The National Transportation Safety Board’s inquiry into the Feb. 12 crash of Continental Connection Flight 3407 outside Buffalo has highlighted the operations of the nation’s regional airlines, a sector of the aviation industry that has grown to account for half the country’s airline flights and a quarter of its passengers.
The details of that world have surprised many Americans — the strikingly low pay for new pilots; the rigors of flying multiple flights, at lower altitudes and thus often in worse weather than pilots on longer routes, while scrambling to get enough sleep; the relative inexperience of pilots at the smaller airlines, whose training standards are the same, but whose skills may not be.
Well, I can believe it. The commercial airline industry has been struggling to hold down costs for a long time now. Guess what? It is reaching a breaking point. Costs must go up to support the airport fees, maintenance fees, fuel, and the salaries and benefits of all those involved in the commerical workflow, including ground crews and air traffic control. The improvements in efficiency has reached a local maximum. It is going to require big changes in technology and processes to make the next leap into driving down costs. The industry does not have the resources to make such a leap. Costs must rise or something drastic must occur.If I may make a prediction. The airline industry is on borrowed time. Rail is coming back and going to rescue the transportation industry. Flying will be reserved for the wealthy. Smaller FBOs with fleets of smaller turbo props and light jets will recover and thrive in the failing commercial market.
Suggestions? Yeh. Control fuel costs. Drop them in half and watch the industry bounce back in a big way. And, once that occurs, then make industry INVEST in more pilots, less hours, and better benefits. Make them do it through CULTURE and PRESSURE. Make the penalties for failure bigger. The bottom line, start with fuel but do not end there.
2 comments:
I disagree, for reasons I outlined here.
Bottom line: under about 400 miles, sure, assuming that NIMBY problems don't prevent railbed upgrades/replacements. Over 400 miles? Not going to happen.
I'll note as well that Southwest is a counter-example. The major airlines have problems that air travel in general does not, and it's analogous to the problems the RIAA has - the main difference being, they managed to get a lot more help propping up their outmoded business model....
Yeh. I see the NIMBY issue. The same issue is occurring with smaller airports that have increased traffic.
However, Smaller FBOs can have great success. Like Southwest, they run out of smaller airports. They just do not have the visibility or the infrastructure. For example, ground transportation options at smaller airports are almost non-existent. However, they have what bigger airlines do not have-flexibility. TSA is not currently interfering as heavily with these smaller operations. They are trying to change that for their own sake.Smaller FBOs can operate a more flexible schedule and on demand. Imagine flying into Batavia to get to Cincinnati. More efficient security. Perhaps a bit slower travel but a more flexible schedules. It can happen.
Post a Comment