Air Canada reports highest system load factor in airline's history for second consecutive month
- System passenger load factor at 85.3% - highest ever
- Domestic passenger load factor at 85.7% - highest ever
- Seventeenth consecutive month of record load factors
MONTREAL, Sept. 7 /CNW Telbec/ - Air Canada reported a system load factor
of 85.3 per cent in August 2005, the highest on record for any month ever. The
mainline carrier flew 5.5 per cent more revenue passenger miles (RPMs) in
August 2005 than in August 2004, according to preliminary traffic figures.
Overall, capacity increased by 2.9 per cent, resulting in a load factor of
85.3 per cent, compared to 83.2 per cent in August 2004; an increase of
2.1 percentage points. In the domestic market, capacity decreased by
0.5 per cent and traffic increased by 4.1 per cent resulting in a domestic
load factor of 85.7 per cent - a 3.8 percentage point increase year over year.
Jazz, ACE's regional subsidiary, flew 55.3 per cent more revenue
passenger miles in August 2005 than in August 2004, according to preliminary
traffic figures. Capacity increased by 44.0 per cent, resulting in a load
factor of 72.0 per cent, compared to 66.8 per cent in August 2004; an increase
of 5.2 percentage points.
North American traffic, on a combined basis for Air Canada and ACE's
regional carrier, Jazz, rose 7.0 per cent.
"Following on July's record performance, in August Air Canada again
achieved the highest load factor of any month in its history and maintained a
seventeen month trend of record-breaking load factors," said Montie Brewer,
President and Chief Executive Officer. "This ongoing strong performance
reflects both a healthy market and ever growing customer preference for Air
Canada. I am incredibly proud of the efforts of Air Canada's employees who
once again handled record volumes in August and achieved operational
performance goals during a month of challenging weather disruptions."
This discussion contains certain forward-looking statements, which
involve a number of risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors
including acts or potential acts of terrorism, international conflicts,
government regulations and government mandated restrictions on operations and
pricing, fuel prices, industry restructuring, labour negotiations, the
economic environment in general including foreign exchange and interest rates,
the airline competitive and pricing environment, industry capacity decisions
and new entrants as well as external events, actual results could differ from
expected results and the differences could be material.
AC reported a system load factor of 85.3% for August
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
tonysoprano
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2589
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:01 pm
-
bravo romeo
- Rank 0
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:23 pm
- Location: YYC
WJ flyer comments...
Hi all usually just a lurker, wanted to take the time and effort to appologize to all the good hard working folks at AC.I am sick of seeing people on both the forums constantly handing out all the negative crap,whenever anyone has anything positive to say about thier respective companies...IT's a crappy world, hurricane devistation etc... try and keep it in perspective. On behalf of hard working peole at WJ, congrats to all those at AC who have busted thier humps during a busy and trying summer 
No, but the overall load factor is pretty good. If Air Canada publishes its ontime performance rating, we can see how well the airline is doing, counting delays and such. But overall, this result is very good for Air Canada, especially in the face of high oil prices, and a aging longhaul fleet.tonysoprano wrote:WJflyer.
Very Blastor-like mentality. Are you trying to outdo him?
-
tonysoprano
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2589
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:01 pm
WJflyer.
Sorry I fail to see how on-time performance has such a big impact on "how well the company is doing". Last spring our management came up with a program to reward us financially for monthly on-time performance. I think we have only missed it once. Anyway, the point is, although it helps to have a good on-time performance, I wouldn't put the kind of emphasis on it you do. When WJ flies hundreds of flights each day, all over the world, we'll do an apples to apples comparison. I not only fly for them, I also take my seat as a passenger with them and I can tell you on time performance is pretty good. Now if we can just have a ground crew at the gate when we get there. But that's a whole different thread.
Sorry I fail to see how on-time performance has such a big impact on "how well the company is doing". Last spring our management came up with a program to reward us financially for monthly on-time performance. I think we have only missed it once. Anyway, the point is, although it helps to have a good on-time performance, I wouldn't put the kind of emphasis on it you do. When WJ flies hundreds of flights each day, all over the world, we'll do an apples to apples comparison. I not only fly for them, I also take my seat as a passenger with them and I can tell you on time performance is pretty good. Now if we can just have a ground crew at the gate when we get there. But that's a whole different thread.
If Air Canada's fleet had an increase in the number of planes going tech, it would show up on the on-time performance ratings. Then, we can analyse why are there more delays, such as age of fleet, tighter maintence schedules, more accidents, etc, and one can look at the reasons and determine a fix for the problem.tonysoprano wrote:WJflyer.
Sorry I fail to see how on-time performance has such a big impact on "how well the company is doing". Last spring our management came up with a program to reward us financially for monthly on-time performance. I think we have only missed it once. Anyway, the point is, although it helps to have a good on-time performance, I wouldn't put the kind of emphasis on it you do. When WJ flies hundreds of flights each day, all over the world, we'll do an apples to apples comparison. I not only fly for them, I also take my seat as a passenger with them and I can tell you on time performance is pretty good. Now if we can just have a ground crew at the gate when we get there. But that's a whole different thread.
-
tonysoprano
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2589
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:01 pm
WJflyer, you are not trying to compare your ontime performance against Air Canada's are you? Flying from YQT to YWG boarding 100 guests is a little easier then turning a widebody going from YYZ to LHR.
And closing the L1 on the NG before you are actually ready to go does not count either!!
And closing the L1 on the NG before you are actually ready to go does not count either!!
Unless you also publish the "on time" performance parameters, the on-time data means nothing at all. There are many scales for what an airline considers on-time, across the board. For AC's use, they consider the published departure/arrival time as the only on-time measure. That is not the case with many on-time figures, particularly in the USA.WJflyer wrote:Good job Air Canada... but publish your on-time performance ratings as well, as you should take a small leaf out of Westjet's book. Now, what are the profits?
What are the on-time deviations allowed at WJ? Plus 5, 10...?
Actually I believe you'll find that OTP is based on gate arrival as stated in the website;jazzy-j wrote:whipline wrote:
And closing the L1 on the NG before you are actually ready to go does not count either!!
OTP at WJ is based on park brake released and AC push but thanks for comin' out.
jj
On-time is defined as an arrival within 15 minutes of scheduled arrival at gate.
Which, as I understand it, is the standard to which the American airlines are reporting. It makes sense to use that if that is the case as, was previously mentioned, you need to be using the same parameters if you're comparing yourself to someone else.
There are other OTP's that are strived for, door close, brake release, etc., but it is the A15 time that is compared with the other airlines. The other times are internal use only.
Its a little difficult to have crews standing at the gate waiting for you when a) we don't have enough man power. b) we're working another flight and you show up 20 mins early. The scheduling of crews is so tight (in YYC anyway) that if a flight is 5 mins late or early it messes everything up. Just have some patientence.tonysoprano wrote:WJflyer.
Sorry I fail to see how on-time performance has such a big impact on "how well the company is doing". Last spring our management came up with a program to reward us financially for monthly on-time performance. I think we have only missed it once. Anyway, the point is, although it helps to have a good on-time performance, I wouldn't put the kind of emphasis on it you do. When WJ flies hundreds of flights each day, all over the world, we'll do an apples to apples comparison. I not only fly for them, I also take my seat as a passenger with them and I can tell you on time performance is pretty good. Now if we can just have a ground crew at the gate when we get there. But that's a whole different thread.
-
tonysoprano
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2589
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:01 pm
Whiteguy.
I know what you're saying, I've heard the same comments from all our trouble spots. I think the real problem is the lack of leadership. Management has refused to address the problem or not given it a high priority. As an example YOW-YYZ is typically sched to be over an hour gate to gate when in reality it is typically 50 mins. We then sit for 5-10-15+ mins because the ground crew is sched to be somewhere else at that time or the gate is occupied. It's poor planning. Patience, by the way, is a virtue that quickly vanishes after sitting in an airplane for 10 mins waiting to get parked. We happen to be in a service industry.
I know what you're saying, I've heard the same comments from all our trouble spots. I think the real problem is the lack of leadership. Management has refused to address the problem or not given it a high priority. As an example YOW-YYZ is typically sched to be over an hour gate to gate when in reality it is typically 50 mins. We then sit for 5-10-15+ mins because the ground crew is sched to be somewhere else at that time or the gate is occupied. It's poor planning. Patience, by the way, is a virtue that quickly vanishes after sitting in an airplane for 10 mins waiting to get parked. We happen to be in a service industry.
