Perhaps - but keep in mind the winter schedule is lighter. And the refurbs will be done by summer season 16. If they're not I would say it would be highly likely that undone frames wait till November 16 for refurbishment. AC is not going to have any planes in refurb in June, July, August, September. It just won't happen - they can sell every seat they can put on at a decent margin.

They didn't buy 777s because of the maintenance refurb. ($400 million in new airplanes to use for 6 months? hardly) Its because of the pilot contract. It says there must be X number of 777/787s in the widebody fleet by certain milestones. They're probably going to buy even more if their expansion keeps going as planned. They have ample aircraft from November-April to do refurb this is the period the 777s normally go away one or two at a time for major work - every year. They'll do the interiors while the mechanics are also being done. Especially with the 777X program and Boeing discounting to bridge production... Which they knew when they ordered them. They've been ordered because Air Canada likes the HD and how it performs from an economics perspective and has somewhere in mind to fly it.

Its 4 this year and 4 next to rouge at this moment.

Any speculation in this thread would be for 2016. There is not a single hour of airframe time this summer in the widebody fleet to fly anywhere else not announced. And when taking into account the refurbs there will be none this winter either. (Unless on the 3-4 787s coming in the Jan-April window but I suspect they'll not start anything they being 7879s will step in for 777s on the slower routes to allow them to go to maintenance.)

Any new routes will be inside 2016.

Probably not that many passengers terminating in SIN but certainly no lack of onward passengers to other south Asian or eastern middle east destinations ex-SIN.

However, AC is "returning" to the India market again that I don't see it flying to SIN. Besides the SIN destination is currently well served via Japan, HKG and west coast U.S. by other *A and AC should be able to easily negotiate some code share operations.

SIN

Before recent O&G bumpiness would have said PER or DRW
MEL or BNE makes sense as far as tourism and regular business travel

CP used TPE as a tech stop when its DC10 ran out of fuel between YVR and HKG. It's AC that flew to TPE and IIRC, code-share with BR. That arrangement was terminated when BR began flying to YYZ.

BR service to YYZ is probably contributed amongst other reasons for AC to raise the minimum AC metal requirement for 2015. AC probably doesn't like people flying BR to Asia from YYZ but getting *G status on Altitude.

BR has PE on all its flights ex-YYZ and its discount J to many Asian destinations is about 10% or so cheaper than AC. Easy connection at TPE, beat connecting via the U.S. any time. BR's newer pod is certainly superior to AC's ageing ones.

BR should have sufficient demand to increase the current thrice weekly YYZ-TPE service to more frequently.

Jan/15 - Guess AC's next two TPAC/TATL destinations!
 

I hope MNL! I know I'd be on that flight at least twice a year if AC operates it.

If they code shared with SQ for destinations beyond SIN such as DPS, MLE, BKK it might be feasible.

MEL seems to be high up on the list of new destinations with the arrival of the 789, but as a second destination, I would say a first foray into Africa south of the Sahara, with a 3/4 weekly schedule to JNB.

Thanks :) Helps me add in data for my childhood memories!

We're in agreement. I don't think there is the metal for any additional TPAC/TATL in 2015, without canning or reducing a route.

As for the 2 new 77s, I think the timing of these helps to cover the refurbishment time of the current 777s. In no way did I believe they are there only for that time period.

yvr-mel its a cash cow to go to Australia if AC has the rights.

Right sorry, forgot about the French connection. Makes even more sense from YUL as "Rouge"

YVR-SIN was previously operated, like 3-4 times a week by SQ via ICN. I'm not sure how long it lasted but they pulled it some time ago.

YYZ-TPE to me just makes sense. There's SOOOO many Taiwanese in this country and while YVR already has CI and BR directs it probably doesn't need another one since there's plenty of direct seats and connecting seats, but YYZ only has BR.

YVR-MNL, I don't know about this. There's lots of Filipinos, I worked with lots of these guys and 1 thing that I heard from many of them was that they didn't fly Philippines because it was just too pricey, so they'd go CI or CX or even AC whoever was cheapest. I don't want to generalize but most of these Filipinos (and ALL the ones I know) aren't rich so price is the biggest factor for them, lots of the guys I knew worked 2-3 jobs sent home like 75% of their pay and lived as modest as possible in Canada so when it comes time to fly home not only do they look at price, but they look at excess baggage fees, if you've ever walked past these guys in line at the airport you know why. The reason I think it might work for AC is the domestic connections on our end. As a handler at YVR I found it surprising how many newly immigrated Filipinos were moving to places like Regina/Saskatoon/Winnipeg. I guess they just were going to wherever the jobs were. I'm not saying AC can't make a go of this, and I don't know how well PR does on the route but I guess they do OK since they keep it running, but that's not what the people I knew would tell you.

You mean like the flight that already exists ;)

I would like to say WAW, but that is never gonna happen, so I will say ARN or OSL.

TPAC - CTU or CAN or some other place in China with enough traffic to support a 787.

I assume you are referring to the Royal Air Marroc flight?

SQ couldnt make YVR-ICN-SIN work with their A340's.. however, the 787 might make that route viable.

Dare i say, KHI ? 400,000 Pakistanis in the GTA who use PK, EY, EK and QR.

YYZ-JNB