cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoen ... oenix-heat

Appears they spent 10-months crunching the numbers to prove the CRJ can takeoff in very high tempuratures. The new limit is 123 degrees

Raventech wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoen ... oenix-heat

Appears they spent 10-months crunching the numbers to prove the CRJ can takeoff in very high tempuratures. The new limit is 123 degrees

Well that's good news.

MO11 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

We know the route can handle a 260-ish seat airplane. Are you saying that 294 seats will be too many and that 189 seats will be right sized?

777PHX wrote:

No, that's clearly not what I said. I was merely questioning whether HA has intended for PHX to go A330 all along or if the schedule change to the A330 was the result of their delayed A321s.

777PHX wrote:

I'm curious if the route actually warrants an A330, or if that is a product of the NEO delays, which have apparently hit HA hard.

I don't see how that could be more clear. And I'm sure the route actually warrants an A330.

I'm not going to have a semantics battle with you, read the second part of the sentence you bolded.

You're also just speculating, you have no more idea than anyone else does if HA has longterm plans to operate the A330 here. If HA intended to operate the A330 here all along, why didn't they just change the schedule that way to begin with? Why insert the A321 into the schedule originally if that were the case? (Because they did intend to operate the A321 here and had to flex out of it because their A321s were delayed....)

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

They are probably referring to this, only applies to the CR7 & CR9 however

https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/new ... ercom.html

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

Correct, there are new performance specs that allow for operating in higher temperatures.

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

Yes. American provided the needed funds to have the Skywest and Mesa performance charts updated, they now go up to something like 127F.

INFINITI329 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

They are probably referring to this, only applies to the CR7 & CR9 however

https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/new ... ercom.html

Thanks for all the replies from everyone, confirming what I thought I'd heard but...I thought the problem was with the CR2's not the CR7/CR9. But now seeing this is about (now) the 7's & 9's, may I presume it was with all, including the CR2's?

In any event...good that they got it ironed out.

June numbers are out: https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/new ... -june.html

Overall traffic is up 0.2% this past June over June 2017.

Just online today at routesonline...the new UA/Skywest sched. for PRC...kinda weird. I've run it thru my head and it looks to me like they have a RON at PRC from the late arrival from LAX to op that 0903 departure to DEN. Also makes it look as if the ship is "based" at PRC, but with the ex-Sat. thing for LAX, I can't figure it out...

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -aug-2018/

United Airlines from late-August 2018 plans to commence service to Prescott, including flights from Denver and Los Angeles, on board Skywest Airlines CRJ200 aircraft. Planned schedule as follows.

Denver – Prescott eff 29AUG18 1 daily CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5159 DEN1230 – 1317PRC CRJ D
UA5158 PRC0903 – 1145DEN CRJ D

Los Angeles – Prescott eff 29AUG18 6 weekly CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5161 LAX2015 – 2131PRC CRJ x6
UA5160 PRC1350 – 1512LAX CRJ x6

cathay747 wrote:

Just online today at routesonline...the new UA/Skywest sched. for PRC...kinda weird. I've run it thru my head and it looks to me like they have a RON at PRC from the late arrival from LAX to op that 0903 departure to DEN. Also makes it look as if the ship is "based" at PRC, but with the ex-Sat. thing for LAX, I can't figure it out...

Denver – Prescott eff 29AUG18 1 daily CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5159 DEN1230 – 1317PRC CRJ D
UA5158 PRC0903 – 1145DEN CRJ D

Los Angeles – Prescott eff 29AUG18 6 weekly CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5161 LAX2015 – 2131PRC CRJ x6
UA5160 PRC1350 – 1512LAX CRJ x6

Here's one of the various ways an airplane gets traded between the California and "east" systems; the airplane is not "based" in PRC. Crew stays with the airplane on the overnight. If the airplane departed earlier, then two crews would have to overnight, making the EAS bid more costly.

cathay747 wrote:

INFINITI329 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

They are probably referring to this, only applies to the CR7 & CR9 however

https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/new ... ercom.html

Thanks for all the replies from everyone, confirming what I thought I'd heard but...I thought the problem was with the CR2's not the CR7/CR9. But now seeing this is about (now) the 7's & 9's, may I presume it was with all, including the CR2's?

In any event...good that they got it ironed out.

Actually other way around; the CR2 was never a problem (other than cabin temp). BBD just never did the performance for the 7/9 past ISA+30.

Lots of speculation in the AA earnings thread that PHX will experience some cuts by AA.

alasizon wrote:

Actually other way around; the CR2 was never a problem (other than cabin temp). BBD just never did the performance for the 7/9 past ISA+30.

Can’t speak for Mesa but all three CRJ variants at SkyWest are limited to ISA+35. The exception now is the CRJ-700s operated as American Eagle are now ISA+40 limited.

MO11 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Just online today at routesonline...the new UA/Skywest sched. for PRC...kinda weird. I've run it thru my head and it looks to me like they have a RON at PRC from the late arrival from LAX to op that 0903 departure to DEN. Also makes it look as if the ship is "based" at PRC, but with the ex-Sat. thing for LAX, I can't figure it out...

Denver – Prescott eff 29AUG18 1 daily CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5159 DEN1230 – 1317PRC CRJ D
UA5158 PRC0903 – 1145DEN CRJ D

Los Angeles – Prescott eff 29AUG18 6 weekly CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5161 LAX2015 – 2131PRC CRJ x6
UA5160 PRC1350 – 1512LAX CRJ x6

Here's one of the various ways an airplane gets traded between the California and "east" systems; the airplane is not "based" in PRC. Crew stays with the airplane on the overnight. If the airplane departed earlier, then two crews would have to overnight, making the EAS bid more costly.

OK I can understand the crew issue you mention, but...since the LAX-PRC doesn't operate on Sat., then where does the airplane come from to operate the 0903 departure to DEN on Sun.? Surely to God it doesn't dome in from DEN at 1317 and sit there till 0903 the next morning?

alasizon wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

INFINITI329 wrote:

They are probably referring to this, only applies to the CR7 & CR9 however

https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/new ... ercom.html

Thanks for all the replies from everyone, confirming what I thought I'd heard but...I thought the problem was with the CR2's not the CR7/CR9. But now seeing this is about (now) the 7's & 9's, may I presume it was with all, including the CR2's?

In any event...good that they got it ironed out.

Actually other way around; the CR2 was never a problem (other than cabin temp). BBD just never did the performance for the 7/9 past ISA+30.

Ah so. OK. My mix-up. I do remember the cabin temp. issue with the CR2's.

Vctony wrote:

Lots of speculation in the AA earnings thread that PHX will experience some cuts by AA.

Oh yes...I've been posting arguments in that thread (as have a few others) against all the typical arm-chair CEO's who, on merely seeing the words that AA is trimming their capacity GUIDANCE (not even understanding what that really means) automatically start with the chorus about cutting/de-hubbing PHX.

What is it with the seeming obsession out there about this? I swear, NO thread can be started about AA without somebody raising that beaten-to-death horse. It just never ends!

cathay747 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Just online today at routesonline...the new UA/Skywest sched. for PRC...kinda weird. I've run it thru my head and it looks to me like they have a RON at PRC from the late arrival from LAX to op that 0903 departure to DEN. Also makes it look as if the ship is "based" at PRC, but with the ex-Sat. thing for LAX, I can't figure it out...

Denver – Prescott eff 29AUG18 1 daily CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5159 DEN1230 – 1317PRC CRJ D
UA5158 PRC0903 – 1145DEN CRJ D

Los Angeles – Prescott eff 29AUG18 6 weekly CRJ200 (Skywest)
UA5161 LAX2015 – 2131PRC CRJ x6
UA5160 PRC1350 – 1512LAX CRJ x6

Here's one of the various ways an airplane gets traded between the California and "east" systems; the airplane is not "based" in PRC. Crew stays with the airplane on the overnight. If the airplane departed earlier, then two crews would have to overnight, making the EAS bid more costly.

OK I can understand the crew issue you mention, but...since the LAX-PRC doesn't operate on Sat., then where does the airplane come from to operate the 0903 departure to DEN on Sun.? Surely to God it doesn't dome in from DEN at 1317 and sit there till 0903 the next morning?

Probably does RON, which is not unusual for a Saturday afternoon in a small market. When I lived in CEC the Saturday flight would come in near mid-day and sit around until the next afternoon.

It’s a CR2? Will anyone even miss it if it hangs out in PRC for a day?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

It’s a CR2? Will anyone even miss it if it hangs out in PRC for a day?

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

alasizon wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

It’s a CR2? Will anyone even miss it if it hangs out in PRC for a day?

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

A Saturday PM PRC-LAS/Sunday AM LAS-PRC would do.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

Skywest has the contract, not United. These are "pro-rate" flights. EAS will subsidize 12 weekly roundtrips.

MO11 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

Skywest has the contract, not United. These are "pro-rate" flights. EAS will subsidize 12 weekly roundtrips.

Will UA codeshare on the PRC flights similar what AA does on the SGU-PHX flights?

INFINITI329 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

Skywest has the contract, not United. These are "pro-rate" flights. EAS will subsidize 12 weekly roundtrips.

Will UA codeshare on the PRC flights similar what AA does on the SGU-PHX flights?

I'm going to say yes, since I think we determined elsewhere that SGU is not capacity purchase. But it also would be like any UA* flight operated by Silver Airways.
Some of the EAS flights are bid by United and contracted to a regional partner, others are bid by the regional and operated as a code-share. Same for Delta and American.

INFINITI329 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

Skywest has the contract, not United. These are "pro-rate" flights. EAS will subsidize 12 weekly roundtrips.

Will UA codeshare on the PRC flights similar what AA does on the SGU-PHX flights?

The flights are being marketed under a UA code, so yes.

cathay747 wrote:

Vctony wrote:

Lots of speculation in the AA earnings thread that PHX will experience some cuts by AA.

Oh yes...I've been posting arguments in that thread (as have a few others) against all the typical arm-chair CEO's who, on merely seeing the words that AA is trimming their capacity GUIDANCE (not even understanding what that really means) automatically start with the chorus about cutting/de-hubbing PHX.

What is it with the seeming obsession out there about this? I swear, NO thread can be started about AA without somebody raising that beaten-to-death horse. It just never ends!

Its my guess from people that don't fly AA or Tru PHX or anywhere in the Western US. They live in the past and think that all small hubs must be cut, at the slightest down turn and can't see forward. The Industry has changed from 8 major players to 4. They are national carries not regional when there 8-10 big carries. The landscape has changed and PHX roll With LAX/PHX westcoast AA operation are a good team in tandem. I really Wish AA would start a Focus City in SFO or still had one SJC. Heck Even SMF. AA without AS would be seriously hurt without PHX. PHX is not going to be a DFW/CLT but is a great and best of the options that AA has. AA know's how to co-exist with WN and WN is focusing elsewhere anyways.

cathay747 wrote:

Did I hear correctly on 12 News that something has been improved/fixed so that the Eagle RJ's won't have the ops problems in extreme heat anymore, so they won't have to cancel flights any longer?

Yeah, this is great news...maybe in the future we won't have to hear "it's so hot, the planes can't even take off" from random people every time we get a spell of ~115+ weather.
I've given up trying to explain to people that it really only affects some RJs, and it's not really that they can't take off, it's just that the manufacturer hasn't published procedures for these temperatures, so they are not cleared to take off.

910A wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

Here's one of the various ways an airplane gets traded between the California and "east" systems; the airplane is not "based" in PRC. Crew stays with the airplane on the overnight. If the airplane departed earlier, then two crews would have to overnight, making the EAS bid more costly.

OK I can understand the crew issue you mention, but...since the LAX-PRC doesn't operate on Sat., then where does the airplane come from to operate the 0903 departure to DEN on Sun.? Surely to God it doesn't dome in from DEN at 1317 and sit there till 0903 the next morning?

Probably does RON, which is not unusual for a Saturday afternoon in a small market. When I lived in CEC the Saturday flight would come in near mid-day and sit around until the next afternoon.

Jeez. One hell of a long RON...inefficient utilization if you ask me. If they had MX facilities @ PRC and could do some weekly work on the ship while it's there, that'd be one thing, but...oh well.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

alasizon wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

It’s a CR2? Will anyone even miss it if it hangs out in PRC for a day?

Given UA's preference for CR2s, if they could find a way to use it; they would have.

A Saturday PM PRC-LAS/Sunday AM LAS-PRC would do.

Now there's out of the box thinking! Wonder if something like that could work/be profitable? Interesting idea, Sat. nite junket to Vegas.

MO11 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

We know the route can handle a 260-ish seat airplane. Are you saying that 294 seats will be too many and that 189 seats will be right sized?

777PHX wrote:

No, that's clearly not what I said. I was merely questioning whether HA has intended for PHX to go A330 all along or if the schedule change to the A330 was the result of their delayed A321s.

777PHX wrote:

I'm curious if the route actually warrants an A330, or if that is a product of the NEO delays, which have apparently hit HA hard.

I don't see how that could be more clear. And I'm sure the route actually warrants an A330.

Speaking of HA's 332's...does anybody know who they contracted with for MRO on those birds? Delta Tech Ops maybe?

KRIC777 wrote:

[Yeah, this is great news...maybe in the future we won't have to hear "it's so hot, the planes can't even take off" from random people every time we get a spell of ~115+ weather.

I'm still skeptical the CRJ2s can make it off the runway in 118+. They're just too underpowered.

atcsundevil wrote:

KRIC777 wrote:

[Yeah, this is great news...maybe in the future we won't have to hear "it's so hot, the planes can't even take off" from random people every time we get a spell of ~115+ weather.

I'm still skeptical the CRJ2s can make it off the runway in 118+. They're just too underpowered.

Even with the length of 8/26 and 7L/25R? They're that bad?

Interesting fleet items about AA in the AA 2Q earnings thread; don't know where the poster got this from, but this finally gives the answer once & for all about what AA is going to replace the 752 with here @ PHX for the Hawaii routes:


The biggest change is delaying 22 A321neo deliveries originally scheduled for 2019, 2020, and 2021. The A321neo is a new-engine version of the A321 aircraft we fly today, and we are still getting our first ones early next year as planned. The new delivery plan has us receiving 17 A321neos next year, 15 in 2020 and 18 in 2021. The deferred aircraft will arrive beginning in 2024.

Our fleet plan is constantly evolving to make sure we have the right mix of aircraft arriving at the right time. By delaying some A321neos, we can spread out those deliveries and the costs that go with them.

Other changes announced today:

We have 10 Boeing 757s based in Phoenix and currently used for Hawaii flying. We had previously planned to retire them in early 2020. Now they’ll retire in late 2019 instead, to be replaced by new A321neos, which will be ETOPS certified.

We are adding eight leased A319s to our fleet, and we’ll keep 14 Embraer E190s a year longer than previously planned. Those E190s will now retire in 2020 instead of 2019. We’re also retiring 15 fewer B737-800s in 2020 than we had planned. Adding A319s and keeping those other aircraft longer will help cover for the delayed A321neos and previously deferred B737 MAX 8s. Those planes will also help us handle the flying we are adding at our hubs such as DFW, CLT and ORD.

Thanks for posting, interesting information. No idea that ten 757's were based at PHX. Pretty much the majority of the new 321neo's will be coming here first if it's a one to one swap with the 757's.

cathay747 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

KRIC777 wrote:

[Yeah, this is great news...maybe in the future we won't have to hear "it's so hot, the planes can't even take off" from random people every time we get a spell of ~115+ weather.

I'm still skeptical the CRJ2s can make it off the runway in 118+. They're just too underpowered.

Even with the length of 8/26 and 7L/25R? They're that bad?

They'll get off, they just can't climb. You have to reach into your bag of tricks if a 737-700 comes off behind one.

MO11 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

I'm still skeptical the CRJ2s can make it off the runway in 118+. They're just too underpowered.

Even with the length of 8/26 and 7L/25R? They're that bad?

They'll get off, they just can't climb. You have to reach into your bag of tricks if a 737-700 comes off behind one.

I genuinely wonder if they can meet the climb requirements on the departure. I suspect they struggle hard, at the very least. I remember hearing guys talk about the old NWA DC9s they'd send to MEM — they'd basically be buzzing the adjacent neighborhoods trying like hell to climb! I'm sure the CRJ2s aren't that bad, but at higher altitudes they're completely worthless on hot days.

atcsundevil wrote:

MO11 wrote:

cathay747 wrote:

Even with the length of 8/26 and 7L/25R? They're that bad?

They'll get off, they just can't climb. You have to reach into your bag of tricks if a 737-700 comes off behind one.

I genuinely wonder if they can meet the climb requirements on the departure. I suspect they struggle hard, at the very least. I remember hearing guys talk about the old NWA DC9s they'd send to MEM — they'd basically be buzzing the adjacent neighborhoods trying like hell to climb! I'm sure the CRJ2s aren't that bad, but at higher altitudes they're completely worthless on hot days.

Well, the original US Airways A321s are no hot rods, either. And if you were standing at the old TRACON, the LH A340 would disappear behind the hangars next to the old Sawyer (Swift), before reappearing after getting airborne.

Wow guys...all very interesting info you've posted. Thanks for the replies.

Any word on how AA will configure the A321neo? It would be nice to have lie flat seats to/from Hawaii in First.

Darenriley wrote:

Any word on how AA will configure the A321neo? It would be nice to have lie flat seats to/from Hawaii in First.

Nothing I've heard of yet, and no seat map on SeatGuru yet, but I wouldn't count on lie-flats!!! You don't have that now on the 752's, no reason to expect they'd do it on the 321neo's (for Hawaii anyway). My expectation is that they'll be configured the same as the rest of the non-transcon 321's.

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Of course. And I'm stuck at home. lol Is there a good public viewing point for the west side of the airport?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Of course. And I'm stuck at home. lol Is there a good public viewing point for the west side of the airport?

The terminal 2 west economy lot is right there. I don’t remember seeing it there yesterday, it had some ground equipment hooked up to it, so not sure how long it will be there. Always cool to get different widebodies at PHX!

Never knew Sichuan operated any Boeings. I thought they were an all Airbus airline.

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Sichuan has A320s (family) and A330s; no 767s. Shanghai has 767-300s. That one has been at Marana since December 2017. It was sold and is due to head out across the Pacific, presumably for a cargo door.

airzona11 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Of course. And I'm stuck at home. lol Is there a good public viewing point for the west side of the airport?

The terminal 2 west economy lot is right there. I don’t remember seeing it there yesterday, it had some ground equipment hooked up to it, so not sure how long it will be there. Always cool to get different widebodies at PHX!

I dropped my son off for a flight a few weeks back and then hung out for a bit taking pics from the parking lot, but I didn't know if PHX frowned on people hanging out taking shots from the garages. I usually hang out in the gravel lot on the east side of the runways close to the international gates.

MO11 wrote:

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Sichuan has A320s (family) and A330s; no 767s. Shanghai has 767-300s. That one has been at Marana since December 2017. It was sold and is due to head out across the Pacific, presumably for a cargo door.

Ah yes, thanks for the correction. So this is plane was probably being prepared to head to Israel or where for the cargo conversion. Thanks!

PlanesNTrains wrote:

airzona11 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Of course. And I'm stuck at home. lol Is there a good public viewing point for the west side of the airport?

The terminal 2 west economy lot is right there. I don’t remember seeing it there yesterday, it had some ground equipment hooked up to it, so not sure how long it will be there. Always cool to get different widebodies at PHX!

I dropped my son off for a flight a few weeks back and then hung out for a bit taking pics from the parking lot, but I didn't know if PHX frowned on people hanging out taking shots from the garages. I usually hang out in the gravel lot on the east side of the runways close to the international gates.

There are a few good spots like that. If I had to guess, I wouldn’t think anyone would bother you if you braved the heat this time of year!

airzona11 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

airzona11 wrote:

Anyone know why there is a Sichuan 763 parked just West of terminal 2?

Sichuan has A320s (family) and A330s; no 767s. Shanghai has 767-300s. That one has been at Marana since December 2017. It was sold and is due to head out across the Pacific, presumably for a cargo door.

Ah yes, thanks for the correction. So this is plane was probably being prepared to head to Israel or where for the cargo conversion. Thanks!

Yes, but this begs the question still of why was it here if it had been in storage at Marana and now going out for a cargo conversion? They are quite capable of prepping a plane coming out of mothballs down there!

Curiously, just today I saw a post on the hnlrarebirds blog where Shanghai just ferried a retired 763 TO Marana thru HNL and it landed in MZJ just morning! One out, another back in!! LOL

Swoop is coming to Mesa..

Calgary, Alberta - August 2, 2018 - Swoop, Canada’s first true ultra-low-cost carrier (ULCC), today announced its entrance into the U.S. market with five new international flight routes available for purchase through April 27, 2019. The 2018/19 winter schedule includes routes from Mesa (Phoenix) to Edmonton; Las Vegas to Hamilton (near Toronto), Edmonton and Abbotsford (near Vancouver); and Fort Lauderdale, Orlando and Tampa Bay to Hamilton.

2x weekly to Edmonton. Calgary to remain WestJet?

910A wrote:

Swoop is coming to Mesa..

Calgary, Alberta - August 2, 2018 - Swoop, Canada’s first true ultra-low-cost carrier (ULCC), today announced its entrance into the U.S. market with five new international flight routes available for purchase through April 27, 2019. The 2018/19 winter schedule includes routes from Mesa (Phoenix) to Edmonton; Las Vegas to Hamilton (near Toronto), Edmonton and Abbotsford (near Vancouver); and Fort Lauderdale, Orlando and Tampa Bay to Hamilton.

2x weekly to Edmonton. Calgary to remain WestJet?

LOL you just scooped me! But, a little more specific from the thread announcing this:

Phoenix/Mesa, Arizona-Edmonton

Service begins Oct. 27; Swoop will fly 2 flights a week (Wednesday, Saturday)