Thanks. Believe me, I wish I didn't have to write things like that. There was a time post-9/11, and post-strike, when Comair was growing, successful, and the "go-to" airline whenever Delta had a tough challenge to solve.

Comair labor was, back in those days, even higher relative to the competition than it is today, yet somehow Delta knew which regional carrier could get the job done.

Unfortunately, the "everything for nothing" Wal-Mart mentality Delta has managed Comair with over the last five years has over time begun to reflect that old saying "you get what you pay for", as completion factor, on-time performance, and other metrics have suffered as talent has been driven away.

Don't tell me crew costs are too high when Comair has been the only carrier in the Delta Connection network to be paid to fly their airplanes slow. How many times over the last five years have you heard the following on a center frequency?

"Freedom XXXX, say speed?"

"Mach point seven-seven, Freedom XXXX."

"Chautauqua XXXX, say speed?"

"Mach point seven-six, Chautauqua XXXX."

"Comair XXXX, say speed?"

"Mach point six-four, Comair XXXX."

Duh, of course crew costs are going to be higher. Even if book rates were the exact same, when you expect your pilots to fly 10% slower than any other pilot in the DCI network, guess what? Your Comair pilots are going to be 10% less productive, or viewed another way, 10% more expensive.

Sad to write this, but perhaps Comair would be best served by replacing the 50-seaters with elephants. That would be more fitting for the circus Delta has made, or allowed local "management" to make, of what used to be a quite competent airline.