Region of Waterloo International Airport - YKF

[tomh009]

Neither aircraft you suggest has enough range.  YKF-SFO is 1932nm, and you need to allow margin due to winds (which are not always favourable).  CRJ200LR is closest, but at 2004nm of range you end up with only 72nm of margin, and that's simply not enough.

It's my understanding that range as described in manufacturer specifications means effective range and not "you arrive there with the last drop of fuel". So if the range is 2076nm it means: you can reach any airport at that distance with enough spare fuel to meet normal airline regulations.

JFK or MIA would make much more sense, giving connections to the east coast and Europe/Latin America.  And no problems with range.

Huh? Is YKF already at capacity, unbeknownst to me?

Because short of that I don't see what the viability of YKF-JFK has to do with YKF-SFO. They serve different parts of the globe. I have argued for YKF-JFK for pretty much the exact same reasons as YKF-SFO. So almost the opposite to what you say, if JFK makes sense this is an argument in favour of SFO as well.

The range means you can reach an airport within that distance with no wind.  Depending on the wind patterns, you need to allow additional range, otherwise you end up making emergency fuel stops when there is a strong headwind (and there are always headwinds flying west).

I am saying that JFK or MIA would be more viable than SFO.  Where the threshold lies (all are viable, none are, or somewhere in between) is a question only AA route planners can determine -- they have far more data than we can even think of.