Man too easy to answer, regionals would be labeled even more unsafe and the media would praise the RJ for landing itself.

 

And the CA didn't happen to be a former fighter pilot AF Academy grad who coincidentally was a director of safety as US Airways? A lot of stars in the right place at the right time, that's for sure.

"Regional aircraft near disaster on Hudson River as pilots unable to avoid geese, more training for regional pilots mandatory."

 

It doesn't matter since we're not actually talking about the US Airways incident.

We're talking about outsourcing and cutting corners.

 

He's 100% correct. The majority of aviation accidents of the last decade were all regional aircraft (turboprop and RJs). In fact, excluding 9/11, there was only one major airline crash (AA). There were many, many more regional aircraft crashes in that time period.

Part of the reason as already mentioned is the 5-6+ leg days, long hours, and short overnights. Fatigue comes into play, too. But lets not forget that (and I put myself in that boat because I was a low timer too) the regionals hire a majority of their FOs with less than 1,000 hrs, and many many more with less than 500 hrs. If time equates to experience, then you can easily argue a safer outcome will be in a more experienced environment (though not always the case).

Anyway, in conclusion, Sully is 100% right. Just look at Pinnacle's attempt to change the current policy of sending a pilot who fails a training event to the pilot review board for further training. Now it's back to the same ol' policy, and you better pass or lose your job. How is this a "safety-value"? It's the other advanced stuff too, like AQP at Delta. From what I hear it's far less stressful and more useful than the typical PCs at regionals where you simply check boxes and done. The level of safety at majors is different than the level of safety at regionals, because regionals are always trying to find the cheapest way of doing the absolute minimum and getting away with it.

 

The difference is that those mainline pilots still eventually got their passengers to their destinations safely. The same cannot be said for the regional airlines in the past decade. Pinnacle's 410 club boys, the RegionasAir Kirksville descending below MDA case, Comair's wrong runway takeoff, a Colgan Q stalling in Buffalo are all examples of regional airline accidents, where there was no safe outcome. Everyone on board died, save a Comair FO. Now don't get me wrong, I would still obviously put my family on any RJ in this country. But I understand Sully's point, and he is right.

 

AWAC is transitioning to AQP as we speak. AA management is trying to cut out their entire pilot's contract for bankruptcy restructuring. Who is cutting corners there? The entire industry is riddled with unsafe practices. You can blame management, but in reality you can't blame regional management (who I loathe) because they are simply trying to secure flying for the major counterpart. It is the major airline who demands low cost, outsources, and then complains about the safety of the regionals. It's unbelievably hypocritical.

The bottom line is that major airline upper management is ultimately responsible right now for the poorer safety record at many regionals. Moreover, it will continue to get worse considering the current trend.

 

My take is that it Sully isn't out to insult Regional pilots. I personally think he is trying to restore the profession to a respectable career. Because Regionals have become so big, the only way to move flying away from them is to turn the public against Regionals. By using this method, we can hope that the public starts to reject Regionals. Now I realize there are a lot of people out there that will never be able to distinguish between a Regional and Major, but Sully using national media as a pedestal for educating the public is a good start. JMO

 

Actually, it does matter.

Capt. Sullenberger is using the pulpit he has been given as a result of US1549 to, in this case, say regional airlines aren't as safe as major airlines.

He's painting all regional airlines with a very broad brush. Case in point:

"At the regionals, you don't have the same robust safety system in which we operate that you do with the large major airlines."

Is this statement true at some regionals? Yes. Is it true at all regionals? Absolutely not!

Besides, look no further than Sully's own US Airways East pilot group and the very public claims USAPA has made about the 'robust safety system' at US Airways punishing pilots for exercising captain's authority and writing up airplanes. Or the actions of UCAL management toward UAL/CAL pilots, which was the entire point of the CBS story Sully was quoted in.

Sully is a very smart, highly experienced man, and his fame has great potential to help airline pilots in a multitude of areas...but in this particular case, I'm not certain he's familiar enough with the current state of the regional industry or objective enough to make a fair statement.

There's truth in the man's statement, but IMO not as much truth as one might believe.

 

+ 1 well said

 

Sullenberger said that we are not operating under "One Level of Safety," and we are clearly not. When it comes down to it, a regional operation will not be safer than a mainline operation. This doesn't just speak to pilot skill or experience but everything involved in the operation. The difference between the two may be very small between 2 airlines, but it is there.

He points out that regional flying is almost always awarded to the lowest bidder, which it is. You do not become the lowest bidder without cutting corners along the way. Just look at the constant regional whipsaw that is going on. As soon as an airline becomes too expensive ("seasoned" and marginaly compensated pilots) with the contract and costs, they lose the flying to a lower bidder. This fact should be crystal clear the the majority of us.

Any pilot who is upset with his words are only helping to mask the problem. It is good for all pilots that someone is getting air time to point out the diferences of Mainline and Regional airlines and pilots. Management goes to great lengths to blur these lines in order to keep the public in the dark with the true realities of this career. Regional pilots are their own worst enemy when they wear mainline lanyards, mainline bag tags, and tell people that they work for "XXXXX Express" or just bold face line and say they work at the actual mainline carrier. Keep bluring that line and you only aid management and the RAA by helping to perpetuate that lie that they have created, that there is one level of safety.

When I was a regional airline FO and people would ask if I really made the little amount of pay that they heard (probably from Sully) on the TV. I would always make it clear that it is true and I would spend a few minutes giving them a crash course in Regional Airline 101, even if they didnt want to hear it.

Swallow your pride, boys and girls. This isn't about who is a "safer pilot," it is about management continuing to blur the lines of the career and keep passengers thinking that there are as safe on a Colgan Saab as they are on a United 777....99% of the time, they aren't.