Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Goodbye Regionals?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

dasmith

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Posts
58
Mesa is already doing this to some extend: the consolidation of the LCC marketplace will contine along with the exit of some large name brands. Continental might be strong enough to digest United... you read it here first.


News Clip from Reuters:

U.S. airline leaders see consolidation in industry

FORT WORTH, Texas, May 3 (Reuters) - The leaders of three of the largest airlines in the United States said on Monday they see a future of consolidation and change in the industry that may result in fewer large-network and low-fare carriers.

"There will be fewer of the legacy, or network carriers. What is harder to fathom or figure out are which ones are going to make it," said Gerard Arpey, chief executive of American Airlines' parent company AMR Corp. (AMR.M: Quote, Profile, Research) .

Over the long term, passengers were likely to see the removal of some familiar names from the market, Arpey said in a panel discussion with Gordon Bethune, chief executive of Continental Airlines (CAL.N: Quote, Profile, Research) and Jim Parker, chief executive of Southwest Airlines (LUV.N: Quote, Profile, Research) .

Arpey and Bethune agreed with the notion that there may only be two or three each of the large-network carriers and low-fare carriers in the long term.

Despite the success of some low-fare carriers, Bethune said that consolidation would come to that end of the market as well.

"It is foolish to believe that all are going to fly," he said.

Their comments come as almost all of the major airlines are struggling to recover from the massive economic hit they took after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, when air travel demand plummeted.

"I think there may be different airlines. I don't know if there will be fewer airlines," Parker said, adding there were a number of obstacles that made it difficult for a troubled airline to be cast on the trash heap of history.

Some of the barriers that make if difficult to exit the industry are decades-old transportation regulations that may prevent a troubled airline from folding, and organized labor.

American's Arpey said that even with fewer airlines, there still should be a high level of price competition.

"The way these networks work, you don't need that many airlines to have very low prices," he said.

© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.
 
Bass Ackwards...?

I don't think that spells the end for Regionals, if anything the complete opposite. The industry appears to be headed that way: More frequent regional flights means the same number of seats available to the public at more convenient times. I think someday we'll see nothing but GIANT airplanes flying from LAX-ORD, etc., and everything else being run with RJ's. Unfortunately that spells the end of the $300,000/YR airline captain guy we all signed up to be.
 
While 911 put the forecast back a few years, the FAA expected domestic traffic to doube by 2010. You can't do all that with RJs...you will need larger aircraft. Even with RVSM the system will not be able to accomodate thousands of 50-seaters. The future is NOT smaller aircraft...they have their place in the big picture but aren't the answer for everything.

In the charter world all I hear about it the small air-taxi business coming back with the Cessna Mustang and the other micro-jets coming out. That'll be interesting. All I see are crashes aplenty as operators that can't really afford to run a safe operation jump at the low aquisition costs of these aircraft. Just like all the unsafe 135 air taxi of the 70s....can't wait.
 
Point being,

If, the network carriers start consolidating, instead of 3-5 carriers serving a medium to small market there will only be 1-3 serving it.

Net effect, less small aircraft flying, they will most likely be parked in the desert.

Pure speculation......

Say Delta and Continental merge.

CLE would likely be closed as a hub

DFW would likely be closed as a hub

CVG might be downsized

EWR or JFK would be downsized as a hub, my bet JFK would be expanded.

Many of the combined hubs would be closed or downsized. Cities where both airlines overlap would route connecting traffic through fewer hubs. DAL/CAL could use larger aircraft to the same cities and keep the same frequency. In this merger many of the <50 seat aircraft would be retired. Since only a few 70 seat aircraft are with DCI and none with Express Jet, I'll bet the 70-110 seat replacement aircraft will be mainline.

Less hubs = less small RJs

JMO
 
Just like all the unsafe 135 air taxi of the 70s....can't wait.
135 air taxi operations of the 70's are now 121 regionals today...and I still won't ride on them no matter how much the turd got chocolate covered in the push for "one level of safety".
 
How many different names are on the aircraf that Mesa pilots fly. Aren't some of those names subsidiaries/wholly owned? Consolidation...
 
Is that so hard to believe? Name one country that has as many airlines as we do. Fewer airlines is not a matter of if, is a matter of when. And a major advantage of merging is to increase efficency. There's no need for all these hubs, managment teams, and pilots who fly the same routes. While traffic may double soon, with the help of GPS/R-nav, more direct routing, better ATCs, increase efficency, 7E7, I doubt that pilot staffing will increase proportionally.
 
Trash,

(strange, mezmerizing Avatar you have)

Thats sort of what I was saying....even with all those improvements it will have to be fewer, larger, aircraft hauling people in a limited ATC system....not throngs upon throngs of RJs.
 
Originally posted by dasmith How many different names are on the aircraf that Mesa pilots fly. Aren't some of those names subsidiaries/wholly owned? Consolidation...

Mesa Air Group is 3 airlines: Air Midwest (B1900s), Mesa (CRJ, ERJ, Dash 8), and Freedumb (we know about them). This is quite similar to the Chautauqua / Republic / Shuttle America mix.

This is not consolidation.
 
Mutually Exclusive

I'm not sure that I agree with the premise that merger = death of regionals or at least regional jets.

If it's all about efficiency and low cost, then the size of the jet should relate to the number of passengers you expect to carry along a route, irrespective of who the carrier happens to be. Stated differently, if Delta, Northwest and Continental merged and wanted to promote themselves as the new, lost-cost, point-to-point carrier, they would assign airframes most suited for each route. If you want to go from Raleigh-Durham to Orlando, than you would likely be on an RJ because there are generally fewer than 70 folk that want to join you on that flight. If you are at La Guardia and want to go to Los Angeles, then you're more likely to be sitting on a 757 because there are more than 200 people that are going with you. If you can't find 50 people who want to travel with you from Tulsa to Raleigh-Durham, than you're probably going to have to fly through a hub.

Whatever the routing though, I don't see how, in this economy, we can return to the day when half-full DC-9s and 737s are flying point-to-point. My two-cents: jets with a seating capacity of fewer than 100 seats are here to stay, and plenty of them -- merger or no merger.
 
Boeing 7E7

If the industry was going to mostly all smaller aircraft does anybody think Boeing would be building the 7E7? Don't they do market research before taking on a project like that? Not being scarcastic! Just an observation.
 
Re: Boeing 7E7

Jetmech41 said:
If the industry was going to mostly all smaller aircraft does anybody think Boeing would be building the 7E7? Don't they do market research before taking on a project like that? Not being scarcastic! Just an observation.

Boeing cancels projects all the time...and they have missed many opprotunities in the civilian market sector.

Boeing did market research on Regional Jets and felt they would catch on. Also, they dumped the Super Jumbo concept as well. Both seem to be doing well...A380 orders are through the roof and we all know what happened to RJ's...
 
Re: Bass Ackwards...?

sleddriver77 said:
Unfortunately that spells the end of the $300,000/YR airline captain guy we all signed up to be.

This only means that regional guys will have 2 choices:


1) Continue to fly for peanuts living in a delusion that they're moving on.

2) Stand up to management and demand higher wages, better QOL, retirement and making "regional airlines" good career airlines.

If this consolidation was indeed to happen, and I believe it probably will, it will take away the management's argument of "you're building PIC turbine time before you go fly a 757 for a major, so shut up and fly this RJ for $50/hr."

But we all know what the reality is....
 
I have lots of good friends who are at the regionals and they make a good living. They are all RJ Captains at Mesaba, Comair and ZW. The are all making 6 figures. Regional FO's will never make much because there are tons and tons of starving CFI's waiting to replace them and they will work for peanuts just to wear a uniform. Nothing will change until the brain washed wanna be's coming out of UND and ERAU put their foot down and refuse low paying entry level commuter positions....AINT GONNA HAPPEN. If you don't lke it quit and do something else because it's not going to change. The left seat is where the $$ is and thats the way it's always going to be.
 
If the industry was going to mostly all smaller aircraft does anybody think Boeing would be building the 7E7? Don't they do market research before taking on a project like that? Not being scarcastic! Just an observation.

Take a look at the 7E7 range. It IS a small jet, relative to the A330/340, B747 that it can replace. The 7E7 is the point to point solution for Int'l flying, as opposed to the A380, which is the extreme version of hub-hub flying.

To the person who thinks Boeing made a mistake not making a superjumbo, I have to dissagree. Boeing didn't think that there was no market for superjumbos, just not enough for two competing designs to recoupe the MASSIVE development costs. And they probably figured no matter what they did, Airbus was going to build one. Which puts them in a great position to develop the 7E7, and Airbus will have nothing to compare with that for a while.

Lastly, I agree, RJ's are being widely mis-deployed. The longer routes need ariplanes like the EMB170/190 or B717, and the shorter stuff needs props (DHC-8 2/3/400's). They are also used to much to feed hubs instead of bypass hubs.
 
New aircraft development takes lots of money and time, so manufacturers like Boeing or Airbus are limited to one or two new projects (ie. 7E7, A380) and updating/refining existing ones (ie. 777, A318/319/320/321). They have pretty much conceded the RJ market to Bombardier and Embraer. Boeing and Airbus have tried to tout the 717 and 318, respectively, as large "regional" jets, but have met with very limited success, primarily due to scope restrictions (at least in the US).

Just because Boeing has decided to focus on its bread-and-butter market (the 200-400 seaters) does not mean that smaller RJs are on the way out. There is a line in the sand with Boeing and Airbus on one side and Bombardier and Embraer on the other. That line may get wiped away one day, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.
 
I think the 7E7 is really not that big of a deal...no big leaps in technology or concepts. I was very excited about the Sonic Cruiser...that would have put Boeing back on top as a world leader in civil aviation...if Boeing didn't waste profits going after projects like the joint-strike fighter, they could have developed the Sonic Cruiser.

Contrary, Airbus is taking risks and is focusing on it's core market customer, the airline industry...the A380 is selling well. I think airlines will look at the 7E7 and see that it's efficiency vs procurement costs does not justify it's purchase when compared to the A330. I'm sure Airbus is working on an airplane to counter the 7E7...possibly an improved version of the A330.

I want to see Boeing back on top...but they need to put civil avaition back into it's core focus and take bolder risks.
 
Last edited:
Re: Bass Ackwards...?

sleddriver77 said:
I don't think that spells the end for Regionals, if anything the complete opposite. The industry appears to be headed that way: More frequent regional flights means the same number of seats available to the public at more convenient times. I think someday we'll see nothing but GIANT airplanes flying from LAX-ORD, etc., and everything else being run with RJ's. Unfortunately that spells the end of the $300,000/YR airline captain guy we all signed up to be.

Never say Never

Mooser
 

Latest resources

Back
Top