Great Lakes' Part 135 plan
10-14-2013, 04:42 AM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 251
Originally Posted by ghann001
does any body know if it is possible to commute from la or do they require their pilots to live at the base?
also their website shows 750 hours total time required are they already approved for the 135 ?????
also their website shows 750 hours total time required are they already approved for the 135 ?????
If you check Flightstats.com and under the "Flights" tab, select "Flight Availability" and select the airports (LAX-MSP), date, and approximate time of travel to find the number of flights and the supposed loads. At a quick glance, it looks like there are a large number of flights between the two all day.
As far as the 135 operation, the Govt shutdown has slowed things a bit. I couldn't give you a specific timeline but hopefully soon.
10-14-2013, 04:28 PM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 182
Originally Posted by EMB120IP
As far as the 135 operation, the Govt shutdown has slowed things a bit. I couldn't give you a specific timeline but hopefully soon.
I really do wish for more competitive working conditions for my fellow Lakers, and none of the BS Part 135 exemptions - for hiring, rest, or anything else.
10-14-2013, 05:20 PM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 1Durrty5
Posts: 290
Presuming the FAA eventually allows the airline to operate under pt 135 on certain routes, how will that affect the EAS subsidies on those routes?
Granted I'm no expert, but EAS contracts are to fly x number of seats on certain routes a certain number of times in a given time period. If you reduce the capacity of the aircraft flying that route by ~50%, wouldn't that be the same as cutting the number of flights in half?
Could the bigger issue here be adherence to a DOT contract rather than gaining FAA approval?
Granted I'm no expert, but EAS contracts are to fly x number of seats on certain routes a certain number of times in a given time period. If you reduce the capacity of the aircraft flying that route by ~50%, wouldn't that be the same as cutting the number of flights in half?
Could the bigger issue here be adherence to a DOT contract rather than gaining FAA approval?
10-14-2013, 05:21 PM
#118
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: c182
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
Ever heard of an airline called SkyWest? Compass? Mesa?
And you won't be commuting to MSP, you'll be commuting to Ft Dodge, Farmington, or Williston. Good luck with THAT!
And you won't be commuting to MSP, you'll be commuting to Ft Dodge, Farmington, or Williston. Good luck with THAT!
10-14-2013, 05:26 PM
#119
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: c182
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by The701Express
Presuming the FAA eventually allows the airline to operate under pt 135 on certain routes, how will that affect the EAS subsidies on those routes?
Granted I'm no expert, but EAS contracts are to fly x number of seats on certain routes a certain number of times in a given time period. If you reduce the capacity of the aircraft flying that route by ~50%, wouldn't that be the same as cutting the number of flights in half?
Could the bigger issue here be adherence to a DOT contract rather than gaining FAA approval?
Granted I'm no expert, but EAS contracts are to fly x number of seats on certain routes a certain number of times in a given time period. If you reduce the capacity of the aircraft flying that route by ~50%, wouldn't that be the same as cutting the number of flights in half?
Could the bigger issue here be adherence to a DOT contract rather than gaining FAA approval?
10-14-2013, 06:23 PM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Posts: 264
Originally Posted by ghann001
which one of these upgrades within months? the goal is get to the majors someday without having to be stuck at a regional for 6 years fo and another 5 as a captain just because they have nicer destinations and fly crjs
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
