From Airlineroute:
Actual schedule based on the airline’s PDF schedule listing (16DEC17 – 10MAR18) as follow.

PR118 MNL1615 – 1755YYZ 773 357
PR118 MNL1620 – 1800YYZ 773 6

PR119 YYZ0015 – 0545+1MNL 773 x235

Interesting they decided to bring back their nonstop YYZ flight before JFK.

LHR and YYZ seem to be where PR will fly their 9th and 10th 77Ws, both to be delivered in the latter months of this year.

How long did MNL-YYZ non-stop last the first time around?

7100 nm. About 15-16 hours without wind. Definitely an ULH route now..

carlokiii wrote:

Interesting they decided to bring back their nonstop YYZ flight before JFK.

It is in line with their statement in the CAPA analysis published recently. PR's ordered A359 for JFK won't be delivered till middle of 2018.

carlokiii wrote:

LHR and YYZ seem to be where PR will fly their 9th and 10th 77Ws, both to be delivered in the latter months of this year.

IIRC the 9th will be delivered Dec 2017 and the 10th, Jan 2018.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Not all that crazy. PR relies heavily on VFR. Toronto, Filipino population is much larger than NYC.

PR has been flying there via YVR for quite some time now. I think they already have a good feel of how the YYZ market would respond.

covert wrote:

7100 nm. About 15-16 hours without wind. Definitely an ULH route now..

I guess they intend to block some seats for the 77W to make it both ways given headwinds and available airways. Nonetheless, it's starting during the peak holiday season, so a good chance of profitable load factors.....


http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=MNL-YYZ&MS=w ... 0x540&PM=*

When they initially launched YYZ, it was non-stop eastbound while it was via YVR westbound.

IIRC, they weren't overflying Russia back then due to "skytoll" negotiations so no polar for them. So the LHR route took a more southerly route.

33" inch pitch in the back is better than average. Hopefully, they have the same pitch or better on the A350's. And once again, they really need a better business class product which means aisle access!

Anyone know how the loads are for YYZ?

Fantastic to see PAL being aggressive in expanding the North American market, as they have huge potential there.
The next step will be MNL-JFK nonstop and also two new destinations to be added.

How come they were not able to make west-bound YYZ-MNL nonstop last time they tried it, but they can now? Is it only due to blocking of seats?

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Not all that crazy. PR relies heavily on VFR. Toronto, Filipino population is much larger than NYC.

Aren't they about the same size? 250-300,000 in the Toronto area and around 250,000 in the NYC area?

LAXdude1023 wrote:

carlokiii wrote:

Interesting they decided to bring back their nonstop YYZ flight before JFK.

LHR and YYZ seem to be where PR will fly their 9th and 10th 77Ws, both to be delivered in the latter months of this year.

[url][/url]

Not all that crazy. PR relies heavily on VFR. Toronto, Filipino population is much larger than NYC.

NYC area has 230,000. Toronto area has 175,000.

Damn! Thought DTW was a given, oh well.

cityairline wrote:

How come they were not able to make west-bound YYZ-MNL nonstop last time they tried it, but they can now? Is it only due to blocking of seats??

As I've said above, they didn't have Russian overflight rights so they couldn't go polar. They wouldn't make it westbound due to strong headwinds in Winter. Eastbound would be a breeze flying past Japan, near Anchorage or Vancouver, then flying straight down to Toronto especially in winter.

While I applaude their ambition that flight will be hell in Y class.

CHI2DFW wrote:

Damn! Thought DTW was a given, oh well.

I think it would work better with an A380...

lavalampluva wrote:

While I applaude their ambition that flight will be hell in Y class.

At least the Y seat pitch isn't bad...33 inches, albeit in a 3-4-3 configuration (so 33" pitch and 17" width---same as on their A343s). Their 9-abreast A330s are hell.

The problem for doing this at JFK is twofold:
1. That the terminal it uses probably doesn't have a spare hardstand where the plane can park
2. That there aren't enough planes to then do MNL-YVR terminator service daily.

The earlier arrival slot could be gotten, but the plane problem is the real issue.

nadavatar64 wrote:

CHI2DFW wrote:

Damn! Thought DTW was a given, oh well.

I think it would work better with an A380...

Wow no way! Jee y'all thanks for pointing out the obvious...get a life.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Their 9-abreast A330s are hell.

I guess you missed the news that PR is reconfiguring their A330s and reducing seat count by ~105 to 309 And those wouldn't be used here anyway.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

That the terminal it uses probably doesn't have a spare hardstand where the plane can park

Probably? The schedule given in the OP indicates a layover time of ~6+ hours...surely a spot could be found? How long does the tag-on stay at YYZ again?

aemoreira1981 wrote:

That there aren't enough planes to then do MNL-YVR terminator service daily.

As stated above, two 77Ws are forthcoming and the A359s will soon follow. The A340s won't have much to do prior to their retirement and could alternate on the YVR terminator as they used to. Aircraft will not be too big a problem once the full complement of A359s are delivered.

Will PR opt to tag a different destination onto their YVR flights now that YYZ (and soon JFK) will be going nonstop?

amadorE175 wrote:

Will PR opt to tag a different destination onto their YVR flights now that YYZ (and soon JFK) will be going nonstop?

Yes, most probably.
My bet is on 4 weekly ORD and 3 weekly IAH (or even LAS/SAN).

cityairline wrote:

Yes, most probably.
My bet is on 4 weekly ORD and 3 weekly IAH.

Agree...ORD and IAH are too far and thin so tag-ons to YVR are the likely way both could happen.

cityairline wrote:

(or even LAS/SAN)

I don't have access to the full Part 3 CAPA analysis of PR's NA expansion strategy so can't say with any confidence that it is indeed what PR intends to do.....

http://centreforaviation.com/insights/a ... ork-363465

I'm less convinced about the latter two but I suppose PR could use their outgoing A340s to 'test the waters' so to speak. They would need the right aircraft though with a much improved onboard product for the long run, should the venture prove viable.....



http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=MNL-YVR-LAS/SAN

Transit visa requirements might be a disincentive for all four and the A359 would be too much plane for SAN or LAS...but a 788 or an A338 (when built) could be a good fit.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

carlokiii wrote:

Interesting they decided to bring back their nonstop YYZ flight before JFK.

LHR and YYZ seem to be where PR will fly their 9th and 10th 77Ws, both to be delivered in the latter months of this year.

[url][/url]

Not all that crazy. PR relies heavily on VFR. Toronto, Filipino population is much larger than NYC.

NYC area has 230,000. Toronto area has 175,000.

NYC has multiple airports with plenty of service to Asia. YYZ has markedly less competition and doesn't even have daily flights with the ME3.

Perhaps the incoming 77Ws will have a better Mtow and improvements to give it the legs to go all the way to yyz and back. Better yet, instead of blocking seats, hopefully they just made the interiors less dense with a new product.

MNL-YYZ 14h 40m
YYZ-MNL 16h 30m

Also a way to get more connecting passengers to Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam too. India might be a possibility if they can time the connections right too.