Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
admanager
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:40 am

iseeyyc wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
Ditch the EAS program. When one chooses to live in a rural area, it has many advantages, I.E. low home costs, light car traffic, small schools, etc. A disadvantage is no local air service and driving to a nearby airport with commercial service.


Skywatcher wrote:
I can just hear the pigs oinking every time this topic comes up. Why does a "socialist" nation like Canada not have an EAS like program when we have many similar, far flung communities with no air service? How about Australia? The U.S. is addicted to Federal government debt and programs like the EAS although small in global numbers is part of the problem.


In Canada we have a similar landmass to cover and 1/10 the economy to support it. Even though the distances between cities are greater, we are accustomed to this and do not expect RJs providing hourly service to everyone. Its Q100's at premium prices, or driving.

Imagine someone in the USA who earns $50k, that same person in Canada earns $50k Canadian (1/3 less buying power) and has to deal with higher costs of everything (shipping, bilingual labeling, etc). Flying is more of a luxury here as the cost is higher relative to the average income.

EAS has no reason to exist. Suck it up. Its easy for Americans to forget how much their propped-up dollar has helped subsidize their ways. That advantage continues to slip away. Future spending has to be more closely scrutinized.



It's not quite as you described. While there is no EAS or similar program, Northerners and "Intermediate" residents get a direct tax credit for simply living "up there"
"Basic residency amount: This is a credit for simply living in a zone. The credit is now $8.25 per day for living in a northern zone, and one-half of this, or $4.13, for living in an intermediate zone"
That said, I agree the individual then has the freedom to decide how to use the money and business isn't getting subsidized by the taxpayers.
 
User avatar
admanager
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:54 am

AAvgeek744 wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
With the exception of Alaska, where it is air travel or no travel, the EAS should be cancelled. It is a monumental waste of money, like propping up Amtrak.


Absolutely. People claim it brings new industry and business to a town with air service. I'd love to see some proof that cities with EAS are positively affected.


There has been a massive amount of research on this. In 1979 I did my graduate thesis on this very topic. That said, in 2017 a $600 per passenger subsidy when there is commercial service within easy driving distance makes no sense. Times change and so do economics.
 
hz747300
Posts: 2417
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:52 am

Missing from the list? Safford, Arizona (KSAD)... It last had air service in the 50s or 60s I think. 3/3.5 hours from Tucson and Phoenix, 4 hours from El Paso.
Keep on truckin'...
 
caverunner17
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:50 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:55 pm

I see no reason for Pueblo to exist as it's 45 minutes from the Springs which has decent service and around 2 hours from Denver.

Alamosa, CO I could see an argument for keeping at least a few flights a week to Denver. It looks like they're already have small props on the routes to Denver and Albuquerque. Driving through the mountains can always be a hit or miss in the winter. Maybe a M/W/F schedule or something?
 
drdisque
Posts: 1357
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:57 pm

hz747300 wrote:
Missing from the list? Safford, Arizona (KSAD)... It last had air service in the 50s or 60s I think. 3/3.5 hours from Tucson and Phoenix, 4 hours from El Paso.


And thusly why it's not eligible for EAS. To be eligible an airport had to have had service when deregulation went into effect.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:08 pm

Jamake1 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
Unless the EAS carrier had code share with a major at the destination airport the traffic volumes are always terrible.

Get a real airline in there like SkyWest and the traffic recovers overnight.


Absolutely spot on.


I was going to say the same thing. When a reliable regional under the brand of one of the big three feeds a US3 hub the pax numbers increase dramatically. So much so that a few former EAS markets are now self-sustaining.

For the Canadians on this thread (myself included), we do indirectly subsidize some air service, but it's mostly to communities with zero road access to the outside world.

Without EAS in Canada surprisingly few towns have lost all scheduled air service over the past 30 years. For example the Government of Ontario subsidized air service until 20 years ago to Northern Ontario towns. When the subsidy ended most of the small towns lost their air service. Since then, a few of them such as Geraldton, have regained scheduled service without subsidies.
 
masgniw
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:25 pm

8 of 11 states represented voted red. Play dumb games: win dumb prizes, folks
 
evank516
Posts: 2170
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:42 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
Jamake1 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
Unless the EAS carrier had code share with a major at the destination airport the traffic volumes are always terrible.

Get a real airline in there like SkyWest and the traffic recovers overnight.


Absolutely spot on.


I was going to say the same thing. When a reliable regional under the brand of one of the big three feeds a US3 hub the pax numbers increase dramatically. So much so that a few former EAS markets are now self-sustaining.


Yes. A lot of these airports lost scheduled service when regional jets didn't exist. They were part of those milk runs on 727s and 737s. Nowadays, the regional jet can transform some of these EAS cities into self sustaining markets. Some are a lost cause, but others not so much.
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:50 pm

admanager wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:
Bald1983 wrote:
With the exception of Alaska, where it is air travel or no travel, the EAS should be cancelled. It is a monumental waste of money, like propping up Amtrak.


Absolutely. People claim it brings new industry and business to a town with air service. I'd love to see some proof that cities with EAS are positively affected.


There has been a massive amount of research on this. In 1979 I did my graduate thesis on this very topic. That said, in 2017 a $600 per passenger subsidy when there is commercial service within easy driving distance makes no sense. Times change and so do economics.


I look at the one city in my state (Tennessee) with EAS - Jackson (MKL). 80 miles from MEM. Over the years after NW and maybe DL regionals pulled out, they've had EAS service to BNA and STL. The local paper here reported ~4 pax per day. I cannot see how that benefits Jackson. Just because cities had service 30 years ago does not entitle them to have it today, especially at taxpayer expense.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2933
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:11 pm

AAvgeek744 wrote:
admanager wrote:
AAvgeek744 wrote:

Absolutely. People claim it brings new industry and business to a town with air service. I'd love to see some proof that cities with EAS are positively affected.


There has been a massive amount of research on this. In 1979 I did my graduate thesis on this very topic. That said, in 2017 a $600 per passenger subsidy when there is commercial service within easy driving distance makes no sense. Times change and so do economics.


I look at the one city in my state (Tennessee) with EAS - Jackson (MKL). 80 miles from MEM. Over the years after NW and maybe DL regionals pulled out, they've had EAS service to BNA and STL. The local paper here reported ~4 pax per day. I cannot see how that benefits Jackson. Just because cities had service 30 years ago does not entitle them to have it today, especially at taxpayer expense.

SInce all three airports are major hubs... or not..
Maybe I am spoiled, but I would opt out of 3-leg itinerary even if that means driving 2-3 hours to another airport to get a single connection. Another problem of EAS being run the way it is...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:22 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Note: US claims sovereignty over our rural areas (and those citizens like it), hence a certain obligation to provide services. Are those disagreeing that they can withdraw from the US and turn to China or North Korea? Get smart!

There is no obligation to avoid a 40 minute drive to better air service. Without EAS, Air Taxis would be far more viable.

The money should go to roads or runways.

You do know what happens to a community withdrawing for the US? Let's say it is allowed. That little town loses US citizenship. No state University, except in China or North Korea. No disaster services. Disconnected from water and power (River water is split Canada/US/Mexico already).

Heck, if a town did that, expel the people.

Or drive 49 minutes for a flight. No flight is worth a $700 subsidy unless it is to one of those way in nowhere radar stations we fund to keep air travel safe for overflights.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:29 am

My sarcastic point is that the US is obligated for a variety of reasons to provide minimal communications and transportation throughout the United States and its territories.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:08 am

frmrCapCadet wrote:
My sarcastic point is that the US is obligated for a variety of reasons to provide minimal communications and transportation throughout the United States and its territories.


Why and how is the US obligated to provide air travel throughout the US? I believe that's your opinion, not what is required by the government. The level of air service provided should be based on an airline setting up a station with the expectation of making a profit, that's the way businesses work. Why should money be spent to compensate for a person's choice to live in a remote area knowing full well that certain services are not available nor profitable? The welfare mentality has spread to air travel, what's next?
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:55 pm

cheapgreek wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
My sarcastic point is that the US is obligated for a variety of reasons to provide minimal communications and transportation throughout the United States and its territories.


Why and how is the US obligated to provide air travel throughout the US? I believe that's your opinion, not what is required by the government. The level of air service provided should be based on an airline setting up a station with the expectation of making a profit, that's the way businesses work. Why should money be spent to compensate for a person's choice to live in a remote area knowing full well that certain services are not available nor profitable? The welfare mentality has spread to air travel, what's next?


LOL. There are things called essential services. Without it, the US would be several states shy of the present day 50. In other words, states entered the US confederation based on certain guarantees that the federal state would provide.

The same thing happened here in Canada. It's why the transcontinental railroad was built here and why BC became a part of the country not long after Confederation. It's why a bridge was built to connect our smallest province of 150,000 to the the mainland of Canada.

It's why rail service is subsidized in North America. It's a heck of a lot cheaper and environmentally friendly to subsidize Via Rail and Amtrak than to spend billions building and maintaining even bigger roads to handle the millions of additional rail trips a year.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:57 pm

Please read: I did not say air travel, although that is part of the answer (hint - Alaska). The roads in rural areas who generally vote against taxes are raised by taxing cities, who generally vote for the other party. The USPS is in fact enshrined in the constitution. If we adopted your ridiculous conclusion the so called red states and counties throughout the country would not only not have airports, they would not have roads, schools, medical care. They would become ghost towns.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
pwm2txlhopper
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:40 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:18 pm

EAS is helpful in some cases for military travel. Not just for locals and the limited business traveler's flying through. Some of our large military bases-example Columbus AFB, Miss, near GTR- are served by some of these EAS airports. Without the flights, it would be much more difficult for service members to get to and from their base.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:27 pm

pwm2txlhopper wrote:
EAS is helpful in some cases for military travel. Not just for locals and the limited business traveler's flying through. Some of our large military bases-example Columbus AFB, Miss, near GTR- are served by some of these EAS airports. Without the flights, it would be much more difficult for service members to get to and from their base.

Which EAS services do you think the military is using to get to Columbus AFB? Meridian?
 
drdisque
Posts: 1357
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:56 pm

The only military bases primarily served by EAS are Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri (served directly - TBN) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SGF 93 miles away) and Ft. Drum in New York (served by ART) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SYR 80 miles away)
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:01 pm

drdisque wrote:
The only military bases primarily served by EAS are Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri (served directly - TBN) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SGF 93 miles away)

And the service is so bad that most of the traffic likely drives to SGF anyway. COU is also almost equidistant from TBN.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:03 pm

drdisque wrote:
The only military bases primarily served by EAS are Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri (served directly - TBN) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SGF 93 miles away) and Ft. Drum in New York (served by ART) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SYR 80 miles away)


ART is a prime example of an EAS airport where US3 branded service is introduced and passenger numbers skyrocket: http://www.wwnytv.com/story/35684545/mo ... rt-in-2017

According to the latest passenger numbers, more than 15,000 travelers have flown in and out of Watertown International Airport from January through May this year.

That's 2,000 more than at the same point last year.


As can be seen, when EAS is done right, the subsidy per passenger isn't a ridiculous $600-$700 per passenger. I think the biggest complaint is how often EAS hasn't been done right.
Last edited by Dominion301 on Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
pwm2txlhopper
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:40 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:05 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
pwm2txlhopper wrote:
EAS is helpful in some cases for military travel. Not just for locals and the limited business traveler's flying through. Some of our large military bases-example Columbus AFB, Miss, near GTR- are served by some of these EAS airports. Without the flights, it would be much more difficult for service members to get to and from their base.

Which EAS services do you think the military is using to get to Columbus AFB? Meridian?


Columbus/Starkville Regional, GTR, has long been EAS with DL Connection to ATL. (Also use to have subsidized NW to MEM) it's one of two AIr Force primary flight training bases. The other being Vance.

TUP can also be used to got Columbus. it use to have EAS with NW to MEM and DL to ATL.

JAN and MEM are both three hours drive, and there is no other alternative to get the to the base other than drive

drdisque wrote:
The only military bases primarily served by EAS are Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri (served directly - TBN) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SGF 93 miles away) and Ft. Drum in New York (served by ART) (nearest unsubsidized airport is SYR 80 miles away)


What about NAF El Centro, CA? Or Meridian NAS, MS?
Last edited by pwm2txlhopper on Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
pwm2txlhopper
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:40 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:09 pm

pwm2txlhopper wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
pwm2txlhopper wrote:
EAS is helpful in some cases for military travel. Not just for locals and the limited business traveler's flying through. Some of our large military bases-example Columbus AFB, Miss, near GTR- are served by some of these EAS airports. Without the flights, it would be much more difficult for service members to get to and from their base.

Which EAS services do you think the military is using to get to Columbus AFB? Meridian?


Columbus/Starkville Regional, GTR, has long been EAS with DL Connection to ATL. (Also use to have subsidized NW to MEM) it's one of two AIr Force primary flight training bases. The other being Vance.

TUP can also be used to got Columbus. It use to have EAS with NW to MEM and DL to ATL.


JAN and MEM are both three hours drive, and there is no other alternative to get the to the base other than drive.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:37 pm

pwm2txlhopper wrote:
pwm2txlhopper wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
Which EAS services do you think the military is using to get to Columbus AFB? Meridian?


Columbus/Starkville Regional, GTR, has long been EAS with DL Connection to ATL. (Also use to have subsidized NW to MEM) it's one of two AIr Force primary flight training bases. The other being Vance.

TUP can also be used to got Columbus. It use to have EAS with NW to MEM and DL to ATL.


JAN and MEM are both three hours drive, and there is no other alternative to get the to the base other than drive.

BHM is 2 hours....
 
RamblinMan
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:05 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
LOL. There are things called essential services. Without it, the US would be several states shy of the present day 50. In other words, states entered the US confederation based on certain guarantees that the federal state would provide.


Air service can hardly be considered "essential." Sure, it might be inconvenient to drive 4-5 hours to reach certain places, but it's not the humanitarian crisis some on here make it out to be. And for those who absolutely must fly...air taxis exist.

AAvgeek744 wrote:
I look at the one city in my state (Tennessee) with EAS - Jackson (MKL). 80 miles from MEM. Over the years after NW and maybe DL regionals pulled out, they've had EAS service to BNA and STL. The local paper here reported ~4 pax per day. I cannot see how that benefits Jackson. Just because cities had service 30 years ago does not entitle them to have it today, especially at taxpayer expense.


A prime example of the dysfunctional EAS of today. I used frequently travel from Chicago to NE Mississippi and for a while Pacific Wings had the EAS flights BNA-MKL. I used it once. Late on the way in, late on the way out. Luckily on the way out I was on a thru-flight to ATL so it didn't mess with my connection but others onboard were pretty screwed.

Every other time I rented a car in BNA and drove. You can't argue that a service is "essential" when it is available at some ridiculously low subsidized price (my BNA-MKL o/w ticket was $39) and aviation enthusiasts are still choosing to drive. Offline connections on third-rate regional airlines is a benefit to nobody but the rural airport director who gets to feel like a big shot.

Intermodal transport, where regional trains and buses stop at airport terminals and are used to reach outlying smaller communities, is a concept that the U.S. seriously needs to embrace.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:26 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
LOL. There are things called essential services. Without it, the US would be several states shy of the present day 50. In other words, states entered the US confederation based on certain guarantees that the federal state would provide.


Air service can hardly be considered "essential." Sure, it might be inconvenient to drive 4-5 hours to reach certain places, but it's not the humanitarian crisis some on here make it out to be. And for those who absolutely must fly...air taxis exist.


It is in some places with zero road access to the outside world...but that's much rarer in the U.S. vs. Canada. In Canada there are literally dozens of remote communities with no outside road access.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:28 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
It is in some places with zero road access to the outside world...but that's much rarer in the U.S. vs. Canada. In Canada there are literally dozens of remote communities with no outside road access.

To play devil's advocate: those places survived before the invention of the airplane, just because something was invented to make life easier doesn't then automatically make it "essential". People also have the option of just not living there. Many people groan about that argument but it's true and it should be considered. If the locals say "but my family has been here for generations", then the answer is that their ancestors didn't have/need airplanes and neither do they if they want to stay.

Unless there is some national strategic interest at play (like defense outposts) then there is really little value to this air service.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:03 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
It is in some places with zero road access to the outside world...but that's much rarer in the U.S. vs. Canada. In Canada there are literally dozens of remote communities with no outside road access.

To play devil's advocate: those places survived before the invention of the airplane, just because something was invented to make life easier doesn't then automatically make it "essential". People also have the option of just not living there. Many people groan about that argument but it's true and it should be considered. If the locals say "but my family has been here for generations", then the answer is that their ancestors didn't have/need airplanes and neither do they if they want to stay.

Unless there is some national strategic interest at play (like defense outposts) then there is really little value to this air service.


Well in Canada, there are no taxpayer subsidies directly to the airlines (remember we get hosed with ridiculous taxes instead of subsidies). The only subsidies are indirect in the form of northern living allowances to individual residents in remote regions, and via Transport Canada grants to small/medium airports for airport safety improvement projects, which indirectly benefits the airlines as the airports can keep their fees lower than they'd otherwise need to.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:46 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
It is in some places with zero road access to the outside world...but that's much rarer in the U.S. vs. Canada. In Canada there are literally dozens of remote communities with no outside road access.

To play devil's advocate: those places survived before the invention of the airplane, just because something was invented to make life easier doesn't then automatically make it "essential". People also have the option of just not living there. Many people groan about that argument but it's true and it should be considered. If the locals say "but my family has been here for generations", then the answer is that their ancestors didn't have/need airplanes and neither do they if they want to stay.

Unless there is some national strategic interest at play (like defense outposts) then there is really little value to this air service.


Amen, where one chooses to live is entirely up each person. Going into Podunk means finding a way out and it is usually the way one comes in. I am not commenting on Canada's situation as I do not know the level of air service provided and their laws are different from the US. You like the rural feel, the back to nature experience, the low taxes, the low home prices, well the price is having to drive a good distance to a airport with airline service. THE EAS program was born out of Washington politicians pandering for votes. Alaska may be a different story as I am not well versed to speak about that portion. Live in the 48, deal with the drive.
 
User avatar
ua900
Moderator
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:14 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:50 pm

ikramerica wrote:
Bingo. EAS for dense states in the north east is wasteful. There might be one or two locations, but otherwise if it's a two hour drive to another airport it's just pork. Out west it's a bit different. You could be 4-5 hours from the nearest airport that has regular service, but that's only a morning flight to a hub, which means you would have to drive overnight to catch the flight.


Exactly. EAS makes a ton of sense out west and south, but not north and east. This program is about keeping the lights on in struggling and fairly isolated communities. If you want to look for pork, there are plenty of bigger and "better" places to look.

Skywatcher wrote:
The U.S. is addicted to Federal government debt and programs like the EAS although small in global numbers is part of the problem. Is it poor people who benefit or businessmen?


We also allow people to mail letters and packages at the same nationwide rate. Are we subsidizing rural areas there? Sure, but some things are being upheld as needed. We have collectively deemed EAS to be worth it, otherwise our elected representatives would kill the program.

Rdh3e wrote:
Unless the EAS carrier had code share with a major at the destination airport the traffic volumes are always terrible.

I'd expect the communities PenAir is dropping will be given waivers. Get a real airline in there like SkyWest and the traffic recovers overnight.


Agreed, but in many cases out west it was OO that pulled up stakes to begin with, setting the stage for the likes of Great Lakes and SeaPort, which then got replaced with something like Mokulele or Boutique Air. Unless OO brings back E120s or something even smaller it's not going to happen, and even that would be too much plane for the likes of IPL or MCE at this point.

But here's the thing, even for regionals like OO there's been pressure to consolidate, see the merger with ASA. It's in many ways the same pressure that the US3 experienced. And now that's made worse by the regional pilot shortage. I get why communities like VIS lost commercial service, but IPL type places are a whole other ballgame. Too remote and forsaken of a place to do entirely without commercial air service. Hard to draw a line, I get it, but there's got to be some slack for isolated communities.

cheapgreek wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
It's always been shown that easy access to transportation is the number one way for someone to climb out of poverty or improve their standard of living.


I agree roads to small towns are needed, but not 3-5 passengers per flight.


A lot of planes have moved to 9 seaters over the last couple years, so 5 people isn't bad. I used to fly to places like IPL or VIS on E120s, and flew SeaPort and now fly Mokulele on a C206. Times for EAS have changed too, it's not like someone is doing a "Queen of the Valley" type 737 service with a bunch of stops up and down some farm road. It's more like FedEx Feeder and has a very intimate feel to it. If you fly more than once, they'll recognize you at the airport and on the plane. Very different from say 10-20 years ago.
2020: AMS | BRU | DEN | DFW | EWR | FRA | GUA | IAH | LAX | LIM | MCO | MUC | ORD | PTY | SAL | SCL | SFO | TXL
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:48 pm

ua900 wrote:
We have collectively deemed EAS to be worth it, otherwise our elected representatives would kill the program.

That is a very naive view of how government works.
 
slider
Posts: 7626
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:05 pm

Driving distances to nearest/most accessible commercially served airline destination:

EAS Communities granted waivers:
AL Muscle Shoals 70 miles to HSV, 110 miles to BHM
CA El Centro 62 mi to YUM
CO Pueblo 44 mi to COS
GA Macon 84 mi to ATL (only the world’s biggest goddamn hub)
KS Salina 97 mi to ICT
MS Tupelo 100 mi to MEM
OR Pendleton 200 mi to PDX, 110 to LWS. This one is remote. Of course, there’s only 17k people there.
UT Vernal 173 mi to SLC; there ain’t shit out here. No people, but this is probably one place where the actual intent of EAS makes sense, even if a population doesn’t support it.

EAS Communities determined to have fewer than 10 enplanements/day:
NY Jamestown - 4.9 76 mi to BUF. GTFO
PA Altoona - 5.2 115 mi to PIT
PA Bradford - 8.4 79 mi to BUF. The pork-laden irony is that both Jamestown AND BFD are EAS cities.
PA DuBois - 8.7 65 mi to SCE
PA Franklin/Oil City - 5.8 96 mi to PIT
TX Victoria - 6.8 86 mi to CRP

EAS Communities determined to have per-passenger subsidies in excess of $200
AZ Prescott - $411
CO Alamosa - $296
IA Fort Dodge - $281
IA Mason City - $241
KY Owensboro - $239
MD Hagerstown - $241
NE Kearney - $231
NE Scottsbluff - $267
NY Jamestown - $656
PA Altoona - $734
PA Bradford - $395
PA DuBois - $412
PA Franklin/Oil City - $428
PA Johnstown - $281
PA Lancaster - $379
TN Jackson - $318
TX Victoria - $538
WV Clarksburg - $255
WV Parkersburg - $406

I’m not even looking up the rest. You all get the point. With the exception of far-flung Western cities that literally are hundreds of miles from the nearest airline spoke city—a rarity in EAS even from the inception—there is NO place on this list that can’t be driven to a station that will, in ONE connection, connect you to the globe and be part of the nationa l airspace system.

John Murtha and John Rockefeller, those fiscal hawks, gamed the system, along with most of the bureaucrats, to coddle their districts. It’s damn near time to end this farcical construct.
 
drdisque
Posts: 1357
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:08 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
LOL. There are things called essential services. Without it, the US would be several states shy of the present day 50. In other words, states entered the US confederation based on certain guarantees that the federal state would provide.


Air service can hardly be considered "essential." Sure, it might be inconvenient to drive 4-5 hours to reach certain places, but it's not the humanitarian crisis some on here make it out to be. And for those who absolutely must fly...air taxis exist.

AAvgeek744 wrote:
I look at the one city in my state (Tennessee) with EAS - Jackson (MKL). 80 miles from MEM. Over the years after NW and maybe DL regionals pulled out, they've had EAS service to BNA and STL. The local paper here reported ~4 pax per day. I cannot see how that benefits Jackson. Just because cities had service 30 years ago does not entitle them to have it today, especially at taxpayer expense.


A prime example of the dysfunctional EAS of today. I used frequently travel from Chicago to NE Mississippi and for a while Pacific Wings had the EAS flights BNA-MKL. I used it once. Late on the way in, late on the way out. Luckily on the way out I was on a thru-flight to ATL so it didn't mess with my connection but others onboard were pretty screwed.

Every other time I rented a car in BNA and drove. You can't argue that a service is "essential" when it is available at some ridiculously low subsidized price (my BNA-MKL o/w ticket was $39) and aviation enthusiasts are still choosing to drive. Offline connections on third-rate regional airlines is a benefit to nobody but the rural airport director who gets to feel like a big shot.

Intermodal transport, where regional trains and buses stop at airport terminals and are used to reach outlying smaller communities, is a concept that the U.S. seriously needs to embrace.


To be somewhat fair, Pacific Wings was pretty much THE WORST EAS operator in the history of the program
 
RJNUT
Posts: 1849
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 1999 1:58 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:41 pm

Just as a funny anecdote, I saw an article last week in a Dodge City news article about the EAS selection of Boutique Air to Denver and they mentioned a "co-chair" agreement with United.!!
 
mtnwest1979
Posts: 2211
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:23 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:02 pm

RJNUT wrote:
Just as a funny anecdote, I saw an article last week in a Dodge City news article about the EAS selection of Boutique Air to Denver and they mentioned a "co-chair" agreement with United.!!


LOL I saw that as well. Got a decent chuckle from it.

I am still in favor of the EAS program, although do believe tweaks are needed. I certainly do not agree with the folks that want to eliminate the whole thing.

One would think that ANYONE on this site would be pro any airline service, even if they had to put in $1/ year to have happen. Doesn't the government waste that much on other things a month these days??
Riddle: Which lasts longer, a start-up airline or a start-up football league?
 
adam47150
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:16 pm

slider wrote:
Driving distances to nearest/most accessible commercially served airline destination:

EAS Communities granted waivers:
AL Muscle Shoals 70 miles to HSV, 110 miles to BHM
CA El Centro 62 mi to YUM
CO Pueblo 44 mi to COS
GA Macon 84 mi to ATL (only the world’s biggest goddamn hub)
KS Salina 97 mi to ICT
MS Tupelo 100 mi to MEM
OR Pendleton 200 mi to PDX, 110 to LWS. This one is remote. Of course, there’s only 17k people there.
UT Vernal 173 mi to SLC; there ain’t shit out here. No people, but this is probably one place where the actual intent of EAS makes sense, even if a population doesn’t support it.

EAS Communities determined to have fewer than 10 enplanements/day:
NY Jamestown - 4.9 76 mi to BUF. GTFO
PA Altoona - 5.2 115 mi to PIT
PA Bradford - 8.4 79 mi to BUF. The pork-laden irony is that both Jamestown AND BFD are EAS cities.
PA DuBois - 8.7 65 mi to SCE
PA Franklin/Oil City - 5.8 96 mi to PIT
TX Victoria - 6.8 86 mi to CRP

EAS Communities determined to have per-passenger subsidies in excess of $200
AZ Prescott - $411
CO Alamosa - $296
IA Fort Dodge - $281
IA Mason City - $241
KY Owensboro - $239
MD Hagerstown - $241
NE Kearney - $231
NE Scottsbluff - $267
NY Jamestown - $656
PA Altoona - $734
PA Bradford - $395
PA DuBois - $412
PA Franklin/Oil City - $428
PA Johnstown - $281
PA Lancaster - $379
TN Jackson - $318
TX Victoria - $538
WV Clarksburg - $255
WV Parkersburg - $406

I’m not even looking up the rest. You all get the point. With the exception of far-flung Western cities that literally are hundreds of miles from the nearest airline spoke city—a rarity in EAS even from the inception—there is NO place on this list that can’t be driven to a station that will, in ONE connection, connect you to the globe and be part of the nationa l airspace system.

John Murtha and John Rockefeller, those fiscal hawks, gamed the system, along with most of the bureaucrats, to coddle their districts. It’s damn near time to end this farcical construct.


I'll give you a hand...lol

OWB is only 42 miles from EVV
 
RJNUT
Posts: 1849
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 1999 1:58 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:25 pm

mtnwest1979 wrote:
RJNUT wrote:
Just as a funny anecdote, I saw an article last week in a Dodge City news article about the EAS selection of Boutique Air to Denver and they mentioned a "co-chair" agreement with United.!!


LOL I saw that as well. Got a decent chuckle from it.

I am still in favor of the EAS program, although do believe tweaks are needed. I certainly do not agree with the folks that want to eliminate the whole thing.

One would think that ANYONE on this site would be pro any airline service, even if they had to put in $1/ year to have happen. Doesn't the government waste that much on other things a month these days??



Yes ,remote air service is a good thing , bringing in the "regions" to civilization. My solution would be to take about 60-70 percent of cities listed, have them divided up and bid upon by the US3, using their code- share marketing power and give them all a good, running start of funding for a year or two and then they are on their own , make it or break it , if you will.(local or state funding could takeover , possibly) . The current set up is self-prophesizing with unreliable , unconnected 9- seat carriers due to the "Schumer Act".
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:24 am

mtnwest1979 wrote:
RJNUT wrote:
Just as a funny anecdote, I saw an article last week in a Dodge City news article about the EAS selection of Boutique Air to Denver and they mentioned a "co-chair" agreement with United.!!


LOL I saw that as well. Got a decent chuckle from it.

I am still in favor of the EAS program, although do believe tweaks are needed. I certainly do not agree with the folks that want to eliminate the whole thing.

One would think that ANYONE on this site would be pro any airline service, even if they had to put in $1/ year to have happen. Doesn't the government waste that much on other things a month these days??


I am pro airline service with any airline that wants to serve an airport that can turn a profit with paying customers, not welfare for a few per plane. Waste on all levels is counterproductive but what else can you expect?
 
User avatar
ua900
Moderator
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:14 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:28 am

Rdh3e wrote:
ua900 wrote:
We have collectively deemed EAS to be worth it, otherwise our elected representatives would kill the program.

That is a very naive view of how government works.


Au contraire, if you have phone lines of elected representatives light up consistently and overwhelmingly (aka enough voters complaining), then taxes (and the likes of EAS, federal grants and ARRA are taxpayer funded) and the associated programs they pay for will get repealed. Here's a recent example from UA's hometown: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... -movement/

Quid pro quo when writing budgets and bills is as American as apple pie. Rural areas get EAS and urban areas get federal grants or even ARRA for say their metro system or a regional heavy rail commuter system. EAS pales by comparison to these grants and programs.

RJNUT wrote:
Yes, remote air service is a good thing, bringing in the "regions" to civilization. My solution would be to take about 60-70 percent of cities listed, have them divided up and bid upon by the US3, using their code- share marketing power and give them all a good, running start of funding for a year or two and then they are on their own, make it or break it, if you will.(local or state funding could takeover , possibly). The current set up is self-prophesizing with unreliable, unconnected 9- seat carriers due to the "Schumer Act".


Exactly, air links bring in a very different demographic, upper middle class, often on business. And for that demographic, the network carriers make far more sense then the likes of Seaport or Mokulele. Given that the network carriers used to fly to these places, then passed off that flying to the likes of OO, who then passed to the likes of K5 and ZK, which gets us to that loose patchwork of small and often changing carriers we see today, it seems that everyone the size of OO and bigger has concluded that flights primarily based on subsidies aren't worth flying. Nor have airlines the size of OO or bigger planes to introduce anything below the size of a E35. The best shot I see for what you're proposing is for someone a bit more upscale like 4B to associate with someone like UA.
2020: AMS | BRU | DEN | DFW | EWR | FRA | GUA | IAH | LAX | LIM | MCO | MUC | ORD | PTY | SAL | SCL | SFO | TXL
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:53 pm

ua900 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
ua900 wrote:
We have collectively deemed EAS to be worth it, otherwise our elected representatives would kill the program.

That is a very naive view of how government works.


Au contraire, if you have phone lines of elected representatives light up consistently and overwhelmingly (aka enough voters complaining), then taxes (and the likes of EAS, federal grants and ARRA are taxpayer funded) and the associated programs they pay for will get repealed. Here's a recent example from UA's hometown: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... -movement/

Quid pro quo when writing budgets and bills is as American as apple pie. Rural areas get EAS and urban areas get federal grants or even ARRA for say their metro system or a regional heavy rail commuter system. EAS pales by comparison to these grants and programs.

RJNUT wrote:
Yes, remote air service is a good thing, bringing in the "regions" to civilization. My solution would be to take about 60-70 percent of cities listed, have them divided up and bid upon by the US3, using their code- share marketing power and give them all a good, running start of funding for a year or two and then they are on their own, make it or break it, if you will.(local or state funding could takeover , possibly). The current set up is self-prophesizing with unreliable, unconnected 9- seat carriers due to the "Schumer Act".


Exactly, air links bring in a very different demographic, upper middle class, often on business. And for that demographic, the network carriers make far more sense then the likes of Seaport or Mokulele. Given that the network carriers used to fly to these places, then passed off that flying to the likes of OO, who then passed to the likes of K5 and ZK, which gets us to that loose patchwork of small and often changing carriers we see today, it seems that everyone the size of OO and bigger has concluded that flights primarily based on subsidies aren't worth flying. Nor have airlines the size of OO or bigger planes to introduce anything below the size of a E35. The best shot I see for what you're proposing is for someone a bit more upscale like 4B to associate with someone like UA.


Well OO are getting back into the EAS game in a big way to keep a bunch of additional 50 seater flying going for years to come.

You raise a very valid point about big cities receiving huge $ for things like subways and light rail.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8502
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:54 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
You can't argue that a service is "essential" when it is available at some ridiculously low subsidized price (my BNA-MKL o/w ticket was $39) and aviation enthusiasts are still choosing to drive. Offline connections on third-rate regional airlines is a benefit to nobody but the rural airport director who gets to feel like a big shot.

Intermodal transport, where regional trains and buses stop at airport terminals and are used to reach outlying smaller communities, is a concept that the U.S. seriously needs to embrace.


I would encourage anybody interested in intermodal transit to take a look at state and county-subsidized rural transportation services in Oregon. There's a broad scope of thruway bus routes built upon Amtrak. They have some regularly scheduled (and cheap) regional buses to get people from deeply rural areas to medical care & shopping. It's more fun (rural airport director big shot) to spend somebody else's (Federal) money on air but the utility gained per $ spend is very low.

http://www.neotransit.org/wallowa-link

See PDF page 4: http://www.amtrakcascades.com/sites/def ... hedule.pdf
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 3568
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:59 pm

OR Pendleton 200 mi to PDX, 110 to LWS. This one is remote. Of course, there’s only 17k people there.


I think closest to Pendleton would be 70mi to PSC (Pasco/Tri-Cities, WA)

The rest:
AZ Prescott - $411 - 100mi to PHX, 90mi to FLG, 222k Metro population. Remote enough I guess
CO Alamosa - $296 - 170mi to COS (~130mi to PUB), 150mi to SAF, 150mi to DGO (Another EAS city). But population is only maybe 15k in the area.
IA Fort Dodge - $281 - ~100mi to DSM, ~100mi to ALO (Another EAS city). Small population, though (~30k maybe)
IA Mason City - $241 - ~80 mi to RST, ~80mi to ALO, ~126mi to DSM. Again, small population.
KY Owensboro - $239 - Get rid of this, seriously (It's what? 44mi to EVV)
MD Hagerstown - $241 - 64mi to IAD, ~80mi to BWI, ~80mi to MDT. So, why is this under EAS?
NE Kearney - $231 - Thought this doesn't have EAS anymore (Easy enough to combined with GRI anyway)
NE Scottsbluff - $267 - Thought this doesn't have EAS anymore
PA Johnstown - $281 - 84mi to PIT. IMO could be easily combined with Altoona
PA Lancaster - $379 - 33mi to MDT. How does this qualified under EAS?
TN Jackson - $318 - ~90mi to MEM.
WV Clarksburg - $255 - Should be combined with MGW.
WV Parkersburg - $406 - 80mi to CRW

Reached the same conclusion, though - except a few communities out west, a bunch of those places are just not all that remote anyway.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3632
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:29 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
You raise a very valid point about big cities receiving huge $ for things like subways and light rail.

Cities are the ones paying the taxes. Giving the money back to them as a grant is not "recieving huge $".

Rural areas overwhelming rely more on the federal government than Cities do, and they also overwhelmingly oppose the very taxes that make it possible to fund their infrastructure and lifestyle.

https://taxfoundation.org/states-rely-most-federal-aid/
 
subramak1
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:21 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:01 pm

WeatherPilot wrote:
It's always been shown that easy access to transportation is the number one way for someone to climb out of poverty or improve their standard of living.


In urban areas this is true. So we need to invest in better urban transportation. Having traveled through many parts of Colorado outside I-70 corridor, I know that EAS subsidies are needed for a town like Alamosa.

Thanks, Subu
 
subramak1
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:21 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:14 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
OR Pendleton 200 mi to PDX, 110 to LWS. This one is remote. Of course, there’s only 17k people there.


I think closest to Pendleton would be 70mi to PSC (Pasco/Tri-Cities, WA)

The rest:

CO Alamosa - $296 - 170mi to COS (~130mi to PUB), 150mi to SAF, 150mi to DGO (Another EAS city). But population is only maybe 15k in the area.
IA Fort Dodge - $281 - ~100mi to DSM, ~100mi to ALO (Another EAS city). Small population, though (~30k maybe)
IA Mason City - $241 - ~80 mi to RST, ~80mi to ALO, ~126mi to DSM. Again, small population.
KY Owensboro - $239 - Get rid of this, seriously (It's what? 44mi to EVV)
MD Hagerstown - $241 - 64mi to IAD, ~80mi to BWI, ~80mi to MDT. So, why is this under EAS?
PA Johnstown - $281 - 84mi to PIT. IMO could be easily combined with Altoona
PA Lancaster - $379 - 33mi to MDT. How does this qualified under EAS?
TN Jackson - $318 - ~90mi to MEM.
WV Parkersburg - $406 - 80mi to CRW

Reached the same conclusion, though - except a few communities out west, a bunch of those places are just not all that remote anyway.



Speaking for Alamosa alone - It would be difficult to get to any place from Alamosa in a snow storm, which happens often for 7 months in a year. Alamosa may not have snow but the mountain passes to the east , west and north have snows making commute difficult

Subu
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 3568
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:23 pm

subramak1 wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
OR Pendleton 200 mi to PDX, 110 to LWS. This one is remote. Of course, there’s only 17k people there.


I think closest to Pendleton would be 70mi to PSC (Pasco/Tri-Cities, WA)

The rest:

CO Alamosa - $296 - 170mi to COS (~130mi to PUB), 150mi to SAF, 150mi to DGO (Another EAS city). But population is only maybe 15k in the area.
IA Fort Dodge - $281 - ~100mi to DSM, ~100mi to ALO (Another EAS city). Small population, though (~30k maybe)
IA Mason City - $241 - ~80 mi to RST, ~80mi to ALO, ~126mi to DSM. Again, small population.
KY Owensboro - $239 - Get rid of this, seriously (It's what? 44mi to EVV)
MD Hagerstown - $241 - 64mi to IAD, ~80mi to BWI, ~80mi to MDT. So, why is this under EAS?
PA Johnstown - $281 - 84mi to PIT. IMO could be easily combined with Altoona
PA Lancaster - $379 - 33mi to MDT. How does this qualified under EAS?
TN Jackson - $318 - ~90mi to MEM.
WV Parkersburg - $406 - 80mi to CRW

Reached the same conclusion, though - except a few communities out west, a bunch of those places are just not all that remote anyway.



Speaking for Alamosa alone - It would be difficult to get to any place from Alamosa in a snow storm, which happens often for 7 months in a year. Alamosa may not have snow but the mountain passes to the east , west and north have snows making commute difficult

Subu


To be fair, out of all the cities that are listed, places like Vernal, UT and Alamosa, CO (and a few other) are places that where EAS serves its purpose just b/c how remote they are and are not exactly easy for access ground transportation-wise (Mountain roads, lack of Interstate, etc.)

Personally, I just think EAS should be reform rather than eliminated anyway. No more the like of Lancaster, PA or Owensboro, KY would be a start.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:30 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
ua900 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
That is a very naive view of how government works.


Au contraire, if you have phone lines of elected representatives light up consistently and overwhelmingly (aka enough voters complaining), then taxes (and the likes of EAS, federal grants and ARRA are taxpayer funded) and the associated programs they pay for will get repealed. Here's a recent example from UA's hometown: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... -movement/

Quid pro quo when writing budgets and bills is as American as apple pie. Rural areas get EAS and urban areas get federal grants or even ARRA for say their metro system or a regional heavy rail commuter system. EAS pales by comparison to these grants and programs.

RJNUT wrote:
Yes, remote air service is a good thing, bringing in the "regions" to civilization. My solution would be to take about 60-70 percent of cities listed, have them divided up and bid upon by the US3, using their code- share marketing power and give them all a good, running start of funding for a year or two and then they are on their own, make it or break it, if you will.(local or state funding could takeover , possibly). The current set up is self-prophesizing with unreliable, unconnected 9- seat carriers due to the "Schumer Act".


Exactly, air links bring in a very different demographic, upper middle class, often on business. And for that demographic, the network carriers make far more sense then the likes of Seaport or Mokulele. Given that the network carriers used to fly to these places, then passed off that flying to the likes of OO, who then passed to the likes of K5 and ZK, which gets us to that loose patchwork of small and often changing carriers we see today, it seems that everyone the size of OO and bigger has concluded that flights primarily based on subsidies aren't worth flying. Nor have airlines the size of OO or bigger planes to introduce anything below the size of a E35. The best shot I see for what you're proposing is for someone a bit more upscale like 4B to associate with someone like UA.


Well OO are getting back into the EAS game in a big way to keep a bunch of additional 50 seater flying going for years to come.

You raise a very valid point about big cities receiving huge $ for things like subways and light rail.


Subways and light rail carry millions, not a handful of people. Too much is made of providing air travel for areas that cannot support regular airline service. That's part of life for small isolated towns and people know full well what the transportation options are when moving there.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: DOT seeks terminate 19 communities from EAS program.

Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:19 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
You raise a very valid point about big cities receiving huge $ for things like subways and light rail.

Cities are the ones paying the taxes. Giving the money back to them as a grant is not "recieving huge $".

Rural areas overwhelming rely more on the federal government than Cities do, and they also overwhelmingly oppose the very taxes that make it possible to fund their infrastructure and lifestyle.

https://taxfoundation.org/states-rely-most-federal-aid/


Porportionately, very true indeed!
 
User avatar
knope2001
Posts: 3031
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:54 am

Jamestown NY loses EAS, others get reprieve

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:12 am

Last fall the DoT advised 27 EAS communities that they were in violation of one or both minimal standards in FY 2016.

All 27 are within 210 miles of a medium or large hub airport and exceeded the $200 subsidy per passenger cap. A few also failed to meet the 10 enplanement per day cap.

All but one were given a waiver based on various factors:
--A significant service hiatus during the year
--The nationwide pilot shortage which led to poor reliability / low completion rates
--Improving passenger traffic
--A new carrier recently started/about to start with the promise of better servc

Jamestown NY the short straw. It failed both the 10-per day passenger minimum and had among the highest subsidy rates. It is only 78 miles from medium-hub airport Buffalo (were it under 70 miles it would be flatly ineligible for EAS subsidy regardless of results). And so Jamestown NY subsidy will end shortly.


In my opinion some of these cities do have a good shot at getting back within EAS constraints.
Clarksburg, Pueblo, Salina, Macon, Vernal, Kearney, Scottsbluff have regional jets now or shortly, mostly code-share branded service.

Prescott, Mason City, Pendleton, Fort Dodge, Muscle Shoals, Alamosa, Tupelo have been posting much better numbers than the 2016 average and have a good shot at being off the bad list in 2017.

But some others just don't seem to be very promising -- chronic low boardins, no change in the nature of service (and in some cases no change in airline). Places like Franklin PA, Hagerstown MD, Victoria TX, DuBois PA don't seem to be showing new life or any reason for optimism with the current air carrier and service pattern -- putting 2 or 3 people on an 8-seat Caravan (for example) just isn't going to get back in EAS good graces, but there's another year given to these cities as well.

The full list of cities on the bubble getting a stay of execution:

Bradford PA
Hagerstown MD
Johnstown PA
Franklin/Oil City PA
Lancaster PA
Clarksburg WV
Parkersburg WV
Prescott AZ
Altoon PA
DuBois PA
Victoria TX
Fort Dodge iA
Mason City IA
Owensboro KY
Jackson TN
Muscle Shoals AL
El Centro CA
Pueblo CO
Macon GA
Salina KS
Tupelo MS
Pendleton OR
Vernal UT
Kearney NE
Scottsbluff NE
Alamosa CO
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Jamestown NY loses EAS, others get reprieve

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:21 am

knope2001 wrote:
Jamestown NY the short straw. It failed both the 10-per day passenger minimum and had among the highest subsidy rates. It is only 78 miles from medium-hub airport Buffalo (were it under 70 miles it would be flatly ineligible for EAS subsidy regardless of results). And so Jamestown NY subsidy will end shortly.

People are willing to drive further today than in the past (more reliable and economical vehicles). So maybe expand that 70 mile distance...

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24799
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Jamestown NY loses EAS, others get reprieve

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:37 am

Lucille Ball would be upset by this, if she were still alive.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos