Air Canada - Wine in juice boxes

[golden hawk]

Air Canada goes off the bottle
BRENT JANG

TRANSPORTATION REPORTER

Air Canada is ditching glass wine bottles in favour of lightweight containers on its Montreal-to-Paris route this week in a trial to reduce the weight of its planes, underscoring the airline's drive to save on fuel as oil prices soar.

"If the test proves successful, our current high-quality French wines from Domaine Paul Mas will eventually be packaged in the new format," Air Canada told employees in an internal e-mail yesterday.

The experiment with abandoning the venerable vino bottle in favour of the Tetra Pak (the juice box is one) is the Montreal-based carrier's latest effort to find innovative ways to reduce fuel bills. For every kilogram shed, the airline estimates each aircraft could save at least $150 a year in fuel costs, so every little bit helps.

Air Canada completed a six-week test on its Montreal-to-Cancun route using new galley carts that are two-thirds the weight of traditional ones. The new full-size cart weighs 10 kilograms less than older models, and a half-size cart is 5.5 kg lighter.

Air Canada executives, eager to embrace aircraft weight-loss programs, have recently introduced several other plans to lighten the load.

Those measures include only partly filling water tanks, and disposing of empty wine bottles at the arrival city instead of flying them back to the departure site.

The airline has a "fuel-efficiency team" that's canvassing employees for suggestions, and the Tetra Pak idea came from flight attendant Judy Gordon and information technology manager Valerie Lepieszo.

"Tetra Paks [possibly made in Canada by Tetra Pak in Richmond Hill, Ont.,] would not only help reduce aircraft weight by approximately 50 kg per international flight, but they would also provide additional benefits, including 33 per cent more wine for the same price and in the same amount of stowage space," the Air Canada e-mail said.

So far, the carrier likes what it sees in the shift to packaged wine in the transatlantic trial, stating that the "quality of wine remains the same" and praising "easier handling for flight attendants and kitchen handlers."

As well, "unlike glass bottles, Tetra Paks won't break and that means no injuries to employees. The Tetra Paks are also warehouse friendly because they can handle greater shifts in temperature and are 100 per cent recyclable."

Last October, Air Canada began charging $2 for a "comfort zone" kit consisting of an inflatable plastic pillow and polyester blanket. That lighter-weight kit on short-haul flights has allowed the airline to jettison its regular pillows and blankets.

The carrier also tightened weight limits last fall on the free-checked-luggage allowance, making ground handlers happy to see heavier pieces disappear.

In the three months after the luggage limits came into effect, "baggage-related workplace injuries decreased by approximately 48 per cent and productivity increased by more than 57 per cent, compared with the same period the previous year," Air Canada said.

It's not just shedding aircraft weight that helps the bottom line. The airline is also conserving fuel whenever possible, including shutting down an engine during the taxiing phase and minimizing the use of auxiliary power at gates.

Air Canada started a program last August to lock in the prices it pays for some of its fuel. And last week, the carrier raised the fuel charge on its base fares for the third time in a year.

While many plans to slash weight and save on fuel expenses have been implemented, Air Canada decided last month that it doesn't make sense to strip the paint off its fleet of 45 Boeing 767 aircraft. The airline removed paint from one plane in a test, but the aluminum skin required extra maintenance, outweighing the benefits of lower fuel costs.

Carriers around the world have found novel ways to cut kilograms. Atlanta-based Delta Air Lines Inc., for instance, has removed phones from some economy-class sections of its aircraft.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... tory/Front

[Juggs]

So when do airlines start applying these restrictions to passengers?
Have a base fare set at 150 pounds or the "average" passenger weight and then the fare goes on a per pound basis.

Probably won't ever happen as that would be discriminatory to those in the upper reaches of weight in the population. Oh well.

[sanjet]

$150 per aircraft in a year in savings??!? I bet they spent $250,000 researching that....

[cyyz]

Get rid of the seats and have standing room only.....

yyz - yow, not a problem standing.

[JigglyBus]

I've always thought passengers should be charged on a per pound basis, but it'll never happen, especially in Canada.

When you send a box fedex, you pay the greater of the dimensional weight, or the actual weight, why should it not be the same for passengers. You pay the greater of either standard weight, or actual weight.

I also think it would be a great way for struggling airlines to make extra income. Even if grossly overweight people get offended and never fly that airline, they are still better off, as they'll reduce their average pax weight by default.

It might even motivate cheap americans to lay off the Burger King, at least before travelling.

[cyyz]

How much would a scale cost?

[golden hawk]

$150 per aircraft in a year in savings??!? I bet they spent $250,000 researching that....

It says

For every kilogram shed, the airline estimates each aircraft could save at least $150 a year in fuel costs, so every little bit helps.

[/quote]

[cyyz]

and how many kilograms are they gonna shed by dumping the plastic bottles and replacing them with tetras?

[SYT_YYZ]

Maybe they should make everyone pee before they get on board.......

make the terminal longer too... burn a couple extra pounds to get to the gates...

hahah

[Mig29]

sanjet

you are almost right on that...I mean it took them few months to figure out that stripping the paint of 67's will cost more to do and maintain thereafter, then just to leave the old one on.

Next thing will be stripping passangers of excess clothes...I think that wouldn't be so bad

But, hey I guess thats we got excess of managers at AC- to think about s**t like this.

Or is the rash of Bush's high oil price scam a reason they have to do this???...In a way I sincerely feel sorry for these airlines, because of the people who run this world and rip off on the bottom line, while they fill their fat pockets...

[North Shore]

I've always thought passengers should be charged on a per pound basis

Me too, three, and four! I travel across the country twice a year, once in the spring, and then back again in the fall. Because I pack for six months, I'm usually carrying 50-60lbs in my bags, and constantly have to sweettalk my way around excess or overweight baggage charges. AC conveniently forgets to subtract the 30 or so lbs that I weigh under the 'average' 200, however, and yet the next person in line can be some 250lb behemoth, and yet nothing is said

[cyyz]

I've always thought passengers should be charged on a per pound basis

Me too, three, and four!

Now we'll see haz checking in with nothing but his undies, to shed the weight of his clothes and shoes...

[rotateandfly]

high-quality French wines from Domaine Paul Mas will eventually be packaged in the new format

I bet that's going to piss a lot of french people off. Wine will typically lose its specific taste/flavor if you open the bottle to repackage it. Inside a bottle is where a wine gains its quality in the first place.

Hooray AC

[CAL]

does that apply to the FA's

[w squared]

I'm not sure how much not using the bottle will affect the quality (a lot of wines don't need to be cellared for a long time to mature), but giving someone wine in a juice box will absolutely affect their enjoyment of it. Different wines come in different glasses for a reason...the shape of the glass affects the way in which the aroma of the wine reaches your nose, which contributes to your enjoyment of it.

Air Canada...yet another company that want to charge you the same amount and deliver less.

[Jaques Strappe]

Air Canada...yet another company that want to charge you the same amount and deliver less.

Not just Air Canada but most airlines are now cheaper than taking the bus in many instances. At the very least, ticket prices have either gone down or remained the same over the past 20 years while fuel and aircraft costs have soared. The total ticket price may have gone up but that is due to Airport improvement fees, security fees, nav canada fees, taxes, etc.....

I am amazed that any airline can make money when I see some of the fares out there. So when you buy a ticket for West Palm Beach and see that only $175 of that ticket actually goes to the airline, call Greyhound and ask them how much a bus fare to West Palm is, then ask what kind of wine they will be serving.

[CD]

I'm not sure how much not using the bottle will affect the quality (a lot of wines don't need to be cellared for a long time to mature), but giving someone wine in a juice box will absolutely affect their enjoyment of it.

I don't believe that it will be a "juice box" size that is provided, but rather the container will be a Tetra-pak, similar in size to a regular bottle of wine. You can get French Rabbit at the LCBO here in Ontario.

[cyyz]

CD you are correct, they'll still pour you a glass, but it'll be easier for them to store and roll around on their carts...

and yes, boxed wine has been around for decades...

[CAL]

mmmmmmmmm.....thats funny

[charlie_g]

$150 per aircraft in a year in savings??!? I bet they spent $250,000 researching that....

$150 per kg, per aircraft, per year. Adds up. Why waste that money if you don't have to?

[charlie_g]

I am amazed that any airline can make money when I see some of the fares out there. So when you buy a ticket for West Palm Beach and see that only $175 of that ticket actually goes to the airline, call Greyhound and ask them how much a bus fare to West Palm is, then ask what kind of wine they will be serving.

And don't forget to ask which 13 movies they'll be playing during your 38hr trip down there...

[bigfssguy]

I've always thought passengers should be charged on a per pound basis, but it'll never happen, especially in Canada.

When you send a box fedex, you pay the greater of the dimensional weight, or the actual weight, why should it not be the same for passengers. You pay the greater of either standard weight, or actual weight.

I also think it would be a great way for struggling airlines to make extra income. Even if grossly overweight people get offended and never fly that airline, they are still better off, as they'll reduce their average pax weight by default.

It might even motivate cheap americans to lay off the Burger King, at least before travelling.

Per pound basis????? I'm built like a blue bomber offensive lineman 6'3" 310 pounds. Travelling would cost me a fortune!!!!

[w squared]

Not just Air Canada but most airlines are now cheaper than taking the bus in many instances. At the very least, ticket prices have either gone down or remained the same over the past 20 years while fuel and aircraft costs have soared. The total ticket price may have gone up but that is due to Airport improvement fees, security fees, nav canada fees, taxes, etc.....

That's why I made the comment "yet another". I'm not singling out Air Canada, just sommenting on their participation in the trend. I'm also not attacking the price charged or the service provided. I'm saying that if you're cant make a profit providing your existing service for your existing price, then you made a mistake when you fixed that price.

Provided that their intention is indeed to use large tetra-pack wine containers and still pour the wine into glasses (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) for consumption, then I don't see any problem at all with this plan. They're reducing their own cost without reducing the value delivered to their customers - something that very few businesses can do effectively.