Stratoliner777

Hi all, haven't flown AC in a long time, but had pleasant experiences before (in Y). Recently came across some advance purchase transatlantic J fares that are very attractive and considering flying AC again this summer.

Question though: any opinions on the state of the 767 fleet? Looking at fleet statistics, most are over 20 years old, dating to 1988. Hopefully these aircraft are still in good condition? Do they go tech often, or feel creaky etc? All the J flights I've been looking at are operated by 767s. Hopefully AC has cared for these birds well--heck they have decades of experience with them. Still, despite the statistics and good record, there still linger safety questions about older aircraft, in general.

I've read the "AC widebodies" and the "versions of the 767" threads and it seems that design-wise, the J cabin is nice, medium luggage storage levels, etc., and that the 767 cabins may be a bit more worn but still serviceable.

Guess I've been spoiled a bit by flying new 777s for most of my transpac flights; the oldest plane I've been on lately was an aging BA 744 which had lavatories inop. One assumes that had the 787s been delivered on time, the 767s would not have had to soldier along as much.

Thanks for any insights.

14940674

Greater safety questions linger about the drive to the airport. Every flight operated by AC is a safe flight, regardless of aircraft.

Away from YYZ

Really?! How long ago was that and on what itinerary?

Stratoliner777

Yes, you're right, objectively. AC has an excellent record from what I've read. But I would prefer a newer aircraft. It will be interesting though...I don't have much experience with heavily retrofitted older aircraft. I recall being on 20+ yr old NW and DL trijets years ago, with old worn interiors and projector entertainment; those were relics in their day! I can only imagine how the experience would be different if they were XM'ed.

Wonder if there is any info on how many cycles AC's 767s have accumulated? I just read that during fatigue testing, the static 767 test frame was subjected to 100,000 cycles or equivalent to 40 years of service, which makes me feel better.

LOL, that was in the late 1990s and on LAX-YYC and YVR-LAX routes...and that was with no IFE! I'm sure AC has its fair share of complaints, but compared with the horrid IFE options and seating on other, mainly domestic U.S. carriers, AC Y seems palatable (I'm also looking at certain transatlantic segments in AC Y class).

In-seat power, 32" vs. 31" seat pitch (in certain 767 Y sections), and the enRoute system seems pretty good (although possibly glitchy and the map might not work--hopefully they've fixed that?).

But by all means, please feel free to share possible experiences to affect my expectations!

Jebby_ca

I think your car, even if you kept it in good condition, would not have been as thoroughly checked as Air Canada's 767's are on a daily basis...

You should feel very safe to fly in Air Canada's "ancient" 767's.

FlyerTalker683455

They look as new or worn as any of the newer planes, once onboard. Outside they have shiny paint, just as any other newer plane. They do have this esoteric way of keeping their crew tied to each plane from date of purchase, especially in J class (and they had seniority back in 1988!). So make sure you wear your eyeshades...it ain't SQ!

Another thing is that for some reason the exit doors are very very draughty. So unless they happen to give you a thick J blanket, you will freeze. I wouldn't pick the window seat by the exit anymore.

alexthe5th

I think the OP would be positively horrified if he went to Iran and flew on a Saha Air 707.

Update: I think they're still flying A300s too.

Guy Betsy

Well maintained is one thing. But dirty interiors (that includes the washrooms) are another!

ACYYZ/SD

The most perilous part of my day is driving on the 401 to work

The 767 is my aircraft of choice - they are solid and well maintained, and remain the workhorse of our International fleet. From a working perspective, the aircraft has the perfect load/configuration for manageability, and allows me more individual interaction, with a better scope of what's happening from front to back (211 guests versus 349). Given the lighter load on a 767 versus 777, we can stretch out customer rest/sleep a little bit longer, as larger aircraft require more time and coordination for service delivery.

To each his/her own - for me it is a matter of size. Bigger/newer not necessarily better

global happy traveller

the only signs of its age is probably the overhead bin space...... square and blocky

ACYYZ/SD

Except of course on fins 691/692 (non-XM'd aircraft) which have 777 style bins. There's always an upside

jjclancy

... you have to go back a decade to find a fatal crash of a 767 on any operator, and two decades to find one that wasn't solely pilot error or a deliberate act.

c_9

Check out Air Canada's fleet here:
http://www.airfleets.net/ageflotte/Air%20Canada.htm

Compare against, for example, American Airlines:
http://www.airfleets.net/ageflotte/A...20Airlines.htm

I echo the statements on safety - the planes have far more attention, legal protection, and documentation of every part, than your car or house. You have no cause for concern on the safety side of the equation. Service? Price? IFE? Food? All different conversations.

Stratoliner777

All good points, thanks. I have confidence that AC does a good job maintaining its fleet. These 767s have gone through D-check teardowns and essentially rebuilt and reexamined. Also, the 767 does have a good safety record, as pointed out.

You are correct!!! No way am I flying a 707 unless it is John Travolta's.

Good points indeed!!! Actually I have LOVED my 767 flights on other carriers, precisely because of the medium capacity, 2-3-2 configuration, etc. In my experience it's quite a pleasant aircraft to fly on, and lacks the crowded feeling of larger widebody jets.

And 24 J pax vs 42 in a 777 makes for a more exclusive feel.

Thanks for the info!!! I just read a trip report where the F/A told pax that if they wanted to sit by the exit doors they had to "be a true Canadian" and stand the cold! One wonders though, given plug-type doors, how it is colder there...air circulation perhaps?


Well hopefully the planes well be reasonably clean! The lavatories especially...

My last 767 flights were a couple of years ago on a pair of JAL birds; one with the new interior and the other without. The difference was night and day, although both were impeccably clean. Now I'm likely to avoid the ex-Hawaiian 767s with the high-density config and 777 bins. The rest of the AC 767 fleet has the old bins but new seats, so hopefully it will be a good compromise. The older bins do hold less but hopefully they will fit my roller bags fine.

Thanks everyone for the detailed responses! It's great to read the reasoned assurances.

jarusoba

My wife always uses the towel the FAs hand her to wipe all over her seat, the IFE, walls of the pod, the table etc. She can't stand the little dust/booger particles on all the crevices onboard an AC plane!