Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
Anything happening at Great Lakes? >

Anything happening at Great Lakes?

Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Anything happening at Great Lakes?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-09-2009, 08:07 AM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TPROP4ever's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: none ya...
Posts: 1,154
Default

Originally Posted by Copperhed51
There is nothing essential about this air service.
Might be essential to someones job??? Even small towns need travel ability for some of their buisnesses.
TPROP4ever is offline  
Old 09-09-2009, 10:49 PM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Beech 1900D
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by TPROP4ever
Might be essential to someones job??? Even small towns need travel ability for some of their buisnesses.
1000% agree!!! If you subtract what is gained through this service, from what is spent, and compare it to your average contract in Iraq, it would more than pale in comparison. Oops...I did it again!

Last edited by 1900luxuryliner; 09-10-2009 at 07:04 AM.
1900luxuryliner is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 10:02 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ZBowFlyz's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Left
Posts: 251
Default

I disagree. EAS stole a huge number of (real) charter jobs. How did those people travel before EAS showed up in thier town?

I have been following this thread and I would like to state my opinion. The first is that 121 flying is only one type of flying in the aviation world. Another thing is that a great number of my/our 135 charter jobs have been lost because we cant compete with a "gobment" funded program. BTW First year pay on a twin cessna in 2009 was a salary of 38K (for me atleast)... our planes made money on those routes without government handouts.

I don't mean to wish you guys out of your jobs but it's hard not to be a little bitter when we see the things we see every day. Our Charters have slowed way down while the number of pax flying stays the same.

The way I see it was we were doing fine. I was fairly compensated. The locals that needed to fly chartered a flight. Now, three 1900's fly in a day. Not one flight has more than 5 people on it. On your route I burn 55 gal, a 1900 is burning 150-180 gal.

What makes this program worth the money when there were guys already there doing it right? Maybe some towns needed it but mine sure didn't.

Just my opinion, flame away!

Last edited by ZBowFlyz; 09-10-2009 at 11:36 AM.
ZBowFlyz is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 11:57 AM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Beech 1900D
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by ZBowFlyz
I disagree. EAS stole a huge number of (real) charter jobs. How did those people travel before EAS showed up in thier town?

I have been following this thread and I would like to state my opinion. The first is that 121 flying is only one type of flying in the aviation world. Another thing is that a great number of my/our 135 charter jobs have been lost because we cant compete with a "gobment" funded program. BTW First year pay on a twin cessna in 2009 was a salary of 38K (for me atleast)... our planes made money on those routes without government handouts.

I don't mean to wish you guys out of your jobs but it's hard not to be a little bitter when we see the things we see every day. Our Charters have slowed way down while the number of pax flying stays the same.

The way I see it was we were doing fine. I was fairly compensated. The locals that needed to fly chartered a flight. Now, three 1900's fly in a day. Not one flight has more than 5 people on it. On your route I burn 55 gal, a 1900 is burning 190-200 gal.

What makes this program worth the money when there were guys already there doing it right? Maybe some towns needed it but mine sure didn't.

Just my opinion, flame away!
No flaming from me. But, I think you were, just maybe, flying for a failing business. I'm not sure you could directly attribute it to EAS. Chances are, the city was set up as EAS well before the charter company started, anyway, so they should have been aware of that fact and planned for that, prior to setting up the business. There is a little market overlap, I admit, but I don't believe it would be enough to send a charter company to the grave. I worked for a charter company (not as a pilot), before I flew for Lakes, that was within a 20 minute drive of one of the largest hubs in the country. They had no issue making money, and felt very little direct competition from the major airlines. A lot of smaller charter companies actually compensate their workers pretty poorly, and provide zero benefits. The one I worked for compensated their King Air pilots less than I am compensated in the 1900. In the 1900, I can think of only a few destinations that we serve, that are served by a charter company, as well. I don't believe the actual effect is quite as dramatic as you make it out to be, but I admit, there may be a little market overlap, and a small negative effect to the charter industry. But, we probably have 2-3 pilots jobs created, for every charter pilot job that may, or may not have been lost, as a result of EAS. We do need to negotiate higher compensation; I have no excuse for that. It should be directly in-line with industry average on type/ aircraft size. We're working on that. Final point. How many major airline jobs are created as an indirect result of EAS? I would reckon that the number is pretty significant. Remember, almost all EAS providers have code shares, or fly as express carriers for major airlines. We feed people to the hubs, to travel on the majors. Most of our business doesn't involve people just looking for a flight to the hub. They are looking at going to another final destination, which will involve flying on a major airline. Charter companies aren't specifically established to feed people to the hubs, like the EAS program is, and they don't have code share agreements, which provides the majors with money and passengers. How many major airline jobs would be eliminated, if we abandoned EAS, and charter expanded to the point where it was actually taking away major airline jobs; Example: It would be cheaper and faster to charter an aircraft to get a group of executives to a final destination, over chartering a bus to drive your executives 300 miles, to the hub, so they could hop on a major airline, and eventually fly to their final destination. Without EAS, not only would you miss out on the direct feed to the majors, more people would completely bypass the airline system to get to their final destination, both resulting in the elimination of major airline jobs in significant numbers.

Last edited by 1900luxuryliner; 09-10-2009 at 01:42 PM. Reason: added a point without a new post
1900luxuryliner is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 02:46 PM
  #35  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 47
Default

I'm in the CGI and MWA area, and they both are going with Cape Air. Subject to DOT approval.
USN(Ret) is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 03:03 PM
  #36  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 47
Default

Originally Posted by travelnate
what shocks me is how ZK didn't bid any of these markets into ORD... i mean, that was the company's largest ops in the 90s. I remember when we used up all of F1 - F5 (well, most of F1 - there was a section blocked off for the United Freight & Mail folks).

No one bidding has an actual codeshare that will be useful. Gulfstream can't get CO to agree to use their code in STL, CapeAir has the same issues, and the one codeshare that gives them *some* flexibility doesn't fly to STL. This is going to be an independent run-down to see who can build traffic the best, and like AVS said, Caterpillar, ADM, and Tate & Lyle are not using the Decatur Airport.

I fly into Bloomington on AirTran when I can and drive down... its a shame that I just can't get a good connection back home to DEC.
There's an allegiance to St. Louis among all these small towns, that is unfounded as far as airline service is confirmed. The local leaders live in the past glory of the Ozark and TWA hubs, not understanding the modern realities.

DEC might be too close to other airports, but UIN, TBN, CGI, and MWA, would be better off soliciting RJ service to ORD, from an AA or UA regional. Don't know if the numbers would work or not, but it would be worth a look.

St. Louis is still a goto place for hospitals and baseball, but it's days as a viable airline hub are over.
USN(Ret) is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 07:34 PM
  #37  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TPROP4ever's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: none ya...
Posts: 1,154
Default

Originally Posted by USN(Ret)
I'm in the CGI and MWA area, and they both are going with Cape Air. Subject to DOT approval.
Just curious who your source is, cause my sources are saying somthing else? Just curious cause
I did see that local 12 reported that the airport board recomended going with Cape air but still subject to a county or city board vote??? Cant find any new reports of Marion Ill going with Cape air though.

Last edited by TPROP4ever; 09-10-2009 at 08:59 PM.
TPROP4ever is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 07:36 PM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 483
Default

Originally Posted by TPROP4ever
Might be essential to someones job??? Even small towns need travel ability for some of their buisnesses.
Somebody who needs to travel for their job can drive the 2 hours to STL in my opinion. Maybe it's just me, but I don't even think of a 2 hour drive as a long drive. If the person is not willing to make the drive, they can live and/or work somewhere else. I still don't see how it is the responsibility of a taxpayer in Dallas to make sure that somebody in Marion has access to an airplane that flies them somewhere they could drive in 2 hours.

Originally Posted by 1900luxuryliner
1000% agree!!! If you subtract what is gained through this service, from what is spent, and compare it to your average contract in Iraq, it would more than pale in comparison. Oops...I did it again!
Yes, but when you add the cost of EAS to the cost of our illegal war in Iraq, you just increase the national debt. Just because you aren't adding as big of a chunk doesn't mean it's ok to add it...though most of Congress seems to disagree with that view.

Originally Posted by ZBowFlyz
I disagree. EAS stole a huge number of (real) charter jobs. How did those people travel before EAS showed up in thier town?

I have been following this thread and I would like to state my opinion. The first is that 121 flying is only one type of flying in the aviation world. Another thing is that a great number of my/our 135 charter jobs have been lost because we cant compete with a "gobment" funded program. BTW First year pay on a twin cessna in 2009 was a salary of 38K (for me atleast)... our planes made money on those routes without government handouts.

I don't mean to wish you guys out of your jobs but it's hard not to be a little bitter when we see the things we see every day. Our Charters have slowed way down while the number of pax flying stays the same.

The way I see it was we were doing fine. I was fairly compensated. The locals that needed to fly chartered a flight. Now, three 1900's fly in a day. Not one flight has more than 5 people on it. On your route I burn 55 gal, a 1900 is burning 150-180 gal.

What makes this program worth the money when there were guys already there doing it right? Maybe some towns needed it but mine sure didn't.

Just my opinion, flame away!
I generally agree with your sentiments. Government subsidies for one company mean a lack of free market principles and a destruction of the ability for companies to compete for business. If these places are so lucrative/wonderful/worthwhile to live in, then the people who live there either need to learn to afford to foot the bill for their air service, learn to drive the 2 hours to the airport nearby, or decide to live in an area that suits their needs better.

Originally Posted by 1900luxuryliner
Remember, almost all EAS providers have code shares, or fly as express carriers for major airlines. We feed people to the hubs, to travel on the majors. Most of our business doesn't involve people just looking for a flight to the hub. They are looking at going to another final destination, which will involve flying on a major airline. Charter companies aren't specifically established to feed people to the hubs, like the EAS program is, and they don't have code share agreements, which provides the majors with money and passengers. How many major airline jobs would be eliminated, if we abandoned EAS, and charter expanded to the point where it was actually taking away major airline jobs; Example: It would be cheaper and faster to charter an aircraft to get a group of executives to a final destination, over chartering a bus to drive your executives 300 miles, to the hub, so they could hop on a major airline, and eventually fly to their final destination. Without EAS, not only would you miss out on the direct feed to the majors, more people would completely bypass the airline system to get to their final destination, both resulting in the elimination of major airline jobs in significant numbers.
As you know, we codeshare with United and Frontier. They both have a very very tiny presence in STL. AA also barely has any flights in STL. Southwest has a bunch but nobody codeshares with them. Point is, there are hardly any codeshare connections on us into STL. If we went to ORD, I think we'd have a ton more people flying.

Originally Posted by USN(Ret)
There's an allegiance to St. Louis among all these small towns, that is unfounded as far as airline service is confirmed. The local leaders live in the past glory of the Ozark and TWA hubs, not understanding the modern realities.

DEC might be too close to other airports, but UIN, TBN, CGI, and MWA, would be better off soliciting RJ service to ORD, from an AA or UA regional. Don't know if the numbers would work or not, but it would be worth a look.

St. Louis is still a goto place for hospitals and baseball, but it's days as a viable airline hub are over.
I agree completely. I was talking to an AA/former TWA guy on the jumpseat in to STL today and I was talking about how much of a ghost town the airport is. He said TWA used to have almost 850 flights/day in STL. Now AA is decreasing the number to 38 departures per day. ORD would make so much more sense. You can't get anywhere from STL.


Again, although I disagree with EAS in principle and think it's generally unconstitutional, I can agree that there are communities out there that do greatly benefit from having EAS in their town. UIN, DEC, MWA, CGI are just too close to STL for it to be important to them in my opinion...and I think that's probably pretty evident when you look at our flight loads. No flaming needed in this thread, just some friendly discussion about the ridiculousness that is the airline industry.
Copperhed51 is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 07:40 PM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TPROP4ever's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: none ya...
Posts: 1,154
Default

I think the real issue with ORD is securing slots and the unjust cost of doing so, makes it almost impossible to do even with EAS monies
TPROP4ever is offline  
Old 09-10-2009, 07:57 PM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 483
Default

Originally Posted by TPROP4ever
I think the real issue with ORD is securing slots and the unjust cost of doing so, makes it almost impossible to do even with EAS monies
Yeah, that's what I've heard. I've heard from multiple people that ORD won't even allow turboprops to service that airport, but I doubt there's much truth to that. I would think that if we're codesharing with United, we could use some of their gates, but I have experience with that and it's ridiculous. We'd spend an insane amount of time in the penalty box.
Copperhed51 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Theonemarine
PSA Airlines
67
05-16-2016 04:13 PM
papacharlie
Regional
36
03-07-2012 08:25 PM
aviator4hire
Regional
290
08-11-2009 10:02 AM
mma35
Military
2
04-30-2009 02:11 PM
FlyingPirate
Regional
74
01-15-2009 03:15 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices