![]() |
Originally Posted by FlyF35
(Post 2798399)
|
The questions you ask are pretty subjective.
Better questions- 1. Is the training in house or third party? 2. If internal what’s the instructor average seniority? 3. Do they use AQP? If so, how long have they done so? |
Originally Posted by Blackhawk
(Post 2798561)
The questions you ask are pretty subjective.
Better questions- 1. Is the training in house or third party? 2. If internal what’s the instructor average seniority? 3. Do they use AQP? If so, how long have they done so? I also like to hear safety culture for the regional. My understanding regional is subject to same FAA rules and regulations regarding safety. |
Safety culture is a much better metric.
I would say that zero fatal accidents over a decade is proof of safety. It’s unclear to me how that could be improved from a passenger standpoint |
Originally Posted by ZeroTT
(Post 2798623)
Safety culture is a much better metric.
I would say that zero fatal accidents over a decade is proof of safety. It’s unclear to me how that could be improved from a passenger standpoint There is a lot to safety more then accident rates. |
Originally Posted by FlyF35
(Post 2798582)
Thanks. Above are better questions.
I also like to hear safety culture for the regional. My understanding regional is subject to same FAA rules and regulations regarding safety. |
Why these regionals in particular? You left our more than half of the regional population.
It’s sort of immeasurable anyway. |
Originally Posted by knewyork
(Post 2798719)
Why these regionals in particular? You left our more than half of the regional population.
|
As a fellow nervous traveler, I try to find information on this topic too. I'm usually laughed at by pilots or at least reassured that flying is extremely safe. And like, yeah, I know that there's only been one fatality in commercial aviation in the US in the last 10 years. Nor have the E145 or E175 seen any fatal accidents. But as others have said, safety is more nuanced than the total number of fatalities. My main concern is poor maintenance, as mechanics seem to be criminally underpaid ($16 per hour?!) at most regionals, especially considering the complexity and importance of the job.
Consider the following Indeed.com review from a former Envoy mechanic: Poor management, poor culture and I would not fly the planes that go out of these hangers as they do not have safe practices for engine work. They put customers and workers at risk. If you will notice, this ad for this location runs every 6 months, which is the most end of the probation period.... not a coincidence. Or perhaps this quote from a former Republic mechanic: some of the mechanics that work on their planes should have their licenses revoked from the FAA. Wrong engine valves changed, Static wicks adhered to the a/c with double sided tape. Wrong slat temp sensor harnesses replaced. And of course, Envoy and Republic are *good* companies. I hate to imagine the standards at some of the more questionable regionals. Honest question - what should passengers make of comments like this? Disgruntled employee? Problem with safety culture at Envoy? Bad management at this particular hangar? What happens when maintenance is lacking because management wants to save a few bucks? Does the FAA actually have the capacity to crack down on all this stuff, or do they only have time to go after the worst offenders? |
Originally Posted by knewyork
(Post 2798719)
Why these regionals in particular? You left our more than half of the regional population.
It’s sort of immeasurable anyway. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:54 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands