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

Risky 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
Since the regionals are the starting point of pilot careers, there will always be inexperienced pilots at them. Some regional cut the corners more than others. Only pilots in the industry would know which ones to avoid.

While I agree, there are a few Mainline Folks with experience that would also fall into this catagory. It all comes down to how you define experience in flying. Someone can have a butt load of experience and an ounce of common sense.

Everyone at every airline and pluck out 10-20 crazies.
 
I know the big guys crash too, but it seems riskier if your trip includes a leg on Colgan, Comair, Go, Mesa etc.....

Does anyone out there actually choose an itinerary so as NOT to fly on one of these airlines?

I think Mesa is the only airline where their own pilots have said they wouldn't let people they know fly on their airplanes. That's just what I've heard, something about speed tape...
 
I think Mesa is the only airline where their own pilots have said they wouldn't let people they know fly on their airplanes. That's just what I've heard, something about speed tape...

and the last fatal Mesa crash was ... ?

official cause of the Colgan crash will take a while, but the front-runners are icing and a wacky glideslope.

My airline (CMR) was the last crash were you could squarely put the blame on the flight crew, so I guess that makes us the "riskiest" regional around.
 
Last edited:
I am curious to know how many pilots realistically think in half a split second when their airplane stalls they would know if it was a tail plane stall or wing stall and push or pull, add power or cut power, bring the flaps up or leave them down, etc? I am venturing to guess even "Sulley" wouldnt fair so good in this sceneraio. My old regional gave us a quick and dirty on tail plane stalls and I kept thinking how impossible this would be to pull back during that one time it really was a tail plane stall. Of course the best couse of action is to avoid icing but thats not always an option.
 
There's already a bunch of data out on the Colgan crash in Buffalo.....it is starting to take shape. Isn't this the same company that sank a 1900 off Massachusetts a few years back? In the flying world they have always been considered a "bottom feeder" would you agree?

My point? When you plan a trip and get an itinerary, there always seems to be a leg on a regional that should be looked into. I know the big guys crash too, but it seems riskier if your trip includes a leg on Colgan, Comair, Go, Mesa etc.....

Does anyone out there actually choose an itinerary so as NOT to fly on one of these airlines?

At best it would only be a psychological fix. Trying to guess the next flight to crash, is like trying to predict the end of the world. Statistically, it's pretty unlikely you're going to draw the short straw no matter what airline you're on.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/ (older data, 2004)

By the numbers, according to the above, you would want to avoid USAirways w/Express (system), AirTran, and MD11's.
 
The NTSB will spend probably a year and tremendous man-hours and resources examining this accident to find out why.

Yet the FAA is willing to allow anyone to play in a $25 million-dollar jet with 76 paying passengers after 6 months of fooling around at some two-bit Florida flight school.

No disrespect to the crew of the ill-fated flight. This isn't directed at them. But is anyone surprised these things happen?

Anyone?

Seems to me it's smoke and mirrors as usual...
 
Well you cant be surprised that there is a disconnect between the FAA and NTSB, thats certainly not news to anyone.

Even if the NTSB came out and said, 'yea it was lack of experience that caused this' or 'if only they were military trained' -- the FAA (read: ATA) is only going to do whats economically realistic for the industry.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top