Not many of us old dudes around that remember the 123.

How many flight hours does one usually get a month on average on the 145 side?

Hard question to answer. Depends on where they use you, if IOE is running full steam to staff up, and whether you want to fly a lot or not. As AUS based continues to add routes, flight hours will be abundant. With that said, a lot of guys living in AUS are going through training, and they may have all the AUS flying on lockdown simply because the company saves money on travel and accommodations when using those guys

The feeling when you know the guy who bought Via Air...

Nobody has ever gone out of business flying too small a plane that was always full.... conversely, many have vanished into history flying too big a plane that was always empty.

Their business model is sound, the growth is slow but organic, and larger planes are in the business plan as loads and demand increase. They’re essentially an ULCC operating smaller jets... for now.

They do not fly in somebody else’s paint pretending to be somebody else. They advertise and sell their own tickets.

They have a lot of maturing to do, but are doing well all things considered. They also treat their pilots much better than other regionals.

Home based
No crashpads
No airport standby
No short call RAP unless a hotel is provided
Pilots keep all travel air, hotel and rental car miles.
Captains have company credit card for short notice emergencies or offline charter catering, fuel
Single occupancy hotel in training
Crew cars in training
Most RON’s have crew cars to use
Crew meals for duty days over 12 hours
Salary job, cancellations or lost days in hotels doesnt cut pay

The bad:
The schedules are always late and subject to change at anytime. Best to just think of it as a workday schedule, not an actual flight schedule.
Lots of cancellations still due to maintenance on some tired E145’s. Their mx dept does a good job, they just mistakenly bought aircraft from someplace an experienced airline would not buy planes from. Dispatch reliability is improving a lot compared to last year. They’ve fixed everything, and now it’s basically normal type stuff.
They will multi-leg you to/from work to save $5 even if it costs you 4 extra hours. You can make deals with them when you find similar priced flights.

Truth be told, I would not have left there if I hadn’t been offered a golden ticket elsewhere in heavy equipment with the associated heavy paycheck. I liked the people there, the check always came (sometimes not until midnight, but it came), the flying was fun into some cool destinations, the equipment was well maintained, safe, and if there was a problem, the CA’s word was final.

This will be a great place to work once they get some details worked out, and hire a few more folks. Lots of growing pains in the process. All things considered it’s still better QOL than most regionals. The pay scales are decent for the equipment. The FO side could use another bump though IMHO

Not directly related to Via, but come on... You do realize CASM is MUCH higher in a 50 seater than a 70 seater RJ?
Plenty of ways to go bankrupt flying too small planes that are full.

But come on.... You do realize without the RASM the 76 seater loses more money.

By your definition we should be flying A380’s into Presque Isle Maine because the CASM is less.....

It’s not CASM..... it’s RASM. You have to have the revenue to support the airframe. In the markets they’re serving the E145 makes money, the E175’s don’t. Can’t fill enough seats yet. Which brings us back to nobody has ever gone bankrupt flying too small a plane that was always full. Don’t believe me, ask Bob Crandall, it’s a quote from him, and I’d venture to say he knows more about it that all of us.

This might help too

http://www.oliverwyman.de/content/da...c_Analysis.pdf

Haha that would be true. Thunder Pig is the last flying example left. Have a few hours in it, hopefully more this year.

Supply and demand. Even if there is demand for 76 seats, with no competition on the route a full 50 seater can possibly make more money than a full 76 seater by driving the yield/RASM up, unless the carrier is using standard rates for ticket prices.

Please cite an airline that went out of business for flying a small plane that was always full. CASM is only 1/2 the equation, and is only a valid comparison with equal percentage of seats full.... ie, RASM.
If they routinely sell an average of 45 seats on any given route, which plane makes money now? The 50 seater or the 76 seater? The smaller plane ends up with a higher RASM and it’s revenue that runs the show, not empty capacity. If CASM ran the show, every route would have an A380 on it.
Also remember that Via is not a FFD carrier; they’re more like an Allegiant or Sun country using smaller equipment on thinner routes. Smart actually.