Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Pax insist on reasonable frequency... the more frequency you provide, the more pax you get. Otherwise they fly the competition, drive, take the bus, or just stay home.
For discretionary travel like a weekend getaway, it's not fun if I have to get up zero-dark thirty for the flight. Also not fun if I have a four hour connection at the hub. I'd rather just stay home.
Up-gauging is not economically viable if you can't fill the seats... narrowbodies will not be replacing 50-seaters in most markets.
There are downsides to living in rural areas with low population density. Certain issues that depend on logistics, frequency, and economies of scale, like a major medical center or busy airport, just aren’t going to be there. That’s always been the case. But what has not been the case is the shortfall of replacement aircraft to replace the aging 50 seaters or pilots to crew them.
I don’t see people resuming manufacture of current technology 50 seaters in this environment but then neither do I see anyone willing to build electric powered or hydrogen fueled small pax aircraft in this environment either. PAX carrying drones, I suppose, are possible, but currently those aren’t particularly fast. A Military Predator drone only travels ~110 knots or so. Granted, that can be straight line, but it isn’t much more than twice the speed of a private auto. I don’t see any quick or cheap fixes to this problem.
And yet all of the legacies have built their business model around a hub and spoke design that significantly depends on regional feeders, including 50 seat feed that will soon not be there.
We live in interesting times.