We have two things colliding in the same airspace. Reduction of 50 seaters and a major shortage of regional pilots.

It has nothing to do with a softer Covid demand reset (not even certain I understand what those words mean).

It is forecast 9,000 regional pilots (out of 20,000 regional pilots total) will be hired by the majors in 2022. A continued strain of hiring will take place, maybe to not quite that extent, year after year for the rest of the decade. They will not be able to find and train sufficient pilots to fill all of those slots. Something will have to give. It will be most of the 50 seaters. (EAS and a few other places will continue to fly a handful of 50 seaters.)

Yes, at this point the math says the 50's are in big trouble. Unless something changes.

I was just referring that my own hometown and many airports don’t have the exact service measured by RJ departures that existed Precovid.

The demand reset referred to an idea that TSA screenings may achieve pre Covid numbers and all lost departures are never restored.

They simply upguage current frequency to meet demand in lieu of restoring lost RJ frequency.

Difficult to know if RJ departure frequency is truly more profitable, or a carry over from pre mergers when it was the cheapest way to scale the network, and offer more product options with cheap overhead.

Except some things just don’t scale well. While three or four flights a day might justify full time TSA personnel or gate people or baggage handlers or other ground support personnel, a single 737/320/220 flight a day makes that far less appealing. And an unavoidable cancellation or missed aircraft isn’t quite the problem if there is another going out in four hours that it is if the next flight is 24 hours later.

Some smaller cities are going to lose air service or at least find it dramatically more expensive. That’s just reality.

That works, if the frequency is sufficient. You can't always fix the problem with larger planes and lower frequency, many of the pax will just make other arrangements... sometimes that means just staying home. There is a very real discretionary travel market enabled by convenient, low-cost flights.


The lowest CASM solution is to run one widebody weekly, and they do that in some places overseas where people have more time than money. That sort of frequency is inadequate for most US customers.

More frequency ALWAYS means more customers... in my rural hometown we have a very few local flights, or can drive to two other airports (1-2 hour drive). On the days where they add a flight or two, I'll fly out of the local small airport. But if it's 8-12 hours off my desired schedule, I'll drive to the hub (they even have a bus).

There's obviously a point of diminishing economic returns on added frequency. There is a sweet spot where more frequency (enabled by RJ's in small markets) gives a competitive advantage (convenience) despite higher CASM of smaller planes.

There are variables...

Gucci vacation destinations support schedules which would be uneconomical for Podunk Falls.

The cost to staff an outstation... typically need three flights on most days, although that can be mitigated if one company handles multiple brands on contract.

On the optimistic side…

I think the network carriers have gotten MUCH better at product differentiation and that’s going to support better service.

the 200/145 is peak bad-old-days. Same crappy product for everyone. Poor pricing for the value conscious, poor service for the business traveler. Nobody’s happy.

But they’ve got a 4 class model pretty well
figu out with the 76 seat and up aircraft. Sell enough paid first class and economy plus, offer basic economy too and maybe some of these smaller Class C markets can support a mix of 737 and 175

(and yes the places that had two 50-seat flights/day will lose service)

Likely a natural consequence of a pilot shortage, but those 50's are close to worn out anyway.

We may see a return of the milk-run in some places... do a loop circuit including several small destinations. I did that only a tiny handful of times in my career.

Plenty of the markets can see a trim without a major disruption. Say LGA-ROC 5x on a 76 seat jet, 380 seats. Can adjust it to 4x 220 (110 seats, or some combination of RJ and 220), 440 seats. Keeps capacity and losing one frequency can be managed by tweaking the times (morning, early afternoon, evening, night).

1. Agreed, the 50 seaters are about worn out. No one is currently making a 50 seat single class replacement for them. They are going to be retired, for several reasons.

2. Some places will be so inconvenient that a lot of passengers will discretionarily drive to a larger airport, stay home, etc.

3. Milk runs. Reminds me of Ozark, from St. Louis to Minneapolis. Had 4 intermediate stops. DC-9. Before deregulation. Pick up 2 here and 3 there.

the ROC’s of the world will be fine. The RST’s are the problem.

also the supply of 110 seat aircraft is limited