Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
EAS cuts could ground rural communities >

EAS cuts could ground rural communities

Search
Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

EAS cuts could ground rural communities

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:37 AM
  #1  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 73
Default EAS cuts could ground rural communities

Essential Air Service cuts could ground rural communities - USATODAY.com

Last edited by rickair7777; 03-30-2011 at 09:31 AM. Reason: Make Title Fit
Group W Bench is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 07:49 AM
  #2  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,256
Default

The common scenario of an entire ground ops team plus 8 full-time TSA's standing around all day to handle three (3) pax ovre the course of the day really is pushing the envelope of fraud, waste, and abuse.

Maybe they don't need to cut it entirely, but they should certainly weed out those destinations which have negligible traffic.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 08:04 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Schempp-Hirth
Posts: 417
Default

My Vote: Dump IYK and IPL
Terrain Inop is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 08:11 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
EWRflyr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,882
Default

My opinion is to dump all EAS, except places in Alaska. I can't believe I'm agreeing with Palin on something.
EWRflyr is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 08:23 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
captain152's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,258
Default

Seeing as how I fly for an airline that does several of these routes ... I can say that some of them are worth it, while others' aren't. I can't count the number of times I've flown to VCT, PQI, PKB, AOO, SHD, etc. with 2-3 pax on just one leg. Pretty sure I've done it w/o any pax a number of times as well. Most of these cities are a solid 2 hr drive (there are some exceptions to this of course) from any city with scheduled air service .. so it would be a pain to make that drive when you need to go somewhere ... but at the same time how often do people that live there actually have to travel??
captain152 is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 08:39 AM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Andrew_VT's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 584
Default

Originally Posted by EWRflyr View Post
My opinion is to dump all EAS, except places in Alaska. I can't believe I'm agreeing with Palin on something.
Why should we exempt Alaska? I know that they actually need EAS more than the rest of the states because they don't have roads to a lot of these places, but make the state pay for it.

Alaska as a state is the third biggest welfare queen in the country, they get $1.84 in federal spending per dollar of federal taxes. Plus they have their own oil money. (The Tax Foundation - Federal Spending Received Per Dollar of Taxes Paid by State, 2005)

Not to thread hijack but when I looked up this list I couldn't help but notice that the top 10 federal 'welfare' states are all red states... kinda ironic.
Andrew_VT is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 01:59 PM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: 737 right
Posts: 285
Default

IYK does not get the EAS subsidy.
moflyer is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 02:07 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Doing what you do, for less.
Posts: 1,792
Default

I think EAS should stick around, but frequency, aircraft size, and cities should be cut.

Provide a subsidy that allows for twice daily service in something the size of a Caravan. The airline wants to run something bigger, they're going to have to pay for the difference themselves. If these routes usually only have 2-3 pax, the government shouldn't be subsidizing an aircraft that seats many times that amount.

Making a distance rule. No EAS to any airport which is within 2 hours driving distance from an airport served by scheduled pax flights.


Other than that, for some airports, EAS is just that... essential, and we shouldn't cut it entirely.
lolwut is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 02:45 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
saab2000's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,750
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
The common scenario of an entire ground ops team plus 8 full-time TSA's standing around all day to handle three (3) pax ovre the course of the day really is pushing the envelope of fraud, waste, and abuse.

Maybe they don't need to cut it entirely, but they should certainly weed out those destinations which have negligible traffic.
EAS needs to go, if not in its entirety, then mostly.

I agree with your assessment of the situation. I have flown in and out of Greenville, MS a few years ago. There were two scheduled flights per day for a total of 62 seats per day. For this there was an operational tower and a TSA crew, in addition to whatever it costs to keep the airport open.

EAS must go unless it is truly 'Essential'. It almost never is.
saab2000 is offline  
Old 03-30-2011, 02:48 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TonyWilliams's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Default

This EAS stuff is political trading points. Doubtful it will go away. Disguised as something else, maybe. But there's too many dollars / votes being poured into some of the micro communities that any politician can say, "Look what I got fer ya... vote for me!".
TonyWilliams is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
winglet
Regional
47
05-15-2016 09:45 PM
StormChaser
Major
378
08-10-2009 12:25 PM
quantumleap
Regional
1
03-02-2009 10:16 AM
Jurassic Jet
Cargo
26
11-15-2007 07:16 AM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
0
07-09-2005 09:27 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