Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air Canada | Aeroplan
Reload this Page >

Air Canada Master Fleet Strategy Thread

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Feb 15, 2019, 9:51 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: YVR72
Sources
Information below is based on the fleet plan reported in the latest fleet update in the quarterly MD&A, (currently 2025-Q4 [English PDF]) with updates based on information from planespotters.net, press releases, and other sources. Please expand the "Spoilers" section that the bottom of the wiki to see latest updates. This spreadsheet contains data on AC's fleet back to 2005, and includes numerous charts that detail the evolution of various types in the fleet from then until the present.



22 April 2026


Spoiler
 
Print Wikipost

Air Canada Master Fleet Strategy Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 11:33 am
  #2416  
All eyes on you!
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Location: Canada
Programs: Aeroplan 25k
Posts: 171
Originally Posted by The Lev
Didn't AC Express have one - I certainly assume it did in the Air Nova days.
Yes Air Nova did. I think it closed about 20 years ago.
AC has never had a pilot base there. (There used to be an AC FA base but it closed al long time ago)
Nightflyer787 is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 4:11 pm
  #2417  
10 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,230
Originally Posted by PLeblond
Given that Rouge MAXs will have basically the same interior as the current ML (yes, with fewer J seats) and the rest of mainline narrow-bodies following the trends with slimline seats and less pitch, will being 'Rouged' still mean anything significant going forward?

If this chart is accurate, flying on anything other than a C-Series sounds equally crappy all around.


The chart is out of date. The A321s are now 30" in economy as well.

The A220s are now advertised with 30" pitch, although they haven't changed anything on those planes, so they maybe they have some 30" rows and some 31" rows?
StuMcIlwain is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 4:40 pm
  #2418  
30 Countries Visited
Community Builder
All eyes on you!
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YOW
Programs: AC P(easant)25K
Posts: 1,247
Originally Posted by StuMcIlwain
The chart is out of date. The A321s are now 30" in economy as well.

The A220s are now advertised with 30" pitch, although they haven't changed anything on those planes, so they maybe they have some 30" rows and some 31" rows?
Yes. Somebody here had shared an internal cad drawing, some rows are indeed have more pitch than the others usually +/- an inch, even seat width can be varied +/- 0.5" on some models.
Leyland1989 is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 5:33 pm
  #2419  
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: YHZ. Previously YYC
Posts: 1,953
Originally Posted by Mikey Mike Mike
2. For us in Halifax, i think there are only 2 or 3 options.
* The obvious move would be to Rouge YHZ to LHR and keep it as a Max Operation.
* Put it to A321ULR before the Maxes all leave the mainline fleet, though I suspect the route is too lean for a high number of biz seats, and the capacity may not be there for a daily flight.
* I'm guessing a A321 may just make it, or switch it to an A330 but again - too large for the market. (I dream about a 767 returning to the route with that lovely 2-3-2 config. (or was it 2-4-2)
You're not wrong about Halifax getting all the crappy planes. It seems every single YYZ-YHZ-YYZ I take is on the old A321.

As for YHZ-LHR, I'm really hoping it doesn't get rouged but I think that's exactly what's going to happen. The J loads are usually always full on this route, so they'd lose some revenue there by rouging it but I don't see them putting the A321XL on that route nor the A330.
pilotboy1985YYC is online now  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 5:57 pm
  #2420  
 
Join Date: Sep 2024
Location: YHZ
Programs: AC 35K, DL Silver, Bonvoy LT Platinum
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by Mikey Mike Mike
2. For us in Halifax, i think there are only 2 or 3 options.
* The obvious move would be to Rouge YHZ to LHR and keep it as a Max Operation.
* Put it to A321ULR before the Maxes all leave the mainline fleet, though I suspect the route is too lean for a high number of biz seats, and the capacity may not be there for a daily flight.
* I'm guessing a A321 may just make it, or switch it to an A330 but again - too large for the market. (I dream about a 767 returning to the route with that lovely 2-3-2 config. (or was it 2-4-2?)
Originally Posted by pilotboy1985YYC
As for YHZ-LHR, I'm really hoping it doesn't get rouged but I think that's exactly what's going to happen. The J loads are usually always full on this route, so they'd lose some revenue there by rouging it but I don't see them putting the A321XL on that route nor the A330.
Galardo has said on the record (Why Air Canada Wants More Range in its Long-Haul Fleet) that the XLR eventually will replace 7M8 on YHZ-LHR.
“If you’re in a smaller airport where you have an obstacle at the end of the runway, or you have a short runway, or you have heat concerns, it starts to cut down the payload,” Galardo said. “That’s a concern, and that’s something I don’t think we factored in when we made the purchase decision.” That means some long routes (like Toronto-to-Prague and Toronto-to-Budapest) will work fine in the summer. So will other thin routes that Air Canada plans, such as Halifax-to-London and Montreal-to-Edinburgh. The XLR will replace 737 Max 8s on both sectors.
That being said,.. he could have been speaking out of turn, or they could very well have changed their strategy/direction since that interview.

Originally Posted by pilotboy1985YYC
You're not wrong about Halifax getting all the crappy planes. It seems every single YYZ-YHZ-YYZ I take is on the old A321.
It's YYZ that's the problem . YHZ to and from YUL is mostly A220s running back and forth.

Originally Posted by Mikey Mike Mike
Ultimately, the atlantic provinces get all of the rubbish aircraft leftovers.
Now, if you're talking about the rubbish PAL birds that we get to fly to and from YOW...

Last edited by miniborder; Feb 18, 2026 at 6:11 pm
miniborder is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 6:03 pm
  #2421  
5 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by pilotboy1985YYC
You're not wrong about Halifax getting all the crappy planes. It seems every single YYZ-YHZ-YYZ I take is on the old A321.

As for YHZ-LHR, I'm really hoping it doesn't get rouged but I think that's exactly what's going to happen. The J loads are usually always full on this route, so they'd lose some revenue there by rouging it but I don't see them putting the A321XL on that route nor the A330.
Right now there is no J on YHZ-LHR, they sell the recliners as PY for TATL flights. If they move to the XLR it will be J, and they have also said they plan on moving the daytripper back to YYZ, so even more reason to have lie flats if YHZ goes back to a red-eye.
miniborder likes this.
romanr27 is online now  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 6:59 pm
  #2422  
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: YHZ. Previously YYC
Posts: 1,953
Originally Posted by romanr27
Right now there is no J on YHZ-LHR, they sell the recliners as PY for TATL flights. If they move to the XLR it will be J, and they have also said they plan on moving the daytripper back to YYZ, so even more reason to have lie flats if YHZ goes back to a red-eye.
You're right, it is sold as PY. You do get access to the lounge though as if you were in J and you also get the J class meal as if you were on a widebody. However, what's really frustrating is you're charged J level redemption rates. More often than not the YHZ-LHR is far more points in PY than it you did J reward and connect in Toronto, Ottawa or Montreal.

pilotboy1985YYC is online now  
Old Feb 18, 2026 | 7:09 pm
  #2423  
10 Countries Visited
2M
100 Nights
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Programs: Marriott LTT, AA LTG MM, AC 25K
Posts: 3,961
Originally Posted by pilotboy1985YYC
You're right, it is sold as PY. You do get access to the lounge though as if you were in J and you also get the J class meal as if you were on a widebody.
We recently flew this route and there is no lounge access without paying in YHZ. Fortunately had credits to burn. I wouldn't describe the meal as J class either and the second meal is the same as economy.
yyzflyer is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 6:42 am
  #2424  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 18,379
Originally Posted by PLeblond
Not sure you can use the CS100 v/v CS300 as an example. The CS300 has a higher MTOW 156k lbs vs. 139k lbs. In a simple stretch there is no expected increase in MTOW so a CS500 would not have the extra capacity for fuel and the extra weight of the stretch, the seats, the PAX and their luggage would remove fuel. The delta in range from a CS500 should be considerably more.
Leeham modeling suggests a 13% reduction in range for the -500 (but then the map they show indicates 2,900 nautical miles vs. 3,100nm - which is a much smaller 6.5% gap, so perhaps call it 2,700 nautical miles range...
https://leehamnews.com/2026/02/19/ai...es-challenges/
The Lev is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 7:02 am
  #2425  
Formerly known as tireman77
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,788
Originally Posted by The Lev
Leeham modeling suggests a 13% reduction in range for the -500 (but then the map they show indicates 2,900 nautical miles vs. 3,100nm - which is a much smaller 6.5% gap, so perhaps call it 2,700 nautical miles range...
https://leehamnews.com/2026/02/19/ai...es-challenges/
I noted that their gcmap graph uses ATL & CDG as centre points. Hubs for both airlines who want a larger C Series and have stated range is not a factor for their use.

The longest current route operated by a C Series is RIX-DXB, if correct, this represents 2.685mi (2,332nm) real world use. YUL-YVR is 1,995nm or roughly 15% less. It would seem that for real world use, a YUL-YVR use would pe possible, but perhaps not plausible year-round. And YUL-SFO/LAX out of contention.

Still not convinced this plane is right for AC and more of a get out of jail card for Airbus who wants to keep producing A321s so they can't sell anymore A320s for most customers

​​​​​​​
PLeblond is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 7:39 am
  #2426  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 18,379
Originally Posted by PLeblond
Still not convinced this plane is right for AC and more of a get out of jail card for Airbus who wants to keep producing A321s so they can't sell anymore A320s for most customers
I would beg to differ. The -500 could probably be deployed on 90%+ of AC's frequencies in North America. The outliers can be served by the MAX and 321XLR.

At the end of the day it will come down to whether Airbus can produce and sell the thing for a price that is competitive with the MAX and A320 after taking into account superior operating economics. The challenge for them will be that it currently costs more to manufacture the 220 than the 320 and they have limited 220 capacity, so the -500 only makes sense if Airbus can use it as a strategy to free up room on the line to sell more A321's.
The Lev is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 7:52 am
  #2427  
Formerly known as tireman77
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,788
Originally Posted by The Lev
I would beg to differ. The -500 could probably be deployed on 90%+ of AC's frequencies in North America. The outliers can be served by the MAX and 321XLR.

At the end of the day it will come down to whether Airbus can produce and sell the thing for a price that is competitive with the MAX and A320 after taking into account superior operating economics. The challenge for them will be that it currently costs more to manufacture the 220 than the 320 and they have limited 220 capacity, so the -500 only makes sense if Airbus can use it as a strategy to free up room on the line to sell more A321's.
I would agree with the 90% rule, if not for the fact that YULYYZ --> YVR/SFO/LAX are probably in the top 10 most important NA routes where the added capacity is needed. So if the model works outside of the pareto optimal routes, then why bother?

And this is from the guy who thinks the C-Series is the best plane in AC's narrow-body fleet. By a country mile.
PLeblond is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 7:58 am
  #2428  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 18,379
Originally Posted by PLeblond
I would agree with the 90% rule, if not for the fact that YULYYZ --> YVR/SFO/LAX are probably in the top 10 most important NA routes where the added capacity is needed. So if the model works outside of the pareto optimal routes, then why bother?
If I were a betting man, I would suggest that AC has plans to make YYZ/YUL <-> YVR/SFO/LAX all Signature Service by using a combo of XLR and widebodies, so if correct the point becomes moot.

In terms of why bother it is to get lower cost and better passenger experience on other busy routes like YUL/YYZ/YOW <-> YWG/YEG/YYC/ORD/DEN...
billdokes likes this.
The Lev is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 8:34 am
  #2429  
All eyes on you!
5 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Programs: air miles
Posts: 450
So given that AC only flies the A220 in North America, range isn't a huge factor. What is a factor is how will the additional capacity of a 225 stretch fit into AC's fleet and will they be able to fill those additional seats at a profit.

According to ChatGPT Air Canada's top ten airports in terms of number of flights are YYZ, YUL, YVR, YYC, YOW, LGA, EWR, BOS, JFK, and LHR. All of these airport (with the exception of LHR) would benefit from the increased capacity of a 225
JustSomeGuy1978 is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2026 | 9:01 am
  #2430  
30 Countries Visited
Community Builder
All eyes on you!
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YOW
Programs: AC P(easant)25K
Posts: 1,247
Here we go again...
A220-500's lack of TCON range won't be a deal breaker if the intent is to replace their existing A320 fleet in circa 2030. -500 shares the same crew pool and hopefully the same for parts and maintenance (likely but not guaranteed), it's no different than buying more -300 if the potential revenue it can generate makes up the difference in the extra capex.

Some current AC A320 routes I could found at a glance;

Perfectly within range:
YVR-YLWY
VR-YYC
YVR-YEG
YVR-YWG
YVR-LAS
YVR-PSP
YVR-ORD

YUL-YWG
YUL-MIA

YOW-YYC

YYZ-YOW
YYZ-YUL
YYZ-YQB
YYZ-YHZ
YYZ-YYT
YYZ-YWG
YYZ-YQR
YYZ-YYC
YYZ-YEG
YYZ-YMM
YYZ-LGA
YYZ-PBI

Stretching the limit but probably okay:
YVR-IAH

Probably out of range:
YYZ-YVR (Plenty of XLR available to fly this route in the future)
YYZ-YYJ (Seems like an A220-300 sized route)
YYZ-LAX (Plenty of XLR available to fly this route in the future)
YWG-CUN (Should be flown by Rouge anyway)


The question we should be asking isn't the range. It's if AC need to fill the gap between A220-300 and MAX/A321.

I certainly see the extra 4 Business class seat on the -500 would be helpful on some days and time between YYZ-YOW.


billdokes likes this.
Leyland1989 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.