sprxUSA wrote:

Well southern shouldn't promise aircraft they don't have for service. They don't fly KA200s or PC12s, but that's what they promised for Chadron, NE yet dont use. Stay away from 9X....

SAE is bidding a no subsidy option, so depending on the community opinion the DOT May very well choose that route. Which would effectively get MKL out of the EAS program

Paying for busses with EAS money makes no sense. And I’m a huge EAS supporter

sprxUSA wrote:

Well southern shouldn't promise aircraft they don't have for service. They don't fly KA200s or PC12s, but that's what they promised for Chadron, NE yet dont use. Stay away from 9X....

Funny. They flew the King Air today. And PC-12s are on their ops specs- when Southern bought Mokulele, the Lanai Air PC-12s came with it (however Western Air is now operating them @ a lower rate).

We submitted the bus bid for MKL.

Sometimes, the USDOT will tell a community internally that they will not consider the bus bid. Therefore, I offered the flexibility to not preclude an air service that is ready to go. However, we are in a window of time where staffing for everything is scarce. The EAS program went through it from 2008-2010 and it destroyed the passenger base at numerous airports. Many of those airports never really recovered.

If you are MKL, you can make a decision as to what air service is useful and use the bus as a bridge to rebuild traffic. Having breaks in service drives the cost of the program up substantially and shows that the program isn't essential. What substitute bus service can do is bring travelers back to the airport and rebuild their passenger base until aircraft come back. Even a free service (such as the proposal for MKL) is extremely cost-effective and maintains a reliable connection to the national airline system. It also provides the airport with the ability to generate some passenger income in the interim from parking or rental car usage.

I wanted to team up with a Part 121 regional jet operator to phase bus service into regional jet service on certain EAS contracts, but I have not found a buddy as yet. There is a small niche for regional operations with pilots paid near the narrowbody scale flying EAS and at-risk markets under a national brand. We'll get there eventually.

9K is a very reliable operator, so they probably have the best shot at winning, but I suspect that everyone will have some form of staffing issue for the next few months. Bus connections are going to become more of a thing in aviation and folks should embrace it as a way to stay connected to the national air system when other options are not readily available.

Kinda surprised my airline (Cape) didn't go for STL and BNA. Then again, they've got a decent shot at this one.

No, bus connections will not become a thing. If they were, they already would have become a thing on a grander scale.
If I am in Jackson or nearby and traveling anywhere, I am not going to go to the airport, bus to an airport, then go thru their security and end up at my destination. May as well drive myself on my schedule and leisure, maskless, to the big airport. A lot of the draw, for me, would be the ease of security clearance at MKL over any of the proposed locations. I know some EAS locations don't have security, so some are out.
Additionally, plan on a 60 pax bus and hope for the best, or an 18 pax bus and see what happens? I bet many trips could be run with a car LOL.
If this does happen to wildly take off, I can't wait for the bus from McCook to Denver....

[quote= "Jshank83"][quote= "BangersAndMash"]On the the strength of those bids, I'd say it's Southern's to loose.

Air Choice One got tossed 6 months ago. I doubt they're making a comeback. Their lack of interline partners is a major downside.
Cape Air's offering is disappointing. 18x to STL is not a winner in my book. A mix of destinations seem the way to go if recent awards are anything to go by.
Air Charter Express is unproven. I can't see them being recommended.
As for that proposal from a bus company, I doubt it'll be flying - pun intended [/quote]

I actually don't hate the bus idea. Would be better if it was to Nashville though, even though it's an hour further. Memphis doesn't offer as good a route map for flights. I also thought it was smart they offered to come in short term. Could get up and running quickly to give an airline time to get set up.

Agree that cape only offering STL is odd. Would be easy to add BNA since they already fly there. Must be a situation where they would take it on their terms but aren't going that hard for it.

I like you would guess southern is the favorite. BUT after boutique going bad it might be a situation where the devil you know (Air Choice) is better than the one you don't. Also not sure how much Southern trying to challenge and hold the last decision could play in to it.[/quote]

They run vans, so not a true bus service; being crammed into a van even if it is a sprinter type vehicle leaves a lot to be desired, very minimal baggage storage unless they have trailers with the vans.

We are NOT proposing vans here. It is a full sized bus.

The only merit a bus would have is if you could screen at the regional airport and be delivered airside and also have your bags transferred

32andBelow wrote:

The only merit a bus would have is if you could screen at the regional airport and be delivered airside and also have your bags transferred

Do they run a TSA at MKL anyway? or did you have to go back thru it at STL/ATL anyway? I know some airports you have to go back thru after the EAS flight gets to the "hub"

32andBelow wrote:

The only merit a bus would have is if you could screen at the regional airport and be delivered airside and also have your bags transferred

That is easier from MEM than to MEM, but it is theoretically possible in both directions. The baggage compartments can be locked and have a TSA seal put on it at MKL. However, the passenger screening is a bit more complicated at MKL. If the bus driver needs to open the passenger door for any reason (such as getting pulled over), it would force a rescreen of all of the passengers. Usually, buses that go airside require a secondary inspection before going there. It may actually require TSA to ride the bus with the passengers to smooth the process.

JA wrote:

We submitted the bus bid for MKL.

Sometimes, the USDOT will tell a community internally that they will not consider the bus bid. Therefore, I offered the flexibility to not preclude an air service that is ready to go. However, we are in a window of time where staffing for everything is scarce. The EAS program went through it from 2008-2010 and it destroyed the passenger base at numerous airports. Many of those airports never really recovered.

If you are MKL, you can make a decision as to what air service is useful and use the bus as a bridge to rebuild traffic. Having breaks in service drives the cost of the program up substantially and shows that the program isn't essential. What substitute bus service can do is bring travelers back to the airport and rebuild their passenger base until aircraft come back. Even a free service (such as the proposal for MKL) is extremely cost-effective and maintains a reliable connection to the national airline system. It also provides the airport with the ability to generate some passenger income in the interim from parking or rental car usage.

I wanted to team up with a Part 121 regional jet operator to phase bus service into regional jet service on certain EAS contracts, but I have not found a buddy as yet. There is a small niche for regional operations with pilots paid near the narrowbody scale flying EAS and at-risk markets under a national brand. We'll get there eventually.

9K is a very reliable operator, so they probably have the best shot at winning, but I suspect that everyone will have some form of staffing issue for the next few months. Bus connections are going to become more of a thing in aviation and folks should embrace it as a way to stay connected to the national air system when other options are not readily available.

I actually think this is well thought out; the haters will always hate no matter what. Posters here will often tout that certain EAS airports are within X miles/hours of another major city with more air service, and thus are not really needing of EAS and should drive THEMSELVES. But now you have someone else doing the driving...big difference. Think you are on to something!

airportugal310 wrote:

JA wrote:

We submitted the bus bid for MKL.

Sometimes, the USDOT will tell a community internally that they will not consider the bus bid. Therefore, I offered the flexibility to not preclude an air service that is ready to go. However, we are in a window of time where staffing for everything is scarce. The EAS program went through it from 2008-2010 and it destroyed the passenger base at numerous airports. Many of those airports never really recovered.

If you are MKL, you can make a decision as to what air service is useful and use the bus as a bridge to rebuild traffic. Having breaks in service drives the cost of the program up substantially and shows that the program isn't essential. What substitute bus service can do is bring travelers back to the airport and rebuild their passenger base until aircraft come back. Even a free service (such as the proposal for MKL) is extremely cost-effective and maintains a reliable connection to the national airline system. It also provides the airport with the ability to generate some passenger income in the interim from parking or rental car usage.

I wanted to team up with a Part 121 regional jet operator to phase bus service into regional jet service on certain EAS contracts, but I have not found a buddy as yet. There is a small niche for regional operations with pilots paid near the narrowbody scale flying EAS and at-risk markets under a national brand. We'll get there eventually.

9K is a very reliable operator, so they probably have the best shot at winning, but I suspect that everyone will have some form of staffing issue for the next few months. Bus connections are going to become more of a thing in aviation and folks should embrace it as a way to stay connected to the national air system when other options are not readily available.

I actually think this is well thought out; the haters will always hate no matter what. Posters here will often tout that certain EAS airports are within X miles/hours of another major city with more air service, and thus are not really needing of EAS and should drive THEMSELVES. But now you have someone else doing the driving...big difference. Think you are on to something!

United has tried this with “branded” bus service in some markets with limited success over the last two decades or so.

Seems to work going direct to a resort with a lot of bags, or a big college town, but doesn’t work for “Normal” destinations. As noted, why take a bus when you can just drive on your own schedule? Miss the last outbound bus just once due to a late flight, and you’ll be back in the car on the next trip.

FlyingElvii wrote:

As noted, why take a bus when you can just drive on your own schedule? Miss the last outbound bus just once due to a late flight, and you’ll be back in the car on the next trip.

I think people will take that risk when they can have someone drop them off at the local airport and save all the big airport parking charges (especially when those could add to up almost as much as the ULCC fare they are paying). Some people don’t like highway driving in bigger cities. There are other reasons like these that make the local airport option (even if by bus) more attractive for some people. Just because one person doesn’t value that service doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea.

drdisque wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

On the the strength of those bids, I'd say it's Southern's to loose.

Air Choice One got tossed 6 months ago. I doubt they're making a comeback. Their lack of interline partners is a major downside.
Cape Air's offering is disappointing. 18x to STL is not a winner in my book. A mix of destinations seem the way to go if recent awards are anything to go by.
Air Charter Express is unproven. I can't see them being recommended.
As for that proposal from a bus company, I doubt it'll be flying - pun intended

It's just not a location that's well suited for Cape to offer anything other than STL. ORD is over 400 miles and is the closest AA, B6 or UA hub. I doubt they would want to open ATL because they have no connection to DL.

Incorrect regarding Cape Air. They now have a partnership with Delta, currently focused on BOS/NYC markets, but presumably can be extended to ATL. The question would be whether Delta would care. The New England flying is important for Delta to try and continue to be relevant to the leisure side of the BOS and NYC markets which B6 has done well.

sprxUSA wrote:

No, bus connections will not become a thing. If they were, they already would have become a thing on a grander scale.
If I am in Jackson or nearby and traveling anywhere, I am not going to go to the airport, bus to an airport, then go thru their security and end up at my destination. May as well drive myself on my schedule and leisure, maskless, to the big airport. A lot of the draw, for me, would be the ease of security clearance at MKL over any of the proposed locations. I know some EAS locations don't have security, so some are out.
Additionally, plan on a 60 pax bus and hope for the best, or an 18 pax bus and see what happens? I bet many trips could be run with a car LOL.
If this does happen to wildly take off, I can't wait for the bus from McCook to Denver....

This has been done in the past, and is being done now. You may personally prefer to spend your money driving, wear and tear on your vehicle, and inflated on or near airport parking costs for the duration of your trip. Oh, and ensure you're there two hours prior to navigate the SSCP unless you've dipped in to your pocket for TSA PreCheck.

I'd cite CO operating AVP and ABE to/from EWR in a secure manner as one reference. It operated for nearly 15 years (if not longer).

In today's world, look at what Landline is doing with both SY in MSP and UA in DEN.

Extending this a tad further, AA and UA had remote check-in in London for the Heathrow Express. Unfortunately 9/11 squashed that.

So - this concept is a "thing". Is it broad in scope? No. Does it work in strategic and unique applications, absolutely. TSA is now finally in a place where they are being dragged kicking and screaming in to being a bit more flexible in thinking about how and where to screen. Look at the private terminal operation at LAX (P/S). Five years ago that would have been a resounding hell no from Washington. Now? Staffed with TSA (and CBP for inbound international arrivals).

Transportation networks are just that - networks. They are often strongest with various modes working in tight, integrated harmony with each other. The crucial key for the bus operators, as JA I hope knows and understands, is that you have a far steeper acceptance curve with an airport bus to airport solution. It's got to operate crisply on time, with immaculate equipment, highly service oriented staff, well identified locations and wayfinding and a deeply integrated experience at the big airport. Gaps in any piece of those will risk the franchise. In many ways no different than the EAS operators face when rebid time comes. I like the out of the box thinking.

And no, I'm not in any way affiliate with the bus bid. Although I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

PBADC3 wrote:

sprxUSA wrote:

No, bus connections will not become a thing. If they were, they already would have become a thing on a grander scale.
If I am in Jackson or nearby and traveling anywhere, I am not going to go to the airport, bus to an airport, then go thru their security and end up at my destination. May as well drive myself on my schedule and leisure, maskless, to the big airport. A lot of the draw, for me, would be the ease of security clearance at MKL over any of the proposed locations. I know some EAS locations don't have security, so some are out.
Additionally, plan on a 60 pax bus and hope for the best, or an 18 pax bus and see what happens? I bet many trips could be run with a car LOL.
If this does happen to wildly take off, I can't wait for the bus from McCook to Denver....

This has been done in the past, and is being done now. You may personally prefer to spend your money driving, wear and tear on your vehicle, and inflated on or near airport parking costs for the duration of your trip. Oh, and ensure you're there two hours prior to navigate the SSCP unless you've dipped in to your pocket for TSA PreCheck.

I'd cite CO operating AVP and ABE to/from EWR in a secure manner as one reference. It operated for nearly 15 years (if not longer).

In today's world, look at what Landline is doing with both SY in MSP and UA in DEN.

Extending this a tad further, AA and UA had remote check-in in London for the Heathrow Express. Unfortunately 9/11 squashed that.

So - this concept is a "thing". Is it broad in scope? No. Does it work in strategic and unique applications, absolutely. TSA is now finally in a place where they are being dragged kicking and screaming in to being a bit more flexible in thinking about how and where to screen. Look at the private terminal operation at LAX (P/S). Five years ago that would have been a resounding hell no from Washington. Now? Staffed with TSA (and CBP for inbound international arrivals).

Transportation networks are just that - networks. They are often strongest with various modes working in tight, integrated harmony with each other. The crucial key for the bus operators, as JA I hope knows and understands, is that you have a far steeper acceptance curve with an airport bus to airport solution. It's got to operate crisply on time, with immaculate equipment, highly service oriented staff, well identified locations and wayfinding and a deeply integrated experience at the big airport. Gaps in any piece of those will risk the franchise. In many ways no different than the EAS operators face when rebid time comes. I like the out of the box thinking.

And no, I'm not in any way affiliate with the bus bid. Although I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

That kind of misses the point of a connection to the National “AIR TRANSPORTATION” Network.

For small cities like Jackson, being connected to the National Network is a big deal, and always has been.

We can rehash the EAS thing again, like has already been done a hundred times on a.net over the years, but the bottom line is that air service is an important economic development tool. Once it is gone, “ it ain’t com in’ back”.

United is also running bus service from Northern Colorado Regional Airport/KFNL to Denver International Airport (approx 60 miles) and is having success with it, which is not surprising given the interstate is a construction nightmare right now. The only downside is its only connected to United with no interline that Im aware of.

BNA offers about 5 times more flights compared to MEM. Any connection should be via BNA.

32andBelow wrote:

The only merit a bus would have is if you could screen at the regional airport and be delivered airside and also have your bags transferred

It has merit where public transportation to the remote airport is good, such that carless people have access. But little, remote airports are seldom in areas where public transport is good. As noted up-thread, I'd just drive to the primary airport. Less hassle. More schedule flexibility. Any airport 'close' enough to a primary airport such that buses are time-competitive shouldn't get EAS subsidies, anyway, IMHO.

Jshank83 wrote:

DOT has a Jan 3 deadline for airlines to put in that they want to pick up service. We should see a list of who put in shortly after.

On Dec 8 DOT told boutique they can’t terminate operations until they pick a new carrier.

On the 10th boutique was like yea.. no we are out.

Update: Boutique is now flying one round-trip per day from MKL to ATL. The service used to be two ATL and one STL each day.

Looking at the Pilot Central Forum one can get a good insight of what is going on at Boutique... Pilots talk of massive pay cuts, very poorly maintained planes that do not sound airworthy ... Flights crews looking for an exit, but stuck in a contract that they signed ... not a good situation for anyone

And then there were two.

Down to Air Choice One and Southern.

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/19/choic ... e-narrows/

Jshank83 wrote:

And then there were two.

Down to Air Choice One and Southern.

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/19/choic ... e-narrows/

just really bad choices. Cape Air would have been best. but hey .what do I know? Southern Airways at least offers SOME connectivity. But their neighbor across the river at JBR went with ACO ,so they might too.

Really wouldn't call them neighbors. 100 miles as the crow flies.

RJNUT wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

And then there were two.

Down to Air Choice One and Southern.

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/19/choic ... e-narrows/

just really bad choices. Cape Air would have been best. but hey .what do I know? Southern Airways at least offers SOME connectivity. But their neighbor across the river at JBR went with ACO ,so they might too.

I think Southern is the better choice but after getting burned they might just go with the airline they know.

Southern apparently is picked. Not sure which routes

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/25/airpo ... y-airline/

Jshank83 wrote:

Southern apparently is picked. Not sure which routes

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/25/airpo ... y-airline/

Well, picked by the locals. Not by who makes the true decision...

crjflyboy wrote:

Looking at the Pilot Central Forum one can get a good insight of what is going on at Boutique... Pilots talk of massive pay cuts, very poorly maintained planes that do not sound airworthy ... Flights crews looking for an exit, but stuck in a contract that they signed ... not a good situation for anyone

WOW, you aren't kidding. It seems like they rival SeaPort and Great Lakes for managerial incompetence.....and we know what happened to both of those airlines.

sprxUSA wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Southern apparently is picked. Not sure which routes

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/25/airpo ... y-airline/

Well, picked by the locals. Not by who makes the true decision...

Glad that the community wants SAE. Although it’s the same aircraft type as ACO, SAE offers the bonus of codeshares and interlines.

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

sprxUSA wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Southern apparently is picked. Not sure which routes

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/25/airpo ... y-airline/

Well, picked by the locals. Not by who makes the true decision...

Glad that the community wants SAE. Although it’s the same aircraft type as ACO, SAE offers the bonus of codeshares and interlines.

SAE uses an FBO in MEM so certain aspects of the interlines get lost but still better than ACO as a selection

We keep preaching Interline, and Cape Air offers it as does Southern.

However look at MWA, Cape Air flies 6 flights. 4 to STL and 2 to BNA.

Guess whose their most common passenger? Southwest.

Interline doesn't mean anything to them. They still have to book it separately and re check their bags.

My dad flies for free because I work for United, he can drive an hour to CGI or PAH, but when he has to fly confirmed, he books MWA-STL on Cape Air and Southwest or to BNA.

Why? Most Non Stops from STL and BNA on Southwest, Free Parking at MWA is a perk, and of course, Free Bags.

Even booking SWA and Cape Air he said he saved over $100 dollars booking it separately versus booking American MWA-STL-PHX.

Interline and Code Share is nice, but apparently doesn't play as big a part for Cape Air when you look at their type of Passenger.

I would hope Southern went for Chicago and ATL (I think that was an option?) Interline to 3 Airlines-AA, UA, DL and Southwest in both stations, ORD and ATL.

Remember Southern and Cape Air and ACO have to park at Terminal 5 anyway where Southwest flies into at ORD.

Alex

atrude777 wrote:

We keep preaching Interline, and Cape Air offers it as does Southern.

However look at MWA, Cape Air flies 6 flights. 4 to STL and 2 to BNA.

Guess whose their most common passenger? Southwest.

Interline doesn't mean anything to them. They still have to book it separately and re check their bags.

My dad flies for free because I work for United, he can drive an hour to CGI or PAH, but when he has to fly confirmed, he books MWA-STL on Cape Air and Southwest or to BNA.

Why? Most Non Stops from STL and BNA on Southwest, Free Parking at MWA is a perk, and of course, Free Bags.

Even booking SWA and Cape Air he said he saved over $100 dollars booking it separately versus booking American MWA-STL-PHX.

Interline and Code Share is nice, but apparently doesn't play as big a part for Cape Air when you look at their type of Passenger.

I would hope Southern went for Chicago and ATL (I think that was an option?) Interline to 3 Airlines-AA, UA, DL and Southwest in both stations, ORD and ATL.

Remember Southern and Cape Air and ACO have to park at Terminal 5 anyway where Southwest flies into at ORD.

Alex

9K parks at T3 at ORD. Gate L11.

maps4ltd wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

We keep preaching Interline, and Cape Air offers it as does Southern.

However look at MWA, Cape Air flies 6 flights. 4 to STL and 2 to BNA.

Guess whose their most common passenger? Southwest.

Interline doesn't mean anything to them. They still have to book it separately and re check their bags.

My dad flies for free because I work for United, he can drive an hour to CGI or PAH, but when he has to fly confirmed, he books MWA-STL on Cape Air and Southwest or to BNA.

Why? Most Non Stops from STL and BNA on Southwest, Free Parking at MWA is a perk, and of course, Free Bags.

Even booking SWA and Cape Air he said he saved over $100 dollars booking it separately versus booking American MWA-STL-PHX.

Interline and Code Share is nice, but apparently doesn't play as big a part for Cape Air when you look at their type of Passenger.

I would hope Southern went for Chicago and ATL (I think that was an option?) Interline to 3 Airlines-AA, UA, DL and Southwest in both stations, ORD and ATL.

Remember Southern and Cape Air and ACO have to park at Terminal 5 anyway where Southwest flies into at ORD.

Alex

9K parks at T3 at ORD. Gate L11.

Sorry, I meant in 2022, later on. They'll be moving to Terminal 5, correct?

Alex

RJNUT wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

sprxUSA wrote:

Well, picked by the locals. Not by who makes the true decision...

Glad that the community wants SAE. Although it’s the same aircraft type as ACO, SAE offers the bonus of codeshares and interlines.

SAE uses an FBO in MEM so certain aspects of the interlines get lost but still better than ACO as a selection

Any news on routes yet? Southern's options for service suck!

ATL, which features in 4 out of 5 options, makes 0 sense since they don't interline with DL.

MEM isn't the best choice either. The AA interline would open up more routes out of STL or BNA. Ditto for the AS interline since they don't serve MEM. UA would make less of a difference. But eh, you could fly to Hot Springs AR!

Options C & D (all ATL) would be the worst, I guess. If they pick that, they might as well have gone for ACO. Of the rest, options A (BNA+MEM) and B (ATL+STL) are about equivalent. Option E (ATL+CHI - ORD, I hope, otherwise it's pointless) looks the most promising, I'd say. But BNA+STL, which would arguably be best, isn't an option!

Metchalus wrote:

That's a new one to me, an airline being asked to leave an airport because they are crap.
Has this happened before?

Southern Airways Express was asked to leave Johnstown, PA several years ago for the same reason.

RJNUT wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

And then there were two.

Down to Air Choice One and Southern.

https://www.wbbjtv.com/2022/01/19/choic ... e-narrows/

just really bad choices. Cape Air would have been best. but hey .what do I know? Southern Airways at least offers SOME connectivity. But their neighbor across the river at JBR went with ACO ,so they might too.

Three a day to St. Louis would have ZERO chance of ever meeting the subsidy cap, especially under current conditions.

The major markets for anywhere in the southeast are going to be Atlanta, Chicago, and Dallas.

A couple notes on the routes.

The MEM/BNA option isn't asking for any subsidy but they list a ticket price of $79, which is the highest and had the lowest projected load. Seems odd they didn't at least ask for some. For $79 I am not sure why you wouldn't just drive to the airports.

The other 4 asked for subsidies.
STL/ATL was the lowest.
ATL only in the middle
CHI/ATL was the highest.
The spread I think was from 2.4 to 2.9 mil.

Jshank83 wrote:

A couple notes on the routes.

The MEM/BNA option isn't asking for any subsidy but they list a ticket price of $79, which is the highest and had the lowest projected load. Seems odd they didn't at least ask for some. For $79 I am not sure why you wouldn't just drive to the airports.

The other 4 asked for subsidies.
STL/ATL was the lowest.
ATL only in the middle
CHI/ATL was the highest.
The spread I think was from 2.4 to 2.9 mil.

ORD-mkl is a long haul for a caravan. Doable in a King Air.

There are a lot of markets in the US that still need EAS, but Jackson, TN is not one of them.

TN has service to/from BNA, MEM, TYS, CHA, and even TRI. Honest question, isn’t that enough?

jeffrey1970 wrote:

Metchalus wrote:

That's a new one to me, an airline being asked to leave an airport because they are crap.
Has this happened before?

Southern Airways Express was asked to leave Johnstown, PA several years ago for the same reason.

... back when the company was having significant issues. I think all EAS carriers go thru that. They seem to be doing well, ever since they bought Mokulele.

DDR wrote:

TN has service to/from BNA, MEM, TYS, CHA, and even TRI. Honest question, isn’t that enough?

Fair enough, but 50 years ago they had 'real airplane' (Martin 404) service to Jackson, Shelbyville/Tullahoma, and Crossville as well, courtesy of the C.A.B. and Southern Airways. Jackson even had a few DC-9 flights along with the Martins.

mga707 wrote:

DDR wrote:

TN has service to/from BNA, MEM, TYS, CHA, and even TRI. Honest question, isn’t that enough?

Fair enough, but 50 years ago they had 'real airplane' (Martin 404) service to Jackson, Shelbyville/Tullahoma, and Crossville as well, courtesy of the C.A.B. and Southern Airways. Jackson even had a few DC-9 flights along with the Martins.

Cookeville apparently now wants commercial pax service. As if.
https://www.newschannel5.com/news/upper-cumberland-regional-airport-officials-consider-offering-commercial-flights

The study will cost $25,000, paid for by grant money.

"It could be a flight to a destination that's a leisure destination such as in Florida or one of the coastal cities or something like that. Or we could be looking at a connecting flight in Atlanta, Chicago, or something to that effect," said Selby. "It's part of what this first phase is to establish where we really need to go and what we really need to do."

The study will conclude at the end of March, after which the public can provide input if the idea takes off. If all goes well, commercial flights may be available in as little as three years.

Who in their right mind would trade an easy 70 mile drive to BNA for infrequent, expensive RJ service?

alo2yyz wrote:

mga707 wrote:

DDR wrote:

TN has service to/from BNA, MEM, TYS, CHA, and even TRI. Honest question, isn’t that enough?

Fair enough, but 50 years ago they had 'real airplane' (Martin 404) service to Jackson, Shelbyville/Tullahoma, and Crossville as well, courtesy of the C.A.B. and Southern Airways. Jackson even had a few DC-9 flights along with the Martins.

Cookeville apparently now wants commercial pax service. As if.
https://www.newschannel5.com/news/upper-cumberland-regional-airport-officials-consider-offering-commercial-flights

The study will cost $25,000, paid for by grant money.

"It could be a flight to a destination that's a leisure destination such as in Florida or one of the coastal cities or something like that. Or we could be looking at a connecting flight in Atlanta, Chicago, or something to that effect," said Selby. "It's part of what this first phase is to establish where we really need to go and what we really need to do."

The study will conclude at the end of March, after which the public can provide input if the idea takes off. If all goes well, commercial flights may be available in as little as three years.

Who in their right mind would trade an easy 70 mile drive to BNA for infrequent, expensive RJ service?

But the choices are not a flight or driving. They are
flight, or a flight and driving. Depending on what "expensive" is, I wouldn't be driving an extra 70 miles, just to take a flight, when I could have the flight without the driving. Especially since it would actually be 140 miles (you need to get back somehow).

Chicago and Atlanta was the choice. Most expensive one. We will see if it goes thru

https://wnws.com/mckellar-sipes-regiona ... s-express/

Aliqiout wrote:

alo2yyz wrote:

mga707 wrote:

Fair enough, but 50 years ago they had 'real airplane' (Martin 404) service to Jackson, Shelbyville/Tullahoma, and Crossville as well, courtesy of the C.A.B. and Southern Airways. Jackson even had a few DC-9 flights along with the Martins.

Cookeville apparently now wants commercial pax service. As if.
https://www.newschannel5.com/news/upper-cumberland-regional-airport-officials-consider-offering-commercial-flights

The study will cost $25,000, paid for by grant money.

"It could be a flight to a destination that's a leisure destination such as in Florida or one of the coastal cities or something like that. Or we could be looking at a connecting flight in Atlanta, Chicago, or something to that effect," said Selby. "It's part of what this first phase is to establish where we really need to go and what we really need to do."

The study will conclude at the end of March, after which the public can provide input if the idea takes off. If all goes well, commercial flights may be available in as little as three years.

Who in their right mind would trade an easy 70 mile drive to BNA for infrequent, expensive RJ service?

But the choices are not a flight or driving. They are
flight, or a flight and driving. Depending on what "expensive" is, I wouldn't be driving an extra 70 miles, just to take a flight, when I could have the flight without the driving. Especially since it would actually be 140 miles (you need to get back somehow).

Well, actually, the choices are probably two more expensive flights versus an easy drive to Nashville and a cheaper nonstop. That's a no brainer for most pepople.

Cubsrule wrote:

Aliqiout wrote:

alo2yyz wrote:

Who in their right mind would trade an easy 70 mile drive to BNA for infrequent, expensive RJ service?

But the choices are not a flight or driving. They are
flight, or a flight and driving. Depending on what "expensive" is, I wouldn't be driving an extra 70 miles, just to take a flight, when I could have the flight without the driving. Especially since it would actually be 140 miles (you need to get back somehow).

Well, actually, the choices are probably two more expensive flights versus an easy drive to Nashville and a cheaper nonstop. That's a no brainer for most pepople.

Clearly you guys haven't experienced Nashville traffic lately. And I've said it before, people in these towns are much more likely to have someone drop them off at the local airport - they are often not comfortable driving in that ridiculous traffic. And if they did drive, they would have to pay to park for the duration of their trip. That added cost is not insignificant either. And finally, people value convenience too. I personally will pay more for a flight out of TYS to avoid driving to BNA or ATL, since I am local, and I imagine I'm not alone. If I were in Jackson or Cookeville, I'd do the same.

dennypayne wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Aliqiout wrote:

But the choices are not a flight or driving. They are
flight, or a flight and driving. Depending on what "expensive" is, I wouldn't be driving an extra 70 miles, just to take a flight, when I could have the flight without the driving. Especially since it would actually be 140 miles (you need to get back somehow).

Well, actually, the choices are probably two more expensive flights versus an easy drive to Nashville and a cheaper nonstop. That's a no brainer for most pepople.

Clearly you guys haven't experienced Nashville traffic lately. And I've said it before, people in these towns are much more likely to have someone drop them off at the local airport - they are often not comfortable driving in that ridiculous traffic. And if they did drive, they would have to pay to park for the duration of their trip. That added cost is not insignificant either. And finally, people value convenience too. I personally will pay more for a flight out of TYS to avoid driving to BNA or ATL, since I am local, and I imagine I'm not alone. If I were in Jackson or Cookeville, I'd do the same.

Nashville traffic isn't fun. But we're talking specifically about the drive from Cookeville to BNA, and it isn't bad (and is in the process of getting better as 40 is widened in Wilson County). Downtown Cookeville to BNA is 75 miles and easily doable in an hour the vast majority of the time.

DDR wrote:

TN has service to/from BNA, MEM, TYS, CHA, and even TRI. Honest question, isn’t that enough?

The idea that Cookeville, 74 miles away from BNA, virtually all of which is toll-free Interstate, needs subsidized air transit, is utterly ridiculous.

People who 'don't like the drive' to BNA need to put on big-boy pants and suck it up. We don't build interstate road and air networks for crowd-phobic rural dwellers.