Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Ever Happened To California Pacific?  
User currently offlineCGMAI From Belgium, joined Feb 2014, 226 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 6178 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was wondering what ever happened to California Pacific Airlines? They got there first E-170 (or was it an E-175?) over a year ago and they have yet to start flights? Will they ever fly?


If its not built by Airbus it must not be good ;-)
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2040 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6058 times:

They have basically thrown in the towel. Their plane has been returned to leasing company, and is sitting in the desert. Every time they submitted paper work to get their AOC, the FAA rejected it or said "Due to Government shut down we don't have the staff to complete your review" Peoplexpress is also running into the same issue.


Just an MSPAVGEEK
User currently offlineCGMAI From Belgium, joined Feb 2014, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6001 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Ah yes, as usual the Government killed an airline...nothing new under the sun. Its shame because the idea sounded good and the livery was nice.


If its not built by Airbus it must not be good ;-)
User currently offlinePSAJet17 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 331 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5966 times:

Quoting CGMAI (Reply 2):
Ah yes, as usual the Government killed an airline

Not totally true. Unfortunately, Ted Vallas relied too heavily on "friends" to make up the team. While they may have had some experience in the airline industry, many were not qualified on E-170 operations or did not know enough to properly complete the necessary paperwork for certification. That is what caused the rejection by the FAA.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11529 posts, RR: 61
Reply 4, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5952 times:

Quoting CGMAI (Thread starter):
what ever happened to California Pacific Airlines?

Reality (a.k.a., the same thing that's about to happen to "People Express" if it ever "gets off the ground.").

Quoting CGMAI (Reply 2):
Ah yes, as usual the Government killed an airline...nothing new under the sun. Its shame because the idea sounded good and the livery was nice.

The U.S. government didn't "kill" California Pacific. Convenient (and creative) excuse, but ridiculous. What killed California Pacific, ultimately, was the same thing that killed Legend, Ozark II/Great Plains, SkyBus, etc. before it - namely, a business plan that simply was not viable. Flying a 70-seat regional jet with 24 First Class seats - no matter how nice the livery - from Carlsbad, CA is just ridiculous. That is not a sustainable or scalable business model, just as neither was flying 30-year-old DC9s with 56 seats from Love Field, or flying Do328s from OKC-ABQ or BLV-IAD, or flying jam-packed A320s between outlying airports with no connectivity, or will be flying 737s from a market as small as ORF. Some like to equivocate and essentially ask, "how do we know? these ideas don't sound any crazier than JetBlue did when it started" - but that's just flat out wrong. They sound a lot crazier.

The airline industry is notoriously difficult to enter and grow in. As Bob Crandall once said of the post-deregulation era - "A lot of people came into the airline business after deregulation ... most of them promptly exited, minus their money." The very, very few exceptions of airlines that could even be considered moderate, let alone thriving, success stories post-deregulation all had business plans built on reality. The single most successful airline startup I can think of in the last 40 years was JetBlue, which has a business model that fundamentally makes sense. California Pacific is not now, nor was it ever, a JetBlue in the making. That's just reality.


User currently offlineatcsundevil From Germany, joined Mar 2010, 1184 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5897 times:

FAA funding issues didn't help, but that's like blaming the referees for losing a game. CP Air had a lot of their own issues and generally failed to meet a multitude of deadlines. They moved very slowly throughout the entire process which was a drain on their funds, and once they took up the lease on the E175 at something like $200,000/month while continuing to move slowly in the process (and yes, the sequester and shutdown didn't help matters), it pretty much did them in.

Their biggest issue though appeared to be their lack of investment capital, which is one reason it took so long for them to pass the FAA's financial fitness review. If they had sufficient investments like B6 or others did when they started up, then the delay from the FAA wouldn't have had the impact it ultimately had because they would have hard the cash to wait it out. If that delay effectively put them out of business, then I'm not convinced they would have survived their first two years of operations.

It's a shame, because they had completed so much of the certification process, only to fall short near the end. Regardless of how well their business model may have worked or not worked, it's unfortunate that they didn't even have a chance to try. It ultimately comes down to CP having horrible timing -- beginning the process while the industry was still in recovery-mode from the recession and having to basically wait for things to improve before advancing in the start up process, generally dragging things out for as long as they did, and then requiring fairly urgent reviews due to lack of cash from the FAA while they were caught in the middle of a pissing match in DC.



1954 1974 1990 2014 -- Los geht's!
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4056 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5814 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 4):
The U.S. government didn't "kill" California Pacific. Convenient (and creative) excuse, but ridiculous. What killed California Pacific, ultimately, was the same thing that killed Legend, Ozark II/Great Plains, SkyBus, etc. before it - namely, a business plan that simply was not viable. Flying a 70-seat regional jet with 24 First Class seats - no matter how nice the livery - from Carlsbad, CA is just ridiculous.

To be fair, that may have killed it, had it ever gotten off the ground...but it never did, so we can't realistically say that's the reason the airline failed.


User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8088 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5709 times:

It remains the dumbest, most awkward, longest, most redundant name for an airline in history (with the possible exception of Taiwan's "U-Land Airlines" - don't mind if I do). I think we all know where California is. It sounds like the name of a disaster airline in a TV movie. What were they thinking.


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineQ From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5517 times:

Why don't they move to San Cabos, Mexico based to start business and flying to Carlsbad then spreading it out routes than in USA based? FAA can't do anything about in Mexico start business and flying. LOL! Why not?

Q

[Edited 2014-02-15 09:27:34]

User currently offlineN471WN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1526 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5435 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 4):
ultimately, was the same thing that killed Legend

Actually Legend did have a good business model---what killed it was American went after it at DAL and ran it into the ground with undercut fares and frequent flyer perks---then when it went out of business they raised fares---same technique used by Rockefeller as a robber baron.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5502 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4941 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 7):
It remains the dumbest, most awkward, longest, most redundant name for an airline in history (with the possible exception of Taiwan's "U-Land Airlines" - don't mind if I do). I think we all know where California is. It sounds like the name of a disaster airline in a TV movie. What were they thinking.

Huh?

California Pacific
Western Pacific
Southern Pacific
Northern Pacific

They are all geographic names. And very American sounding ones for transportation companies.

It might have also shortened it to "CalPac" or "CPA".

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinePSAJet17 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 331 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4558 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 10):
It might have also shortened it to "CalPac" or "CPA".

I believe the airline's proper name is Carlsbad-Palomar Airlines dba California Pacific Airlines (CPAir)


User currently offlineflyenvi From United States of America, joined Nov 2013, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4496 times:

I heard that they "borrowed" manuals to copy and paste from that belonged to a 135 scenic flight outfit from Hawaii. Not sure if that's totally true though.

California Pacific was dead from the start as most would agree. Uncertain business plan, wrong choice of aircraft, inexperienced people, and ultimately a disenfranchised community that threw a lot of money at them to get going.


User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8088 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4449 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 10):
Western Pacific
Southern Pacific
Northern Pacific

I still say it was a stupid name - the other three you list were three syllables shorter (cal-i-forn-i-a vs south-ern, north-ern etc) very short-lived and also had to be shortened to be useable - "Westpac" etc. Nor were any of them successful brands - I have never even heard of Southern Pacific.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 10):
It might have also shortened it to "CalPac" or "CPA"

The fact that it has to be shortened to be functional shows these guys didn't know branding. "United", "Delta", "jetBlue" - easy to use, easy to remember, easy to spell. Most important - easy to Google.

A good telltale of how these guys didn't know what they were doing. California Pacific was never going to get off the ground.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2158 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3947 times:

Quoting Q (Reply 8):
Why don't they move to San Cabos, Mexico based to start business and flying to Carlsbad then spreading it out routes than in USA based? FAA can't do anything about in Mexico start business and flying. LOL! Why not?

Because they wanted to fly domestic routes out of CLD, not to Mexico?


User currently offlineQ From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3877 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 14):

Based in Mexico then fly to Carlsbad to fly USA routes. That's simple. I mentioned flying to Carlsbad then spreading it out routes.

Q


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2754 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3823 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 13):
California Pacific was never going to get off the ground.

Maybe this new Cal-Pac (however the name) needed to stay inside of the State of California, maybe like this new Florida Express Jet, and gotten off the ground with easier state regulations than going interstate with both numerous fed and state regulations? I don't know quite yet what to make of this Florida Express Jet, but if staying inside of the State of Florida allows them to get ops off the ground, then maybe Cal-Pac's initial scheduling needed to have omitted any stations outside of the State of California, which I think if I remember were PHX and LAS (and I think that SJD was to be added later on anyways). So, having it's starting routes to be CLD-OAK, CLD-SJC and CLD-SMF wouldn't have been so bad to get them off the ground. I'm kind of now surprised that maybe the planners of Cal-Pac did not consider this, unless they have and maybe California has more ominous regulations that Florida or the feds.......

Anyways, as usual, just my   

 


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2158 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3774 times:

Quoting Q (Reply 15):
Based in Mexico then fly to Carlsbad to fly USA routes. That's simple. I mentioned flying to Carlsbad then spreading it out routes.

??? A Mexican airline can not fly Carlsbad-US routes while carrying local passengers. Cabotage is against the law.


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1634 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3725 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 17):
??? A Mexican airline can not fly Carlsbad-US routes while carrying local passengers. Cabotage is against the law.

In addition, American owners don't have free reign to just do whatever they like in Mexico. There would be regulatory hurdles to clear there before they could take to the skies as well, not the least of which would be a need to find enough Mexican investors to satisfy foreign ownership requirements.


User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1113 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 16):
Maybe this new Cal-Pac (however the name) needed to stay inside of the State of California, maybe like this new Florida Express Jet, and gotten off the ground with easier state regulations than going interstate with both numerous fed and state regulations? I don't know quite yet what to make of this Florida Express Jet, but if staying inside of the State of Florida allows them to get ops off the ground, then maybe Cal-Pac's initial scheduling needed to have omitted any stations outside of the State of California, which I think if I remember were PHX and LAS (and I think that SJD was to be added later on anyways). So, having it's starting routes to be CLD-OAK, CLD-SJC and CLD-SMF wouldn't have been so bad to get them off the ground. I'm kind of now surprised that maybe the planners of Cal-Pac did not consider this, unless they have and maybe California has more ominous regulations that Florida or the feds.......

Anyways, as usual, just my

your take is interesting. I do believe that when Timmoner and Griffin started Air Florida, it was an "intra-state" carrier only and operated wholly within the confines of Florida.


User currently offlinemtnwest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2455 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2793 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 13):
I have never even heard of Southern Pacific.

SP was a US railroad. I think they fuinaaly became a part of Burlington Northern-Santa Fe. There is a short name......



"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6124 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2719 times:

Quoting Q (Reply 8):

Baja California Airlines. I like it!!



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11529 posts, RR: 61
Reply 22, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Quoting N471WN (Reply 9):
Actually Legend did have a good business model

No it didn't. It did not take a rocket scientist to figure out that, even in 2000, configuring 30-year-old, 100-seat DC9s with 56 First Class seats and charging Coach prices was not a viable business model. In some ways, this actually parallels with the detachment from reality evident in California Pacific's business model: uneconomic use of a unique aircraft from a unique airport. In both cases, the outcome were or would have been the same.

Quoting N471WN (Reply 9):
what killed it was American went after it at DAL and ran it into the ground with undercut fares and frequent flyer perks

a.k.a. - American competed. AA just helped along the inevitable, and had AA not acted completely within its rights as a competitor in an open marketplace, 9/11 certainly would have killed Legend.


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1634 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2573 times:

Quoting mtnwest1979 (Reply 20):
SP was a US railroad. I think they fuinaaly became a part of Burlington Northern-Santa Fe. There is a short name......

Southern Pacific is now part of Union Pacific, having previously been purchased by Denver & Rio Grande Western (which kept the more widely recognized SP name). Also, Burlington Northern Santa Fe officially shortened its name to BNSF Railway.


User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2542 times:

Quoting flyenvi (Reply 12):

So? Isn't that why most airlines buy another AOC, for the approved manuals? Seems like nothing new.


25 flyenvi : Yes, but for a prospective part 121 airline to copy a part 135 carrier's manuals isn't going to fly with the FAA. Totally different operation and req
26 mtnwest1979 : OK thanks for the clarification. I knew there was a lot of RR consolidation, unlike the current airline industry lol. Off topic, in 1981 there was som
27 bjorn14 : WN started out as a TX intrastate carrier. It was relatively easy to get an AOC and they didn't have to follow all the CAB rules. Unfortunately, TX do
28 BoeingGuy : Southern Pacific was one of the biggest railroads in the US for many years. One of their predecessors (Central Pacific) was part of the first transco
29 PSAJet17 : I don't believe the "States" ever issued an AOC, this has always been part of the FAA (and their predecessors). Before the 1978 Deregulations Act, ai
30 bjorn14 : I think you can read about it Peanuts!. I was speaking with TX CAB (mid 80s) and claimed they did issue AOC. He even told me a story one time during a
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...
What Ever Happened To Baltia? posted Fri Nov 30 2012 18:20:04 by spiritair97
What Ever Happened To TN Plans To Buy A345? posted Wed Jun 20 2012 12:12:42 by 747400sp
What Ever Happened To Baltia? posted Mon Jun 18 2012 20:51:23 by spiritair97
What Ever Happened To Wright Airlines? posted Mon May 28 2012 12:09:09 by doulasc
What Ever Happened To Las Vegas Air? posted Thu Feb 23 2012 06:27:13 by emirates202
What Ever Happened To... posted Fri Apr 10 2009 06:06:25 by Seemyseems
What Ever Happened To N77014 Aka. CO Petermax? posted Sun Jan 20 2008 11:03:42 by RoadWarrior
What Ever Happened To V.T.O.L. Airliner Plans? posted Mon Aug 6 2007 18:49:47 by DIA
What Ever Happened To The Fairchild 728jet? posted Wed Nov 29 2006 08:12:38 by Stealth777
What Ever Happened To AC Buying Into RG? posted Tue Oct 31 2006 22:19:10 by Kiwiandrew