backtoregionals

Via is also big into EAS routes. I flew for them. 2/3 empty E145's.

deltajuliet

It's not Joe American's job to subsidize someone wanting to live in BFE, Alaska. I think it's cool if people want to lived a rugged frontier life, but it's not very rugged if it's only possible through taxation.
I think we're finding with the 1500 hour rule that more barriers to entry can be a good thing. And there'll always be flight instructing.

hawk21

Last job was EAS. Most of the routes were within 2 hours of a major airport.

Good riddance.

msprj2

Bad idea, You get rid of EAS then taxpayers see little reason to keep
small airports even open.
Whats next no roads leaving cities, costs to much to maintain.

Avroman

I take it you haven't driven roads in Michigan or the New York City area lately... Might as well be mine fields.

flightview

@deltajuliet yer dumb.

People living in BFE, don't choose to live there. This is their life, their heritage and all they know. It's not people choosing to 'live a rugged frontier life'. Your comment comes across as vey juvenile, uneducated and idiotic.

ETA: I know BFE means bum **** Egypt. I still don't know why cursing isn't allowed on this board. Also dumb.

Shrek

99% of the EAS routes are a complete waste of taxpayer dollars - glad they are going away.

serthwrmtym

Is there an actual news article talking about the EAS going away, or is this just armchair speculation?

BeatNavy

Where you live is absolutely a choice. People move every day.

flightview

To a degree, yes. So, it may be economically impossible for people to move out of their location because the only way in and out of their village is by airplane. Where will they move to? A closer, bigger village? There are only a few major cities in Alaska. There are limited jobs available in a village, if they survive on subsistence, where will the money for airplane tickets come from? Do you know how much that costs? Once they get out, where does the money for an apartment and all of those necessities come from? You're saying that because it is inconvenient for the government to subsidize rural air service routes, it's up to the people who live there to move? Then to think about people who never grew up around working an office job, who lack any formal education last high school (which, lets face it, that's another joke), to just, what? Work minimum wage? Then asking people (a lot of people) to give up their way of life, culture and heritage is just next level. I'm not saying they should live there for free (believe me, they don't), I'm just offering up the other side of the coin.