Jump to content

Yyc Aif Up To $30


internet

Recommended Posts

Any airport authority operate with variable pricing? That is to say they charge airlines higher fees for departures at peak times when the gates are all full, and less at times when the 12 gate concourse has two airplanes parked there? Maybe stimulate demand when the airport has capacity? Instead of building 12 more gates that would be used for 2 hours a day?

I wonder if this system of supply and demand / or yield management could work in this crazy aviation business?

This has been tried in Europe and has even been considered here in Canada. The primary issue is that congestion pricing has some pretty negative consequences for an airport and the principal airline. In the case of YYZ, it would provide a disincentive for Air Canada and WestJet to build connection banks to promote timely and efficient connections (something the airline and the airport want).

That being said, there is a time and a place for congestion based charges, and that is when you are operating at near-capacity during non-peak times. For example, an airport like LHR could pull that off. From the perspective of the bigger Canadian airports (YYZ, YVR, YYC, and YUL), it would undermine efforts to increase connection activity and place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to airports in the USA that compete for international connecting traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Interesting comments, but you'll never get me to believe this size of an expansion is necessary for YYC, or that it's being done efficiently / effectively. And I find it absolutely disgusting when I see it will cost $220 for a family of 4 to travel between YYC and YYZ just in AIF's, never mind what the airlines are alread paying.

Not sure how accurate this is but I've heard YYZ is still paying for the T2 and most of the AIF simply goes to pay interest on the debt, so there's no hope of it ever going away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting comments, but you'll never get me to believe this size of an expansion is necessary for YYC, or that it's being done efficiently / effectively. And I find it absolutely disgusting when I see it will cost $220 for a family of 4 to travel between YYC and YYZ just in AIF's, never mind what the airlines are alread paying.

Not sure how accurate this is but I've heard YYZ is still paying for the T2 and most of the AIF simply goes to pay interest on the debt, so there's no hope of it ever going away.

As I said in my first post, the $220 is simply a reflection of public policy decisions related to Canada's airports. If the federal government funded infrastructure projects, the AIF would be much, much smaller. We're part of a user pay system. Unfortunately for Canadian airports and airlines, our largest competitors across the border are not.

The GTAA currently has about $8 billion in outstanding bonds. As with all airport authorities in Canada, rates and charges are set annually based upon the cost required to operated the airport and to repay bonds that are coming due. Airports typically also maintain a few reserve accounts to protect against airline insolvency, epidemics like SARS, or terrorism activity.

The master trust indenture that airports operate under ensures that the airports will be debt free before the ground leases expire.

Finally, most airport authorities in Canada (those that issue bonds) also issue annual reports that contain a great deal of information about how money is earned and spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the Enoch propose that very idea as an alternative in response to the closure of CYXD (Edmonton Muni, or whatever it is called these days), as well as an alternative home for the Alberta Aviation Museum?

I thought that was a proposal by Air Mikisew?

And what becomes of the Alberta Aviation Museum, since it is presumably amongst the land to be expropriated for the subsudized urban hippie commune or whatever exactly it is they're building there? It looks **bleep** ridiculous.

I have seen some angry people at YXD over the years and for damn good reasons, but the folks still there are so on edge it look like they could go postal at absolutely any moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rozar s'macco

The YYZ CDF is the best deicing facility in Canada and USA, possibly the world.. I say that without a trace of irony. It is fashionable to bash the home team, but there are 6 bays, 2 spots in each, so 12 aircraft can spray at once; it is terrific.

Also, YYC needs another runway. It is terrible right now.

Imagine Toronto without an airport. Ridiculous. So why should travellers be the only ones to pay for it? An airport is a necessary piece of infrastructure wih massive economic benefits to the region it serves, and as such should be paid for by everyone in the catchment area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I asked why the new YYC runway was going to be longer than the existing runway I was told it was in the hope of getting more traffic from Asia in the summer. I’d love to see the business case on that one, millions of dollars to build the longer section and then ongoing maintenance costs of it forever. Plus it further made the case to spend hundreds of millions on an unnecessary tunnel, brilliant. Just like expansion of YXS with the hope of bringing in more cargo traffic, that’s been an unmitigated failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I asked why the new YYC runway was going to be longer than the existing runway I was told it was in the hope of getting more traffic from Asia in the summer. I’d love to see the business case on that one, millions of dollars to build the longer section and then ongoing maintenance costs of it forever. Plus it further made the case to spend hundreds of millions on an unnecessary tunnel, brilliant. Just like expansion of YXS with the hope of bringing in more cargo traffic, that’s been an unmitigated failure.

14,000 feet does seem a little excessive. But consider what I said earlier about airports having a much longer planning horizon than airlines.

I don't know YYC well, but let me share some thoughts on why it may be better to build bigger now.

1. It is damned hard to get land for airport expansion. This effort increases with time. In 20 years, will urban encroachment preclude the possibility of further runway expansion? What will future environmental assessments look like, will they be cost prohibitive?

2. I just read a news article that WestJet is evaluating the addition of wide-body aircraft to their fleet. Can you say for certain that WestJet or ACA won't be operating 777s from Calgary to Asia in 20 years?

3. Calgary is a the third busiest airport in Canada. It's only a matter of time before Asia and trans-atlantic traffic fly there direct with much greater frequency.

4. We are at a time of historically low interest rates. YYC bonds to fund this construction are probably in the 3% range. What will they be in five years, or ten?

5. As I recall, the tunnel project was mired in controversy. Perhaps YYC management felt that the support they have now from the city for airport expansion may not be there in 5-10-20 years.

As I said, I don't know the YYC situation well but those are some thoughts for why the decision to build big and build now may have happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The YYZ CDF is the best deicing facility in Canada and USA, possibly the world.. I say that without a trace of irony. It is fashionable to bash the home team, but there are 6 bays, 2 spots in each, so 12 aircraft can spray at once; it is terrific.

You're absolutely right. YYZ does have the best set up I have seen......US, Europe, Asia.....nothing compares. And some of the others are a joke. You get sprayed and the aircraft turning out of the next lane blows a snow drift all over your freshly de-iced a/c......YVR has this problem.

IMHO, YYZ is like a drive thru car wash. Sometimes you have to wait but once you're in they're fast and professional.

Back on topic.....from the photo posted, there seems to be an odd assortment/design of taxiways west of the new YYC runway. Is this an accurate plan of what's being built?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I just read a news article that WestJet is evaluating the addition of wide-body aircraft to their fleet. Can you say for certain that WestJet or ACA won't be operating 777s from Calgary to Asia in 20 years?

3. Calgary is a the third busiest airport in Canada. It's only a matter of time before Asia and trans-atlantic traffic fly there direct with much greater frequency.

As i said before, YYC is mostly a domestic airport. Over 70% of its traffic is domestic. Before more frequency is created to Asia or Europe, airlines will upgauge equipment. Ex. AC will go to a 77W from YYC-NRT before it adds a second frequency, or even a new destination, as most Asian destinations are an easy connection from NRT.

Same for Europe. YYC cannot support anything more that the service it currently has to Europe. This was displayed very well by LH pulling out of YYC recently. Even if more capacity is needed, airlines will first upgauge equipment. This alone is good enough for YYC for the next 10-15 years, possibly even longer.

In fact, YYC should consider itself lucky to have non-stops to Asia and Europe. Bigger cities in the States, such as St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, etc...dont even come close to what YYC has in terms of international lineup.

Thenoflyzone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YYC cannot support anything more that the service it currently has to Europe. This was displayed very well by LH pulling out of YYC recently. Even if more capacity is needed, airlines will first upgauge equipment. This alone is good enough for YYC for the next 10-15 years, possibly even longer.

Maybe the YYC airport authority has hired Kevin as a consultant......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rozar s'macco

Is this not the ultimate marginal cost argument? They're expanding the airport, check. A zillion approvals, hundreds of millions of dollars, construction logistics, on and off airport closures, political hoops...it's a gigantic undertaking, making a new runway. It would be pennywise not to make the dang runway as long as possible right away, while all the bulldozers are already gassed up and on site. Good planning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. Calgary is a the third busiest airport in Canada. It's only a matter of time before Asia and trans-atlantic traffic fly there direct with much greater frequency.

First off, YYC is Canada's fourth busiest airport. YUL is third. (we are talking about passenger numbers here, not aircraft movements, as the latter has no direct implication to our discussion.)

Second, i wouldn't hold my breath on any new international scheduled service into YYC. LH pulled out recently, that's indication enough that YYC cannot handle too much capacity, even to a major Star Alliance hub such as FRA.

The long runway may be a military consideration?

Not really. Military aircraft currently wishing to transit YYC have plenty of runway lenght with 16/34. In fact, any modern airliner would have no problem reaching East Asia with the current 12,675 ft runway at YYC. The extra 2 thousand feet with the new parallel runway is not what airlines in Asia are waiting for in order to start service to YYC. If demand was there, they would have started already.

Thenoflyzone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, YYC is Canada's fourth busiest airport. YUL is third. (we are talking about passenger numbers here, not aircraft movements, as the latter has no direct implication to our discussion.)

WHAT?

Runway capacity directly affects the number of aircraft movements and therefore YYC being 3rd in movements is most relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT?

Runway capacity directly affects the number of aircraft movements and therefore YYC being 3rd in movements is most relevant.

Let me rephrase that. More Asia and Trans Atlantic service has no direct link with aircraft movements, bur rather passenger numbers. More people use the airport, more chances there are of being more destinations.

That was my point. We all know YYC needs the parallel runway, it is a busy airport in terms of aircraft movement, but in term passengers, it is 4th, although it will be very close to YUL this year, less than 500,000.

Thenoflyzone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And of course during the summer, RWY length is important if Temperature Accountability is a limiting factor, or do the modern birds achieve max lift even at YYC altitude and high temps?

As i said in reply 41.....

In fact, any modern airliner would have no problem reaching East Asia with the current 12,675 ft runway at YYC. The extra 2 thousand feet with the new parallel runway is not what airlines in Asia are waiting for in order to start service to YYC.

YYC average temp in June is 20 C, in July and Aug, it's 22 C, in Sept, it drops to 17C.

Most of the time, it is enough, as most international destinations offered out of YYC require nowhere near a MTOW config. That being said, I understand YYC's business case justifying an extra 1000-2000 feet, because technically a B77W or B77L with GE90 engines (which is what AC has), on a standard day or even a standard day +15 C (which is 22C at YYC altitude), will reach tire speed limit around 13,500 ft down the runway. So YYC wants to make sure that it has enough runway to hit that max tire speed.

http://www.boeing.co...ps/777rsec3.pdf

it is the same thing for most modern commercial airliners. Max tire speed is the limiting factor at high alt airports (JNB, ADD, etc) not the end of the runway.

Look at Ethiopian airlines.

ADD (altitude of 7,600ft) has a 15,500ft runway, and yet the 787 still has to stop at FCO on it's way to IAD or YYZ. Why, max tire speed on takeoff roll is the limiting factor. You could pave 20,000 ft of runway if you wanted. Past 13,500-14,000ft, it is pretty much useless. Hence why most hub airports have runways capped out around 14,000ft, since building anything longer than that is wasting asphalt and, more importantly, money !

Thenoflyzone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14,000 feet does seem a little excessive. But consider what I said earlier about airports having a much longer planning horizon than airlines.

1. It is damned hard to get land for airport expansion. This effort increases with time. In 20 years, will urban encroachment preclude the possibility of further runway expansion? What will future environmental assessments look like, will they be cost prohibitive?

2. I just read a news article that WestJet is evaluating the addition of wide-body aircraft to their fleet. Can you say for certain that WestJet or ACA won't be operating 777s from Calgary to Asia in 20 years?

3. Calgary is a the third busiest airport in Canada. It's only a matter of time before Asia and trans-atlantic traffic fly there direct with much greater frequency.

4. We are at a time of historically low interest rates. YYC bonds to fund this construction are probably in the 3% range. What will they be in five years, or ten?

5. As I recall, the tunnel project was mired in controversy. Perhaps YYC management felt that the support they have now from the city for airport expansion may not be there in 5-10-20 years.

With the kind of money they are spending in Calgary you are going to need a lot more than a few potential WestJet 777 flights to Asia to make the business case.

Since Calgary's fortunes rise and fall with oil prices, the money being spent in that airport is reckless. The world is moving away from oil. It's slow right now but no one can stop the progress. If not moving away from oil then it would be greater supply from shale just as we are seeing in natural gas.

So in 20 years Calgary could be a much bigger city or it could be a stagnant or smaller city. It all depends on oil prices.

The only attraction for tourists to Calgary is Banff and that will not change with oil prices. The question remains, is tourist traffic alone sufficient to meet the growth forecasts to justify the spending? Probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"since building anything longer than that is wasting asphalt and, more importantly, money"

Great post, but with respect to the above line, may I add; 'unless you're attempting a reject from V1 as per the conditions above'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...