EdmFlyBoi

Oops - correct. Did the calculations too quickly. My point about the 28J remains the same however.

m.y

You are right, I had a typo, should be 28 incremental Pods, but doesn't matter the exact number of additional seats, the point still stands that the 777w brings in a lot more revenue and can be quite profitable given the high load factor these days.

YOWgary

Hard to say.

Sometimes an airline is better off with the aircraft it can get delivered now, than with the operationally-ideal aircraft delivered 18 months later.

Symmetre

Interesting to have the 77L on my last two YYZ-MUC trips ... traveling there again early next month and it's once again the scheduled AC. My pre-pandemic travels on this route have generally been on a 77W. Not sure why the switch to the smaller airframe now, since the 77Ws were always packed.

EdmFlyBoi

I would think it again comes down to the aircraft available to fly the routes AC needs to fly. There are 8 788's and 6 77L's that have to allocated somewhere (as mentioned previously). In normal times the 77L's were allocated to YVR-SYD and YYZ-HKG (4 frames). COVID and the war in Ukraine has turned everything upside down. The 77L hauls more in its belly than a 789, hence why it may be allocated to certain routes over the 789. Since the 789 and 77L have similar seat numbers, AC may shift based on cargo demand, and could potentially do this quite close to the flight time. The refurbishment of the A330 has brought its seat count to 297 which also makes in somewhat interchangeable with the 789 and 77L (if the difference in J and PY seats are ignored). And just because a 77W was packed when you flew it, a 77W may not be available because it is better allocated to another route where the income generated by the flight is greater. It is why all airlines have route planning, yield management, and all sorts of other resources that look at these dynamic factors when allocating certain aircraft to certain routes. It is complex but the way it is done is likely quite sophisticated.

capedreamer

Makes sense.

Out of curiousity, do you (or does anyone) recall what YYZ-LHR frequency / type was pre-pandemic?

EdmFlyBoi

4 daily. Three overnight and the 1 day-tripper.

StuMcIlwain

International business travel is still way down while international leisure travel has exploded. AC needs to fly enough flights into LHR to keep their slots*, but without business travel, demand is likely down overall, so it makes sense that they are using smaller aircraft for LHR. Also, I don't think the airlines expected that leisure travel would rebound as quickly as it has.

* That was true until earlier this month, when due to the meltdown at LHR, the UK decided that they would not take away slots that weren't being used. But with most flights to anywhere in Europe very full, this isn't going to change any of AC's fleet utilization plans.

capedreamer

Good point re: business travel and slot retention. Thanks!

D582

The 787 order was made based on supposed performance figures from Boeing. AC had originally ordered 15 788s IIRC, and the 788 was the first variant built and delivered by Boeing. Once 789s started to be produced and flown by other carriers and AC, it was apparent that the 789s performance and economics were much better than originally thought so AC converted 7 788 orders to 789.

Adam Smith

A reminder that we have a specific thread for discussion of current in-flight experiences, such as load factors on particular flights. A number of off topic posts have been deleted to try to keep this thread to the topic in the thread title/OP.

Adam Smith
AC Forum Moderator

muskoka

Not necessarily long haul, but Im seeing 788's 789's and even 777W and 777L's being used on YYZ-YYC and YYZ-YVR mostly on redeyes but
other times throughout the day as well. While most of the YYC-YYZ flights are operated with the usual 321's and a couple 7M8's sprinkled in Im wondering why so many widebodies on these routes
over the summer & fall? Maybe this is normal? Im on a 77L in August and a 77W in Sept- YYC-YYZ- hoping for an upgrade-maybe the additional J seats will help my cause!

BR787

I don't remember it being this common but I'm also not an intra-Canadian flyer. AC used to reposition aircrafts by scheduling aircrafts on something like YYC-LHR-YYZ but now that not all YYZ-LHR flights are 777s, maybe this is a new way of repositioning given loads to LHR are down?

Adam Smith

Why? AC maintained a fleet of only 8 333s for nearly 20 years before expanding it, and for over a decade after they ditched the last of the A340s. The 788 has more economies of scale with the 789 than the 333 had with anything else during that decade, so the incremental cost of having it has not necessarily been outrageous.

The 788 may have not been exactly what AC expected from a performance perspective, whether in absolute terms or compared to the 789, but that doesn't mean they regret ordering it.

They've frequently used the 788 to open up new routes and see how demand shakes out, in addition to filling in spots in the schedule where the 788 is a better fit than a larger or smaller aircraft, whether that be on a TATL route for a short period of time, doing some of the TCONs, etc.

Widebodies have frequently been deployed on TCONs for ages (excluding the COVID period). There's nothing new or odd about this.

The use of widebodies on those routes has always varied seasonally depending on demand.

YOWgary

Sometimes a widebody will shuttle back and forth on domestic routes for days at a time, and then go weeks without flying another domestic leg.