London - London Gatwick Airport
London - London Heathrow Airport
Manchester - Manchester Airport
Not sure about...
VCE
ATH
OSL
...are they seasonal?
yyzhyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2010, 06:54 PM   #1286
GlasgowMan
AirGlasgow.com
 
GlasgowMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: GLA, ALC, AYT, SSH, KGS, FAO
Posts: 2,644
Likes (Received): 88

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
Not sure about...
VCE
ATH
OSL
...are they seasonal?
I'm not sure if they are seasonal or not, but they definetely do operate to these destinations direct from Philadelphia.

Athens
US758 4:10 PM PHL 9:00 AM ATH 9h 50m 767
US759 11:45 AM ATH 4:00 PM PHL 11h 15m 767

Oslo
US788 8:50 PM PHL 10:40 AM OSL 7h 50m 757-200
US789 12:55 PM OSL 3:25 PM PHL 8h 30m 757-200

Venice
US714 6:25 PM PHL 9:10 AM VCE 8h 45m 767
US715 11:35 AM VCE 3:20 PM PHL 9h 45m 767
__________________
AirGlasgow.com | Fly direct from Glasgow to 120 worldwide destinations

As your Scottish airport to the world, you can fly direct from Glasgow to 120 worldwide destinations, more than any other Scottish Airport. As well as listing all flights and destinations on offer from Glasgow's Airports, you can also view all the latest news and see a full list of all new routes on offer from Glasgow. You can also view our tourist guide to Glasgow, Scotland's largest city.
GlasgowMan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2010, 08:18 PM   #1287
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,870
Likes (Received): 18149

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
Mr. Rovinescu's ocomments are completely on point.

Canada should only sign a "open-skies" bilateral with the UAE if they allow AC 5th and 6th Freedoms. So far UAE has not been willing to do this, but rather trying to bully the Canadian government via the media... not the smartest move IMO.
EK will get their daily Toronto flight... but they'll be stuck with that for a while I think.
Canada's Flying Moose in the headlights
Flagship carrier's protectionist response to UAE's expansion plans does more harm than good

20 March 2010
National Post

The United Arab Emirates recently upped the ante in a battle over market access to Canada for its national airlines, Emirates and Etihad. By introducing the issue of Canada's military bases into the aviation argument, the UAE hardly used a new tactic in this age-old and archaic industry.

Canada and its flag carrier, Air Canada, predictably responded with shock and horror, insisting that a restrictive aviation policy was in the national interest. Moreover, it said, admitting these government-owned airlines would be unfair and disastrous for Air Canada. Meanwhile, InterVISTAS Consulting Group produced a report suggesting that Canada was missing out on a potential $480-million in economic benefits if Emirates Airline were prevented from expanding.

The Canadian arguments raised in favour of the status quo suggest that the Canadian government is, like King Canute, seeking to hold back the tide of consumer-driven air travel policy. Is this approach, better described as a moose in the headlights reaction, in Canada's --or even Air Canada's--best interest?

Australia offers a useful comparison with Canada as an aviation (and tourism) market. The two countries have a roughly comparable airline system and are widely spread across a large land mass. (Australia's population, however, is somewhat less.) Like Canada, one of the country's two major legacy airlines collapsed about a decade ago. But today Australia enjoys service from Qantas, a successful full-service airline with an equally successful low-cost subsidiary, Jetstar; at home it competes mainly with the evolving Virgin Blue.

Canada now has a similar major airline profile, with Air Canada, its Jazz subsidiary and a gradually evolving WestJet, which, like Virgin Blue, moved in to fill part of the gap left by the failed legacy airline.

Also operating in the Australian domestic market is Tiger Airways, another low-cost carrier allowed in along with foreign-owned Virgin Blue under Australia's relaxed ownership rules. All are profitable, although recently arrived Tiger is still establishing itself. Also, unlike Canada, Australia's liberal entry regime means it enjoys a very high level of competing international service -- not only to the main gateway, Sydney, but also to several other smaller cities.

And again, by contrast with Canada, Australia has not needed to bail out a failing national airline. Qantas came close to being taken over in 2008, potentially burdening it with a fatal debt burden and divestment of its best assets. Instead, it remained intact as a single group entity.

Another big difference is the role of different Gulf region airlines in Australia's international market. Not only Emirates Airline, but also Etihad and Qatar Airways operate there. And the UAE carriers don't just operate to one Australian port. Emirates flies to Sydney (three times daily), to Melbourne (three times daily), to Brisbane (twice daily) and to Perth (twice daily). Several of these services also extend across to New Zealand and return, where, apart from passengers, the carrier uplifts good loads of freight.

Etihad, the other large UAE airline, also operates to Sydney (twice daily), to Melbourne (daily) and to Brisbane (daily). Additionally, Qatar Airways operates a daily service to Melbourne.

Between them, the Gulf airlines fly almost 40,000 seats weekly into Australia. The bulk of these seats do not carry end-to-end Australia-Gulf passengers (although inbound tourism from the Middle East to Australia is consequently the country's fastest growing market). Most passengers travel to and from European, other Middle East and African points, as well as carrying New Zealand origin and destination passengers.

Canada's Transport Minister would be shocked with this level of foreign seats invading his country. And this is only a small part of the total "sixth freedom" airline activity into Australia. Singapore Airlines for one does nearly a quarter of its business carrying Australia-Europe and Asia traffic. Very little of that originates in, or is destined for, Singapore. Numerous others also participate in what today is recognized as a legitimate --and valuable--aviation service.

Transport Canada spokesman Patrick Charette last week affirmed Canada's narrow perspective: "Officials continuously monitor the Canada-UAE market to ensure it is not underserved, as this would not be in the commercial interest of either country. The rights under the current Canada-UAE air transport agreement meet the market demands of travellers whose origin or final destination is either Canada or the UAE."

Air Canada's pilot union head, Captain Paul Strachan, also adheres to the old aviation trade mantra, maintaining Emirates "has a tactic to break into markets and expand aggressively, but free trade in aviation has to be fair trade. In this instance, it's a lopsided proposal by Emirates." There is actually nothing in the definition of free trade to require that it be "fair", if that simply means protecting a weaker competitor against a supplier providing a commercially viable service.

Transport Canada too says there is no seat shortage (on the end-to-end route), and has resorted to use of the ugly old cornerstone of aviation protectionism, saying that the UAE does not offer "reciprocity" -- that is, airline reciprocity, meaning basically that each country's airlines must have the ability to make equal money on the specific route. Reciprocity does not account for consumers, but is a throwback to the bad old days of regulation, which IATA's CEO and Director General, Giovanni Bisignani, has been fighting so hard to overcome.

Then of course, Air Canada itself is categorical about the need to protect itself from the new world of air travel. In a lengthy diatribe directed at Emirates last week, Air Canada CEO, Calin Rovinescu further elaborated this reactionary theme: "Competition for international traffic flows must exist on a level playing field that provides equal opportunities for all. Any trade agreement -- and that is what an air bilateral agreement is -- must be fair, balanced and mutually beneficial." What he meant was mutually beneficial for the airlines-- not for consumers.

Mr. Rovinescu defended access restrictions. "The bilateral agreement between Canada and the United Arab Emirates is a case in point. Simply put, the market between Canada and the UAE has not developed to the point where more capacity is warranted. Period. Full stop. There are already more airline seats being flown between Dubai and Canada than there are people to fill them. No adjustments to the Canada-UAE bilateral are warranted at this time and in our view it would be shortsighted on the Canadian government's part to yield to the massive lobby effort underway by Emirates and the UAE."

These are attitudes that fitted comfortably in the 1960s, but they are sadly out of place in the 21st century.

Even if this were an appropriate stance in a world where everyone else is going in the opposite direction, it is intriguing to examine precisely where the vaguely defined threat to Air Canada exists. What exactly is the flag carrier being protected from?

Mr. Rovinescu argues, "What Emirates wants to do is flood the Canadian market with capacity. Its strategy is to scoop up travelers going elsewhere in the world and funnel them through Dubai, further strengthening Dubai as a global flow hub. This would have the effect of severely damaging our hubs in Canada and our network in Europe and elsewhere."

But there is surely not a lot for the foreign carriers to "scoop up" on Europe services; few passengers will be prepared to backtrack all the way from Dubai to western Europe en route from Canada, so there is hardly any threat of diversion away from Air Canada's U.K. and continental European services. More relevant, there are carriers like British Airways, Air France and Lufthansa who all use their hubs to beef up their end-to-end traffic flows (in what Mr. Rovinescu might call unfair ways), consolidating traffic and distributing it to and from Canada. So, in reality, all Air Canada is doing here is protecting Lufthansa's hub role.

And, beyond the key European gateways, the simple fact is that Air Canada's network is skeletal at best (and almost all virtual). This helps make Canada one of the more inaccessible (and higher priced) destinations for most travellers. Even more challenging for Canadians and would-be visitors is that there is currently only one global alliance--Star --effectively serving the Canadian market. WestJet is working with Air France and its partners to enhance the SkyTeam presence, but this is still elemental. So most of Air Canada's European travellers must rely on the Lufthansa network to access European, Indian and Middle East destinations. This is enormously valuable to Lufthansa and its own subsidiaries.

Further east, India might arguably be a market "at risk" from competition from Emirates (and others). But despite Canada's large Indian expatriate population, Air Canada doesn't fly there. From Toronto, Air Canada only operates a one-stop daily service to Delhi, relying entirely on Lufthansa and Jet Airways to provide connections (and codeshares), over London, Zurich and Frankfurt. From Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver, service is so limited that Air Canada's own schedule does not bother even to list connections.

Yet, in 2008 there were around 350,000 passengers flying roundtrip between India and Canada -- some 2,000 return passengers daily on average, meaning that in peak periods this could be a lucrative trade for airlines, given the limited capacity. But Air Canada's own metal only flies across the Atlantic to primary European gateways.

Beyond a handful of gateways, Air Canada is essentially a virtual airline, codesharing widely. Canada's Indianorigin inhabitants might see some reason to support additional service to the subcontinent -- not to mention the potential for enhanced inbound tourism.

When Canadian Airlines folded, it hurt Vancouver badly. For decades a "spheres of influence" strategy had applied, where the Vancouver-based airline was awarded the bulk of the (then less valuable) Asia Pacific routes and Air Canada dominated Europe and the rest of the world. So, predictably, when Air Canada took the smaller airline over, the gravitas shifted back east. Toronto is still today the centre of the world for the Canadian flag.

This was cause for western Canada's dissatisfaction with Ottawa and Air Canada, also opening the way for West-Jet to establish and flourish locally, eventually spreading across the country. But today, even for Asian points, Toronto remains very much Canada's hub. Vancouver is therefore a delicate issue for Air Canada. It needs to humour the airport and the local commercial interests, while recognizing that its clear economic priority has to be to bed down in Toronto.

From Vancouver, it is hard to see exactly how Emirates and others directly threaten Air Canada, or even its partners, heading west into Asia. The carrier has chosen to consolidate its operations on Toronto, reflecting the economics of a lower yielding Vancouver gateway and the value of focussing on a single hub. Air Canada simply doesn't have the scale to manage two major airport hubs at this stage. So the argument against Emirates had to be more carefully constructed for Vancouver consumption.

The result was intriguing. First Mr. Rovinescu painted a bleak picture of Emirates turning Vancouver from a hub to a stub. Then he a presented a joyous version of Vancouver as a hub for Air Canada.

The longer term impact of letting Emirates fly into Canada, said Mr. Rovinescu, would be "devastating and could have the effect of restricting or even marginalizing Vancouver as a hub. When an international carrier dumps seats into a market like Canada, it becomes harder for Canadian airlines to operate internationally. Ultimately, this translates into less economic activity, fewer jobs and fewer routes served." The Emirates strategy, he said, would "constrain the growth of Canadian airports by turning them from hubs into stubs at the end of a spoke that leads only to Emirates' hub in Dubai."

Then Mr. Rovinescu, after an imaginative portrayal of Vancouver's potential to emulate Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth's hub roles, pointed out the great opportunity which might exist for Vancouver if it could attract substantially more global flow traffic. "I believe we can connect a lot more U.S.-Asia traffic through Vancouver. At present, we have about 34% of the Canada-Asia market, so we are getting our share domestically. But of course, in North America the far, far larger market is between the U.S. and Asia, where our share is only 1%. By winning only a couple of extra percentage points of market share on these routes we could connect a million more passengers through Vancouver's airport, ensuring Vancouver's hub status."

That "only a couple of extra percentage points" is drawing a long bow, given that Air Canada currently only operates three times weekly to Beijing and four times weekly to Shanghai from Vancouver. There are also dailies to Hong Kong, Seoul and Tokyo. A lot more movement will be needed to make Vancouver a compelling hub for the U.S. traveller -- without undermining Air Canada's Toronto hub. What Mr. Rovinescu didn't say was that the "34% of the Canada-Asia market" was heavily biased towards Toronto travel, with no clear intent to expand Vancouver's ex-Canada share.

What is Canada protecting? Last year, faced with the quandary of an airline that was "too-big-to-fail", the government stepped in to prevent Air Canada's second bankruptcy in five years. The bailout, involving substantial taxpayer-funded loans, has left the company with a large debt overhang -- although it was able to raise $260-million in an equity issue later in the year following a new deal with unions. But Air Canada is far from being out of the woods. The carrier is still burdened with the baggage that comes with 72 years of existence.

The world is replete with examples of how protectionism creates precisely the wrong atmosphere for achieving such an ambitious turnaround. Unless an airline is able independently to achieve a sustainable platform amid the rigours of today's brutally competitive marketplace, protecting it merely prolongs the suffering.

Meanwhile, the Canadian government is steadfastly hanging onto the old supportive philosophy that entails underwriting almost anything that is good for Air Canada.

It is always hard to prove what economic value is being lost in this type of regime. But examples like the parallel one of Australia suggest that, whatever the economic cost of protecting Air Canada might be for points like Vancouver (and there must inevitably be a certain loss), the danger of opening the floodgates to competition is nowhere as threatening as is being made out.

In Australia's case, despite a 50% increase in Gulf airline capacity since 2005, Qantas' international market share is almost identical to its level back then--just under 30%.

The big change, because Qantas has to be competitive in its own right, is that Jetstar, with its lower cost base, has replaced Qantas on several marginally economic routes, maintaining the group's place in the market. In other words, unable to rely on government protection, Qantas has successfully adapted to a more competitive international environment. This will stand it in good stead for the long term.

Meanwhile, airline capacity to Australia's smaller airports has blossomed. Indeed, fresh competition in the marketplace is usually the best way to encourage innovation and -- perhaps -- even to instill a new culture into an airline that is now so used to being propped up that change is instinctively opposed, not embraced.

As for inbound tourism, Canada has the blessing and the curse of a readily available market to the south; it proved to be a curse last year, as the heavy reliance on the U.S. inbound market turned stale when the recession and more stringent entry requirements saw visitor numbers almost halved.

Half of Canada's tourists by air originate in the U.S. This U.S. reliance may partly explain why Canada languishes near the bottom of the list for inbound travel from other countries. But it is unlikely the only reason. Despite Canada's vastly superior range of tourism attractions and much larger population, it gets less traffic than remote Australia. Australia welcomed just over 5 million inbound tourists by air last year. If American travellers are extracted from Canada's inbound numbers, a mere 3.5 million foreign tourists visited the country by air in 2009. Canada is a country boxing well below its weight in terms of international tourism by air.

So, for the time being, as the government focuses on supporting the national flag carrier, Canada's airports, consumers and tourism industry are going to have to continue to digest the dated rhetoric of an aviation system that should have been consigned to the pages of history last century.

- Peter Harbison is executive chairman of the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation, a leading source of global aviation analysis based in Sydney, Australia. This article first appeared on the centre's website at centreforaviation.com
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2010, 11:55 PM   #1288
urbanfan89
Registered User
 
urbanfan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,502
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
Mr. Rovinescu's ocomments are completely on point.

Canada should only sign a "open-skies" bilateral with the UAE if they allow AC 5th and 6th Freedoms. So far UAE has not been willing to do this, but rather trying to bully the Canadian government via the media... not the smartest move IMO.
EK will get their daily Toronto flight... but they'll be stuck with that for a while I think.
But the UAE unilaterally declares itself open to all airlines of the world. The trouble is that AC believes this is still the 70s where air travel is tightly controlled by governments.

It's possible that EK will do to YYZ what SQ did to YVR: serve Canada with three weekly flights, demand rights to fly daily, and when Transport Canada denies them they pull out of Canada entirely. No one wins in this scenario.
urbanfan89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 12:28 AM   #1289
YU-AMC
Aviation/Travel Nerd
 
YU-AMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Whitchurch, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,243
Likes (Received): 1036

I think EK seems fair.Let me just bring this up. As Eastern European airlines ended the overseas operations, those guys in the west took advantage of that. MA/OK/SU/OA/RO/JU/LZ all ended their long hauls. The ones in the western EU took adventage of that.

Here is an ex, lets look at Austrian. These guys depend of pax from the Balkan counties. If you look at their eastern EU network, their regional jets fly to each village in eastern europe/Balkans. It is clear that there is not enough O&D traffic from Canada to Austria. LH/KL take a nice portion as well, but I do not want to bring them up because somebody will say, "There is some serious traffic from Canada to Germany". That is true as it is.

Emirates want to do the same thing. The only thing is, nobody gives a damn about beaten up B767 that OS operates. The big deal is with Emirates because they got the money.
Even if AC got 5th and 6th freedom from Dubai, they know that AC would still lose. Emirates know that they got the cash and a super perfect position of Dubai to be the best hub for the far east. That is the bottom line.
YU-AMC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 12:34 AM   #1290
YU-AMC
Aviation/Travel Nerd
 
YU-AMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Whitchurch, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,243
Likes (Received): 1036

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
Not sure about...
VCE
ATH
OSL
...are they seasonal?


BCN/ATH/OSL/VCE/LIS all seasonal.

DL 763
CO 764

all year around for ATH.
YU-AMC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 03:13 PM   #1291
melbstud
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 667
Likes (Received): 7

Loved the article and didnt realise Canada had few inernational tourist, Australia seem to do quite well for themselves. Largerly its due to Geography, not too far from Middle East, Asia, Africa and America, infact even reach Canada YVR to be exact, all non stop only Europe is a one stop.

I think Canada should be a little more forward thinking -its government.
melbstud no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 04:03 PM   #1292
Filip
Torontonian 4ever
 
Filip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,891
Likes (Received): 435

Quote:
Originally Posted by melbstud View Post
Loved the article and didnt realise Canada had few inernational tourist, Australia seem to do quite well for themselves. Largerly its due to Geography, not too far from Middle East, Asia, Africa and America, infact even reach Canada YVR to be exact, all non stop only Europe is a one stop.

I think Canada should be a little more forward thinking -its government.
Toronto is one of the top 10 international tourist destinations.. I'm sure Canada does QUITE well.

In fact probably better due to its location - ie: not being isolated in the middle of nowhere.
Filip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 05:11 PM   #1293
Toronto_41
Registered User
 
Toronto_41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: YUL, YYZ, CDG, LGA
Posts: 256
Likes (Received): 65

I think that people should make a comparisson that is of equal value. Australia is located all on its own. It is not parked smack dab beside the wealthiest nation in the world. AC competes for traffic in North America against some of the worlds largest carriers. It is consistently being rated as one of the top airlines here in North America. I am not an AC supporter but one should realise that it is in the interest of the gov't to maintain those 20,000 jobs. If AC goes belly up, you can rest assured that the present gov't will face a whole lot of flack. Just as if they let any other major Canadian business go under, there will be hell to pay. Just the Canadian Psyche.

The largest trading partnership is between Canada and the US. So, I am a bit lost for words as to why one would compare Sydney to Toronto or Canada to Australia. If things were as fair as everyone has stated, then why was AC not allowed to fly via LAX to Sydney? Why was AC and NZ blocked from their partnership to Australia? Why did they not examine that case?

Australia does not have AA, UA, Delta, US Airways, etc serving their airports as frequently as we do here. Quantas does not have to worry about people driving over the border to catch a flight from Buffalo, Burlington or any nearby airport. As a matter of fact, you are dealing with a captive audience in Australia. You either fly out on one of those carriers in Australia or you can take a boat.

We can study all we want but if there is to be a stury, make sure to take into account all the factors and not the ones that the people feel to include.
__________________
Life is like a box of Chocolates! If you know better then everyone, then why ask?

Asia, here I come!!!
J.
Toronto_41 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 10:16 PM   #1294
yyzhyd
Registered User
 
yyzhyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 646
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Canada's Flying Moose in the headlights
Flagship carrier's protectionist response to UAE's expansion plans does more harm than good

20 March 2010
National Post

The United Arab Emirates recently upped the ante in a battle over market access to Canada for its national airlines, Emirates and Etihad. By introducing the issue of Canada's military bases into the aviation argument, the UAE hardly used a new tactic in this age-old and archaic industry...

Just because the UAE got the Aussies to bend over without even so much as a kiss doesn't mean that the Canadian Govt. should do the same.
The Australian and Canadian markets are very different in terms of international traffic/pax, and that seems to be mostly ignored in the article and only the similarities highlighted.

The article mentions how AC seems to be protecting LH's hub operations... well with full profit sharing between the two on their transatlantic routes it's to be expected.

I have stated from the beginning that if the UAE was willing to give 5th & 6th Freedoms to AC from AUH or DXB (preferably DXB) then the Canadians would have much less of an issue awarding increased flights.
I know for a fact from some very highly placed sources that the UAE has refused to put this on the table in their negotiations with Canada.

Regardless I don't think we're going to persuade eachother, so let's just agree to disagree on the merits of EK's case to Canada.
yyzhyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 10:26 PM   #1295
yyzhyd
Registered User
 
yyzhyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 646
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanfan89 View Post
But the UAE unilaterally declares itself open to all airlines of the world. The trouble is that AC believes this is still the 70s where air travel is tightly controlled by governments.

It's possible that EK will do to YYZ what SQ did to YVR: serve Canada with three weekly flights, demand rights to fly daily, and when Transport Canada denies them they pull out of Canada entirely. No one wins in this scenario.
There are several errors in your post.

UAE declares itself open to all airlines of the world yes but...
1. They do not allow 5th or 6th freedoms to many of those airlines.
2. Which means the UAE is just as tightly controlling their air travel rights.

3. Canada and Singapore have signed a pretty open bilateral which allows SQ or AC to fly daily non-stops from Singapore to YVR and other points in Canada.
4. However, SQ wanted an increase to their SIN-ICN-YVR, and their rights on the ICN-YVR sector in particulart as there were a great deal of high-yield pax on that sector (essentially wanting to skim the cream off the top). Since they didn't get it they decided to pull out.

Last edited by yyzhyd; March 22nd, 2010 at 10:34 PM.
yyzhyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 22nd, 2010, 10:33 PM   #1296
yyzhyd
Registered User
 
yyzhyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 646
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by YU-AMC View Post
Even if AC got 5th and 6th freedom from Dubai, they know that AC would still lose. Emirates know that they got the cash and a super perfect position of Dubai to be the best hub for the far east. That is the bottom line.
You think so? How many Canadians are Aeroplan members? If they had a choice of flying and getting Aeroplan miles over Skywards miles most if not all would take the Aeroplan as they can use those not only on AC but many more airlines for travel.
AC may not win outright, but EK won't be filling up those A380s ex-YYZ I can assure you of that.
yyzhyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2010, 05:07 AM   #1297
YU-AMC
Aviation/Travel Nerd
 
YU-AMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Whitchurch, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,243
Likes (Received): 1036

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzhyd View Post
You think so? How many Canadians are Aeroplan members? If they had a choice of flying and getting Aeroplan miles over Skywards miles most if not all would take the Aeroplan as they can use those not only on AC but many more airlines for travel.
AC may not win outright, but EK won't be filling up those A380s ex-YYZ I can assure you of that.
You are not looking at the bigger picture. Emirates seem much cheaper to fly with. Whenever I book with AC , it is a rip off fare. What about equipment wise.... They need nothing smaller than a B777 for this route. I doubt they have one available for this particular route. Most EU routes are done with a B767/A330. I think only LHR and FRA get a B777.
YU-AMC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2010, 08:59 AM   #1298
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,870
Likes (Received): 18149

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto_41 View Post
I think that people should make a comparisson that is of equal value. Australia is located all on its own. It is not parked smack dab beside the wealthiest nation in the world. AC competes for traffic in North America against some of the worlds largest carriers. It is consistently being rated as one of the top airlines here in North America. I am not an AC supporter but one should realise that it is in the interest of the gov't to maintain those 20,000 jobs. If AC goes belly up, you can rest assured that the present gov't will face a whole lot of flack. Just as if they let any other major Canadian business go under, there will be hell to pay. Just the Canadian Psyche.

The largest trading partnership is between Canada and the US. So, I am a bit lost for words as to why one would compare Sydney to Toronto or Canada to Australia. If things were as fair as everyone has stated, then why was AC not allowed to fly via LAX to Sydney? Why was AC and NZ blocked from their partnership to Australia? Why did they not examine that case?

Australia does not have AA, UA, Delta, US Airways, etc serving their airports as frequently as we do here. Quantas does not have to worry about people driving over the border to catch a flight from Buffalo, Burlington or any nearby airport. As a matter of fact, you are dealing with a captive audience in Australia. You either fly out on one of those carriers in Australia or you can take a boat.

We can study all we want but if there is to be a stury, make sure to take into account all the factors and not the ones that the people feel to include.
Australia actually has to put up with significant levels of international competition, and I think they're far more liberalized than Canada in general. Any flight out of there to Europe requires 1-stop, and passengers have plenty of competition to choose from. They can transit in Hong Kong, Dubai, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, or even Bangkok on a whole array of different carriers. Sure, they can't drive across the border to take another airline, but they can freely choose to fly a foreign carrier from their home city. The transpacific sector is not as competitive, although there are American and New Zealand carriers available in addition to the Australian ones (Qantas, Virgin).

Qantas is indeed worried any passenger leaving Oceania can choose the likes of Cathay, Emirates, United, Air New Zealand, or Singapore Airlines. But Australia hasn't closed the door to international competitionbut Qantas has been able to survive, even though their transit market is extremely small. New Zealand and the Pacific Islands have miniscule populations compared to the Canadian case where a giant USA stands next door to capture some traffic.

So the cost of protecting AC's job base is increased fares for all. Why should the consumer be subsidizing all this? This is also why there is an irony in the Canadian aviation industry. We have a huge population sitting across the border with close economic and cultural ties, yet AC hasn't successfully captured a major slice of the transit market. Price is key.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2010, 06:21 PM   #1299
killerk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,516
Likes (Received): 1116

Price is part of the reason...the bigger reason is that they are not a transit airline....more of a point to point one......
killerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2010, 08:11 PM   #1300
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,870
Likes (Received): 18149

^ Technically, I think AC is a transit setup. They have the big cities like Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal. With the populations scattered around so much, if people want to fly international, they will likely need to connect via one of the above big airports. This is very true for Asia, and very much for Europe besides London as well.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
canada, canadian airports, northamerica airport hubs, toronto

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium