Originally Posted by
Excargodog
My personal opinion? Regional flying of smaller jet aircraft is likely going to be decreasing anyway - the first casualty of trying to control carbon release. A220 and 319 NEO service on a less frequent basis will replace higher frequency smaller aircraft and likely a return to smaller turboprops and/or small electric aircraft for EAS and other low volume ops. Similarly, except perhaps for international ops you will see more flights direct to and less feeding of hubs. The quickest way to reduce carbon footprint is to make the system more efficient and feeding hubs - often at right angles (or worse) to the intended destination isn’t an efficient use of fuel compared to nonstop.
Agree with a lot of that, RJ's are not good for an airline's carbon footprint. I could see some reduced frequency in the name of the Carbon God, but at some point I suspect some enterprising major will start using SAF and offer higher-frequency on Very Low Carbon flights.
Hub and spoke will continue for sure... you could probably find 100 people who want to fly between IDA and MLI. Each year. On which day of the year do you operate that flight?
The LCC/ULCC who are doing the direct thing are simply filling in that niche of mid-size towns that can support direct flights, nothing new, it started with SWA. And even then the have "focus cities", aka mini hubs. There's a whole bunch of small towns which cannot support direct flights, and never will. That's what hub n spoke does. Unless the fed is OK with cutting the small towns off. They clearly weren't okay with it last time they granted CARES aid to the airlines.