Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Regional Carriers For Mainliners  
User currently offlineMach3 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1770 times:

Now here is a thought that ran across my mind. I'm in my mid 60's so I can remember the Old Regional carriers that were operating in the 50's 60's and early 70"s. ie Schmohawk, Agony, Bannana, etc. It seems to me that as bad as they might have been that their management had honor, and commitment to the original goals that they established.

Now granted they started with old worn out aircraft from WW-II but they somehow had them work and took customer service to heart. In generations after mine and those of the founders of regional carrier's integrity started to go down the drain. Thing's became clouded and the ME ME Generation started to grow. IMHO thats the crux of the regional carriers problem's. Young bucks getting money from investor's for what looks like a great idea in founding regional carriers, but lacking the one most important quality, COMMITMENT followed by HONOR.

All that seems to be important now is making a buck, and screw they customer anyway we can with poor quality service and lack of integrity. Get into the business, get as much money out of it and then sell it to some poor schmuck along with they mess they created.

At they Mainline carriers the young bucks come up with brain F-rt's and convince upper management they will work!

The idea of taking a Mainline carriers name and placing it on regional carriers planes, was a brain F-rt! And it has proven it self to stink to high heaven. Airlines and Esp. the Legacy carriers are seeing their names dragged through the mud by their regional partners. To the general public who doesn't know the industry its DELTA or UNITED.

Regionals or SUB-SERVICE carriers have brought a new low's to great names in the industry. The Legacy's have hired those same type of people. Those with a lack of integrity, grabbing their money now, as much as they can and finding a new carrier to fowl up.

The real answer IMHO is that they Legacy's should force the regionals to operated under their real name and let the general public see who the real incompetent jerk's are! Let the public know it's not them but the dam fool's running these fly by night SUB SERVICE carriers that are creating the problem's!

In the case of where the Legacy owns the regional, get rid of them and make them stand on their own and be recognized for by crap!

They Legacy's can mess up on their own without the help of they stupidity at the regional level! The legacy's owe it to themselves to place the blame where it should be placed and not carry it on their shoulder's.

The legacy's need to get back to the basics INTEGRITY,HONOR, COMMITMENT AND SERVICE!

Now I know that i'm going to be FLAMED for this but if you have a brain think about it, look deep and dissect it! If you do that you'll see I just might have hit the nail on the head.


If you pull on the Tiger's tail, better be prepared for him to bite you in the ARSE
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMach3 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1736 times:

In my previous message I forgot to mention that the original regionals flew at lower altitudes in their respective area's where the weather caused most of the delays. Today's regionals can still be messed up by weather but its their basic attitude of take in as much money as they can and spend as little as possible.


If you pull on the Tiger's tail, better be prepared for him to bite you in the ARSE
User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1717 times:

Quoting Mach3 (Thread starter):

The real answer IMHO is that they Legacy's should force the regionals to operated under their real name and let the general public see who the real incompetent jerk's are!



Quoting Mach3 (Thread starter):
To the general public who doesn't know the industry its DELTA or UNITED.

The mainline carriers contract with the regionals, sell customers tickets, etc. They should be responsible for the product they sell. If the regional sucks, in the end it's the mainline carrier's fault for failing to contract with a regional that can provide quality service.

Quoting Mach3 (Thread starter):

The legacy's need to get back to the basics INTEGRITY,HONOR, COMMITMENT AND SERVICE!

Right, the legacy mainline carriers should have the integrity and honor to maintain a commitment to their service, which includes service provided by the regionals. Removing the legacy carrier's name from the aircraft helps them avoid such a commitment.

Keep in mind that many regionals are screwed over by the mainline carrier. CO cancels/delays many COex flights to keep its mainline operations running smoothly (especially at EWR). This makes COex look terrible because their delay/cancellation rate is much higher. Again, it's the mainline carrier's fault.

Quoting Mach3 (Thread starter):
Now I know that i'm going to be FLAMED for this but if you have a brain think about it, look deep and dissect it! If you do that you'll see I just might have hit the nail on the head.

I'm not going to flame you, but I do disagree with you. (BTW: I don't have any relationship, other than as a customer, with any airline, regional or mainline).


User currently offlineMach3 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1687 times:

Mainline CO sells connecting tickets on AA to the final destination. Does that mean CO is responsible for AA's foul ups?

If CO is running smoothly that means flights are arriving on time, baggage is being switched properlt et. al. How do you equate that to COx problems? Doesn't make sense! DUH? Is Co the cause of Cox's poor ontime results? Is it Co that brakes a COx's plane?



If you pull on the Tiger's tail, better be prepared for him to bite you in the ARSE
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1600 times:

Quote:
Now I know that i'm going to be FLAMED for this but if you have a brain think about it, look deep and dissect it! If you do that you'll see I just might have hit the nail on the head.

Actually, if you're going to analyze the situation, you need to take ALL factors into account.

You will see that the ENTIRE system, from top to bottom, is broken.

Start with ATC and traffic corridors - the system was designed in the 1950's for MUCH less traffic than what we have now. Nothing has been changed or updated significantly; certainly not nearly enough to keep up with the demands made of modern day traffic levels.

Second, let's go on to hemmed in airports that would love expand, except that sub-moronic cretinous NIMBY's moved into the neighborhood - and now demand that the airport either (a)restrict its hours of operations, (b)start to shrink, or (c)close all together. Airports are ALWAYS evil - except when that NIMBY has a $49 transcon ticket and gets p.o.'d at everyone because their flight is delayed three hours due to "traffic".

Which brings us to the third problem - while its not exclusive to just Americans, it is a safe fact to say that the general public is hopelessly and completely addicted to getting things "on the cheap". The oft-discussed "Wal-Mart mentality" has permeated virtually every aspect of society today - witness the people who scream into a camera, "I will NEVER fly this airline again!!" and then book a flight for their next trip with that same airline, simply because it is $5 cheaper.

And because of this, airlines have had to cut back on everything - including paying their workers virtual slave labor wages. No hot meals, no snacks, no IFE - AA even tried offering "More Legroom Throughout Coach", but pulled it when customers found it "too expensive". And for a REAL eye-opener, witness some of the threads here on salaries - many a.netters, sadly, have absolutely no sympathy for any employee - "quit and go work at McDonald's" has been said more than one time.

Finally, IMHO opinion, Golden Parachutes for poor leaders has become a sad fact of life. There's no incentive anymore for many top executives to earn their pay or respect. There are many exceptions to this, yes - Gordon Bethune immediately comes to mind - but why bother to try and resurrect the company if there's no incentive.

You can't pick and choose in this situation - there's blame to go around all over. One person or group is NOT responsible for all the problems with travel today.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1600 times:

Quoting Mach3 (Reply 3):
If CO is running smoothly that means flights are arriving on time, baggage is being switched properlt et. al. How do you equate that to COx problems? Doesn't make sense! DUH? Is Co the cause of Cox's poor ontime results? Is it Co that brakes a COx's plane?

Not literally, but CO does break COex's schedules. CO is one of the biggest, probably the biggest, causes of COex's delays. When ATC at EWR tells CO that it has to cancel/delay X number of flights, CO generally tells COex & COConnection (ExpressJet, etc.) to delay/cancel flights so that CO can run its mainline flights on/closer to schedule (makes sense to me). Thus many of COex's delays are CO's fault.

Quoting Mach3 (Reply 3):
Mainline CO sells connecting tickets on AA to the final destination. Does that mean CO is responsible for AA's foul ups?

CO does its best to avoid selling AA tickets (can be done by phone, not online, I think). If it does, the flight is marketed as AA, not "Continental Express". That being said, when something goes wrong, CO is ultimately responsible for getting you to your destination if your ticket is on CO stock.


User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4997 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1548 times:

Yet it is ironic that first "mainline" airline to slap thier good name on a commuter plane was....Local Service Carrier Allegheny!


Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineMach3 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1512 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 4):



Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 4):

PamAm I agree with you and have tried to get threads started on this subject, whoever no one seems to care about this critical problem!! In the "worlds Largest Aviation Forum its more important to start threads on the new paint job on Spirit or other mundane things. It seems to me that if the readers here really don't know about the debacle at the FAA they don't comment on it . They are the the ostrich with their head in the sand and Tush in the Air. They just dont get that the FAA is trying to push 50#'s of pooo into a 10" bag, and that is a course for disaster. Sooner or later people will die, and that a. netters will be screaming that change is needed at the FAA. The time to change the FAA is NOW! That includes its management, the ATC system and spend money on airport infrastructure. Rather then spending money on systems that don't work or once designed they have no idea on how to get them up and running!

Quoting Analog (Reply 5):

Analog you just put your foot in your mouth! ATC TELLS CO to CNX flights. Its not CO but the Big Dog telling it what to do. Not CO's fault! Its ATC admitting they can not handle the flow! The system is broken and needs to be fixed. Remember Analog you said it!


One of the points of my orig. message is get rid of the Branding crap and let the public at large know its the sub carrier
not them that can't get their act together, not the Legacy. If the sub carrier can't provide the service they say they can let the Legacy get rid of them!



If you pull on the Tiger's tail, better be prepared for him to bite you in the ARSE
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1467 times:

Quoting Analog (Reply 5):
When ATC at EWR tells CO that it has to cancel/delay X number of flights, CO generally tells COex & COConnection (ExpressJet, etc.) to delay/cancel flights so that CO can run its mainline flights on/closer to schedule (makes sense to me). Thus many of COex's delays are CO's fault.

First of all, let me make one thing clear. ATC does not tell anyone to cancel flights at all. What ATC does is take all flights scheduled to arrive during the period of a ground delay program, and assigns each one a slot time, from which the wheels up time is derived from. The majors can still run a full schedule if they want to, but often times this is impossible without signifcant delays, which will screw up your operation even after the program is over. This is why flights get cancelled during ground delay programs.

That being said, after the command center assigns all the slot times, the airlines can then move around the slots. In the case of most regionals, the slots are contolled by the mainline carriers, and not the regional. Sometimes the Majors will switch the slots around at the expense of the regional carrier, often times without their knowledge (United is notorious for this at the Regional level, which makes running an SOC affiliated with United nearly impossible). The Regional carriers in the US most affected by this obviously are Air Wisconsin, Piedmont, ComAir, ExpressJet, and American Eagle. We have heard Johnny O whine about how Mesa is affected, but their ORD operation is not as big as SkyWest or someone like that, and no other UA station where they operate is affected by any signifcant delay problems (Although they do do much of the NE flying from IAD). SkyWest is affected in ORD, but since they are one of the most punctual airlines on the mainland, it could be a lot worse.

This is one reason I wonder how NW ever went bankrupt. They have fortress hubs in some of the least delayed airports in the country, their operations to major delayed airports are somewhat limited compared to other carriers. Pinnacle and Mesaba are among the most on time regional airlines too as a result.

That was OT a bit. Anyways, I often wonder what would happen if any of the following would happen related to the regional industry.

1. OT performance for a Major consists of all flights operated for the airline, mainline and express. Currently, its just Mainline for most carriers. This distorts some truth in my opinion.

2. Congress or the FAA pass something that gives each regional airline control over its own edct slots during a GDP. Can you imagine what the mainlines would do if this ever happened?

3. The regional affiliates all flew planes in their own company colors, and not that of the partner airline. American Eagle wouldn't change, and Air Wisconsin's planes would be similar to the current US paint scheme. But imagine, all the COEX flights in the Aquafresh paint scheme, ASA and Comair going back to the old paint scheme before they started putting the Widget on their planes, Skywest planes in that paintscheme (A few actually have this already), Mesa in the purple and gold colors, PSA planes with the smilely nose, Piedmont in the old blue and white, etc.

Insights or thoughts on this?


User currently offlineKAUSpilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1958 posts, RR: 33
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1457 times:

As a regional pilot, I would be fine with it, because I take pride in the level of service I provide to my customers, regardless of who they buy their ticket from.

However, mainline partners are moving in the opposite direction. We are discouraged from so much as mentioning the name of our actual company in PA's; we are instructed to only refer to our operation as "____ Express/Connection", not our actual company name.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
DL Orders 32 Jets For Regional Carriers posted Wed Mar 3 2004 09:23:17 by Flyingdutchboy
Pricing For Regional Carriers And Mainlines posted Thu Jul 31 2003 17:48:50 by Ssides
New EAS Carriers For SLK/PLB/RUT posted Sat Sep 15 2007 23:35:54 by N6168E
Consolidation/Mergers Of Regional Carriers posted Mon Dec 18 2006 02:29:10 by Jmc1975
Regional Carriers... Why? posted Sat Oct 21 2006 05:36:43 by Boston92
Growth In Mesa/ Regional Carriers Seen posted Sun Nov 27 2005 22:14:36 by Psa53
Why No Regional Airlines For LCCs. posted Mon Aug 22 2005 20:10:10 by AirWillie6475
Taca Regional Carriers posted Sat Aug 20 2005 18:51:04 by KEno
If UA Go Bust...what About The Regional Carriers? posted Wed May 25 2005 23:06:20 by RootsAir
Regional Carriers posted Mon Jul 19 2004 03:16:37 by Scott4AA