32andBelow wrote:

These towns would be so dumb to get caught up over frequency and not keeping a 1X jet with a Major airline code

Except in our first month at IPL as Mokulele, we flew more pax to LAX in our tiny Caravans than SkyWest did with 2 Embraer Brasilias as United Express.

Not every market is designed the same. Some need frequency, and some need access.

FlyingElvii wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

Agreeing to triangle routings can also get you more daily flights but many don’t like doing this. 12 seems like a sweet spot.

In the past, tag flights had short ground times at the mid stations.

10 minutes for 19 seaters, with the right engine running, 15 minutes for the 30 seaters, etc.

Now you see these intermediate stops scheduled at 30 minutes, 45, or even longer.

I think that is due to hub congestion and ATC slotting, but a planner could give a better explanation than I can.

This caught my attention as well. OO/UA5045 DVL-JMS-DEN departs DVL 0600, arrives JMS 0702, 82 miles and they schedule 62 minutes for a 23 minute flight. Then you don't depart JMS until 0745, 43 minutes on the ground. Last July this flight was only 40 minutes DVL-JMS then only 30 minutes on the ground at JMS. Appears a lot of extra time is factored in for deicing.

Chuska wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

Agreeing to triangle routings can also get you more daily flights but many don’t like doing this. 12 seems like a sweet spot.

In the past, tag flights had short ground times at the mid stations.

10 minutes for 19 seaters, with the right engine running, 15 minutes for the 30 seaters, etc.

Now you see these intermediate stops scheduled at 30 minutes, 45, or even longer.

I think that is due to hub congestion and ATC slotting, but a planner could give a better explanation than I can.

This caught my attention as well. OO/UA5045 DVL-JMS-DEN departs DVL 0600, arrives JMS 0702, 82 miles and they schedule 62 minutes for a 23 minute flight. Then you don't depart JMS until 0745, 43 minutes on the ground. Last July this flight was only 40 minutes DVL-JMS then only 30 minutes on the ground at JMS. Appears a lot of extra time is factored in for deicing.

Amazing so much ground time -- I can imagine DLV passengers getting pretty antsy to have first boarded sometime around 0530-0545 and only just be taxiing out in JMS at 0745.

Deicing is good speculation on this extended North Dakota ground times during winter, especially if the actual performance at those airports for that flight are crappy. But Skywest has comparably long block times and stops for their EAS tag and round robin flights in general. For example back when Hattiesburg and Meridian were tags and round robins by OO for AA*, here was the morning originator in June 2018

0825 lv PIB (69 mile hop)
0905 ar MEI
0936 lv MEI (485 mile hop)
1137 ar DFW

Not only was the 31 minute ground time long but the 2:01 block for MEI-DFW was highly padded. It's similar to what AA* was scheduling at that time for BHM-DFW which is 100 miles farther. The long ground times in the evening were similar. The evening flight ORD-MEI-PIB had a 30 minute MEI stop on what was a dump-and-run situation. And it wasn't just Meridian. Hays and Salina had combined flights DEN/ORD and stops were 30+ minutes including a 33-minute late night dump-and-run DEN-HYS-SLN route. In June, so not deicing season. The Quincy stop on the evening ORD-UIN-CGI trip was scheduled at 48 minutes with the summer 2018 schedule.

2018 lv ORD (222 mile hop)
2130 ar UIN
2218 lv UIN (207 mile hop)
2315 ar CGI

So why the long stops? They happen both directions so that doesn't make sense for traffic flow reasons at the hub destination airport. These are from summer so it's not deicing. Best I can figure it might be related to crew work rules and scheduling or related to on-time performance stats and delay reasons. For example if the ORD operation was sluggish due to ATC / Weather the delayed ORD-UIN flight would have that delay reason. However the UIN-CGI tag would be "late arriving inbound aircraft" as the delay reason for that segment. The root cause was of course ORD but if the UIN-CGI delay was charged to late arriving aircraft, extending the UIN ground time could reduce the number of times UIN-CGI ran late. I've never been able to get anyone to confirm the reasons for Skywest's less-than-aggressive scheduling for EAS tags and round robins, but it has been a consistent pattern. And these are the best reasons I've heard for why it is this way. (The generous block times may also have been to help on-time performance in these non-competitive routes, but they also could have been to lower fuel burn with a slower cruise)

For this reason I have doubts that widespread tags and round-robin routings are a solution Skywest will use. The scare commodity is pilots, and the padded block times and long turn times burn that resource.

Several people think back to the old-style milk runs, so let's look at one. Skywest is temporarily paring back North Platte (LBF) and Scottsbluff (BFF) to 10x/week nonstops to DEN, each from 12x. The old Frontier river run including a 737 on the morning LBF-BFF-DEN routing. Why not have Skywest temporarily run LBF-BFF-DEN and keep it at the 12x/week? Well...it doesn't same much if anything.

Normal Schedule -- 48 total segments
12 nonstop round trips each market per week
24 LBF-DEN and DEN-LBF trips per week
24 BFF-DEN and DEN-BFF trips per week

River-Run Style Combined Schedule -- 48 total segments
12 Denver round trips each market per week
24 LBF-BFF and BFF-LBF trips per week
24 BFF-DEN and DEN-BFF trips per week

a round-robin routing for the mid-day flight would save a 5 segments per week -- twice daily on weekdays and once daily on weekends for 12 total Denver flights.

River-Run Style Combined Schedule with Round Robin -- 43 total segments
12 Denver round trips each market per week.
7 segments on each weekday LBF-BFF-DEN, DEN-BFF-LBF-DEN, DEN-BFF-LBF for a total of 35
4 segments on each weekend day LBF-BFF-DEN and DEN-BFF-LBF for a total of 8

Skywest Reduced Schedule -- 40 total segments
10 Denver round trips each market per week
20 LBF-DEN and DEN-LBF trips per week
20 BFF-DEN and DEN-BFF trips per week


The other thing is that passenger demand drops with those tag flights, especially in the way Skywest's current operation drags them out.
Here's a sample 737 on LBF-BFF-DEN from the early 80's (note that North Platte is Central Time while BFF and DEN are Mountain)

0722 lv LBF
0700 ar BFF
0718 lv BFF
0754 ar DEN

Skywest's morning BFF-DEN is blocked at an hour, and given that LBF-BFF is 10 miles farther than that (160 miles) we can assume about an hour block time for LBF-BFF. So if it was the same 0722 departure from LBF we'd be looking at something like this:

0722 lv LBF
0722 ar BFF
0752 lv BFF
0852 ar DEN

Almost an hour longer than what Frontier used to do. And that burns of up a lot of pilot time, the scarce resource which is causing all this trouble.

I suspect the reason Skywest has gone away from tags and round robins in EAS markets in the past few years is that it doesn't save much crew time, aircraft time, aircraft cycles and fuel versus simply operating each market with nonstops to the hub. DVL and JMS are so comparably low-volume and unusually distant (600-ish miles) from Denver that they are an exception. But for the most part I'd expect to see reduced frequencies like Skywest has been doing than a widespread return to tags and round robins.

Yeah, Skywest originally proposed 1 x RT non-stop daily for both DVL and JMS but that didn't meet the minimum frequency requirements for EAS. I believe they were forecasting something like a 15% load factor.

Skywest's counter proposal was to do the current tag and round-robin arrangement for the same subsidy amount in order to meet the minimum frequency requirements. So that's how DVL and JMS ended up with their current route and schedule configuration.

32andBelow wrote:

You can’t run subsidize triangle or multi stop flights with a modification to the EAS contract. The DOT won’t pay for the added leg unless it’s bid that way

I imagine that's true for EAS routes that are mid-contract, but in the case of the JMS and DVL, it played out as I described.

Here's Skywest's original proposal for 7x weekly non-stops: https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-1997-2785-0168/attachment_1.pdf
The DOT replies that it doesn't meet the minimum service requirements: https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-1997-2785-0184/attachment_1.pdf
Skywest replies that they can do 11 one-stop trips for the same subsidy: https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-1997-2785-0186/attachment_1.pdf
DOT selects Skywest based on their email statement that they can do the one-stop flights for the same subsidy: https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-1997-2785-0187/attachment_1.pdf

Going forward, I think the EAS program will need to be more flexible in supporting alternate (including lower frequency) service patterns. The carriers probably also need some flexibility to adjust service patterns mid-contract based on other factors (crew shortages, for example) if the program is to survive in any meaningful way. I imagine that would require statutory changes, but I'm not certain.

I hear and understand a lot of the criticisms of EAS, but speaking personally, EAS service makes a major difference in how often I can visit my aging parents. I hope the program can evolve with changing times, but this is only going to get harder especially as the pool of 50 seat and smaller aircraft continues to shrink.

DOT has ruled that SkyWest cannot reduce the service to 10 Weekly to the Selected Communities.

In order to reduce it, the community themselves must request the reduction in service. Only then, will DOT allow it, community by community.

Docket: DOT-OST-1999-6589-0145

While we appreciate very much the difficult situation SkyWest faces,
Congress has specified that our discretion to consider a reduction in basic EAS at individual EAS
eligible communities is triggered not by a request from an air carrier providing EAS, but by a
request from the EAS eligible community. Thus, for the Department to consider Sky West's
request, the Department must receive a request from each affected community consistent with 49
U.S.C. § 41732(c). We encourage you to discuss your request with the communities as soon as
possible. Communities that are willing to accept such reductions should then contact the
Department in writing to request a waiver under 49 U.S.C. § 41732(c).

Interesting to see if the communities themselves will chime in and help SkyWest out.

Alex

atrude777 wrote:

DOT has ruled that SkyWest cannot reduce the service to 10 Weekly to the Selected Communities.

In order to reduce it, the community themselves must request the reduction in service. Only then, will DOT allow it, community by community.

Docket: DOT-OST-1999-6589-0145

While we appreciate very much the difficult situation SkyWest faces,
Congress has specified that our discretion to consider a reduction in basic EAS at individual EAS
eligible communities is triggered not by a request from an air carrier providing EAS, but by a
request from the EAS eligible community. Thus, for the Department to consider Sky West's
request, the Department must receive a request from each affected community consistent with 49
U.S.C. § 41732(c). We encourage you to discuss your request with the communities as soon as
possible. Communities that are willing to accept such reductions should then contact the
Department in writing to request a waiver under 49 U.S.C. § 41732(c).

Interesting to see if the communities themselves will chime in and help SkyWest out.

Alex

I'm sure they'll find volunteers, if only out of fear.

Several of these communities are up for renewal this year. It'll be interesting to see how it all pans out. Does OO bid again? Do they propose frequency reductions? How does the competition respond? A lot of OO's routes don't see competitive bidding, maybe that will change. How badly has the relationship with some/all of these communities been damaged?

BangersAndMash wrote:

I'm sure they'll find volunteers, if only out of fear.

Fear of what? Not being cheeky I just don't see what's in it for the community to compromise here. DOT can hold OO to their contract until a new bidder emerges. It's in the interest of the community not to let OO off the hook. Once they agree to less service, future bids only have to match that reduced service level, no?

bval wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

I'm sure they'll find volunteers, if only out of fear.

Fear of what? Not being cheeky I just don't see what's in it for the community to compromise here. DOT can hold OO to their contract until a new bidder emerges. It's in the interest of the community not to let OO off the hook. Once they agree to less service, future bids only have to match that reduced service level, no?

Fear of getting dropped down the line. I'm sure none of these communities are delirious about loosing frequencies. After all, that's not what they signed up for. But do you swallow your pride, if there's another 12, 18, or 24 months on that contract, hoping it's temporary? Or do you stand your ground, bearing in mind OO might decide you're not worth the trouble at the next renewal, or sooner? If that's your position, you might want to plan for a future with another carrier, just in case. Is that worth the upheaval though, especially in the current environment? What do you do if OO drops and you and nobody bids? None of these hypotheses are that far-fetched.

BangersAndMash wrote:

Fear of getting dropped down the line. I'm sure none of these communities are delirious about loosing frequencies. After all, that's not what they signed up for. But do you swallow your pride, if there's another 12, 18, or 24 months on that contract, hoping it's temporary? Or do you stand your ground, bearing in mind OO might decide you're not worth the trouble at the next renewal, or sooner? If that's your position, you might want to plan for a future with another carrier, just in case. Is that worth the upheaval though, especially in the current environment? What do you do if OO drops and you and nobody bids? None of these hypotheses are that far-fetched.

I just think the scenario where nobody bids is unlikely. SkyWest pushed other operators out of these markets, and some of them will want back in. EAS subsidy can be an easy way to make a guaranteed buck, especially if you're the sole bidder.

bval wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Fear of getting dropped down the line. I'm sure none of these communities are delirious about loosing frequencies. After all, that's not what they signed up for. But do you swallow your pride, if there's another 12, 18, or 24 months on that contract, hoping it's temporary? Or do you stand your ground, bearing in mind OO might decide you're not worth the trouble at the next renewal, or sooner? If that's your position, you might want to plan for a future with another carrier, just in case. Is that worth the upheaval though, especially in the current environment? What do you do if OO drops and you and nobody bids? None of these hypotheses are that far-fetched.

I just think the scenario where nobody bids is unlikely. SkyWest pushed other operators out of these markets, and some of them will want back in. EAS subsidy can be an easy way to make a guaranteed buck, especially if you're the sole bidder.

True. But even if somebody bids, are you happy with Cessnas? Those are questions worth answering ahead rather than when you're faced with that situation. Sure, you can be within your rights and stick to your guns, but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences. Each market is different and the dynamics won't be the same across the board, but for some communities, I'm sure it'll weigh on their mind and they may go for the frequency cuts as a lesser evil.

atrude777 wrote:

DOT has ruled that SkyWest cannot reduce the service to 10 Weekly to the Selected Communities.

In order to reduce it, the community themselves must request the reduction in service. Only then, will DOT allow it, community by community.

Docket: DOT-OST-1999-6589-0145

While we appreciate very much the difficult situation SkyWest faces,
Congress has specified that our discretion to consider a reduction in basic EAS at individual EAS
eligible communities is triggered not by a request from an air carrier providing EAS, but by a
request from the EAS eligible community. Thus, for the Department to consider Sky West's
request, the Department must receive a request from each affected community consistent with 49
U.S.C. § 41732(c). We encourage you to discuss your request with the communities as soon as
possible. Communities that are willing to accept such reductions should then contact the
Department in writing to request a waiver under 49 U.S.C. § 41732(c).

Interesting to see if the communities themselves will chime in and help SkyWest out.

Alex

Quoting Myself here....

Ever since DOT said No, I assumed SkyWest would revert back to their Published schedule of 12 Weekly.

Using CGI, still showing 10 Weekly...

Does DOT saying No mean SkyWest has to go back to 12 Weekly? Hoping DOT won't notice...?

Alex

atrude777 wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

DOT has ruled that SkyWest cannot reduce the service to 10 Weekly to the Selected Communities.

In order to reduce it, the community themselves must request the reduction in service. Only then, will DOT allow it, community by community.

Docket: DOT-OST-1999-6589-0145

While we appreciate very much the difficult situation SkyWest faces,
Congress has specified that our discretion to consider a reduction in basic EAS at individual EAS
eligible communities is triggered not by a request from an air carrier providing EAS, but by a
request from the EAS eligible community. Thus, for the Department to consider Sky West's
request, the Department must receive a request from each affected community consistent with 49
U.S.C. § 41732(c). We encourage you to discuss your request with the communities as soon as
possible. Communities that are willing to accept such reductions should then contact the
Department in writing to request a waiver under 49 U.S.C. § 41732(c).

Interesting to see if the communities themselves will chime in and help SkyWest out.

Alex

Quoting Myself here....

Ever since DOT said No, I assumed SkyWest would revert back to their Published schedule of 12 Weekly.

Using CGI, still showing 10 Weekly...

Does DOT saying No mean SkyWest has to go back to 12 Weekly? Hoping DOT won't notice...?

Alex

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

BangersAndMash wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

DOT has ruled that SkyWest cannot reduce the service to 10 Weekly to the Selected Communities.

In order to reduce it, the community themselves must request the reduction in service. Only then, will DOT allow it, community by community.

Docket: DOT-OST-1999-6589-0145

While we appreciate very much the difficult situation SkyWest faces,
Congress has specified that our discretion to consider a reduction in basic EAS at individual EAS
eligible communities is triggered not by a request from an air carrier providing EAS, but by a
request from the EAS eligible community. Thus, for the Department to consider Sky West's
request, the Department must receive a request from each affected community consistent with 49
U.S.C. § 41732(c). We encourage you to discuss your request with the communities as soon as
possible. Communities that are willing to accept such reductions should then contact the
Department in writing to request a waiver under 49 U.S.C. § 41732(c).

Interesting to see if the communities themselves will chime in and help SkyWest out.

Alex

Quoting Myself here....

Ever since DOT said No, I assumed SkyWest would revert back to their Published schedule of 12 Weekly.

Using CGI, still showing 10 Weekly...

Does DOT saying No mean SkyWest has to go back to 12 Weekly? Hoping DOT won't notice...?

Alex

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

CGI has not filed with DOT using the regulation.gov website.

CGI, and TBN show 10 weekly.

DEC appears to be at 12 weekly...?

I am using March 6th Week as the week I am checking...

Anyone else able to determine if OO returned to 12 weekly for the mentioned cities above?

Alex

BangersAndMash wrote:

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

Nah, fine them, per flight not operated. Running out of cash will very quickly focus their attention.

MIflyer12 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

Nah, fine them, per flight not operated. Running out of cash will very quickly focus their attention.

Aren't they punished already? They only get paid for flights they actually operate so anything that doesn't fly gets deducted from the subsidy total. 2 flights out of 12 means a 17% hit every day. Clearly things are not well at OO.

atrude777 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

Quoting Myself here....

Ever since DOT said No, I assumed SkyWest would revert back to their Published schedule of 12 Weekly.

Using CGI, still showing 10 Weekly...

Does DOT saying No mean SkyWest has to go back to 12 Weekly? Hoping DOT won't notice...?

Alex

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

CGI has not filed with DOT using the regulation.gov website.

CGI, and TBN show 10 weekly.

DEC appears to be at 12 weekly...?

I am using March 6th Week as the week I am checking...

Anyone else able to determine if OO returned to 12 weekly for the mentioned cities above?

Alex

No filing doesn't necessarily mean the communities are not on board. DOT can be a bit behind with the filing. Or a filing could be forthcoming. DOT probably would let it slide if that was the case.

atrude777 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

Quoting Myself here....

Ever since DOT said No, I assumed SkyWest would revert back to their Published schedule of 12 Weekly.

Using CGI, still showing 10 Weekly...

Does DOT saying No mean SkyWest has to go back to 12 Weekly? Hoping DOT won't notice...?

Alex

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

CGI has not filed with DOT using the regulation.gov website.

CGI, and TBN show 10 weekly.

DEC appears to be at 12 weekly...?

I am using March 6th Week as the week I am checking...

Anyone else able to determine if OO returned to 12 weekly for the mentioned cities above?

Alex

ALS is at 10 for March then goes back to 12 for April and beyond.

BangersAndMash wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

Seems pretty clear they must return to agreed schedule as per the contract from that wording. This is not AEAS! Maybe CGI said yes?

If not, DOT could remind OO that the problem might easily be solved by them not landing another EAS contract ... ever.

Nah, fine them, per flight not operated. Running out of cash will very quickly focus their attention.

Aren't they punished already? They only get paid for flights they actually operate so anything that doesn't fly gets deducted from the subsidy total. 2 flights out of 12 means a 17% hit every day. Clearly things are not well at OO.

OO isn't punished if the DOT passively accepts the flight reduction decision by OO. OO gets less of a subsidy to cover overhead -- but it's already chosen that.

MIflyer12 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Nah, fine them, per flight not operated. Running out of cash will very quickly focus their attention.

Aren't they punished already? They only get paid for flights they actually operate so anything that doesn't fly gets deducted from the subsidy total. 2 flights out of 12 means a 17% hit every day. Clearly things are not well at OO.

OO isn't punished if the DOT passively accepts the flight reduction decision by OO. OO gets less of a subsidy to cover overhead -- but it's already chosen that.

DOT did NOT accept the flight reduction, they denied it.

So that's why this discussion is going on, does this mean SkyWest MUST go back to the 12 Weekly or do they get penalized or what?

Alex

SkyVoice wrote:

The folks at Muskegon (MKG) are going to scream, but they're only an hour's drive from Grand Rapids. Still, they might be able to salvage some kind of service. Cape Air (9K) is now handling service between Manistee County Blacker Field (MBL) and Chicago, so maybe the folks at MKG can work out something with 9K.

While South Bend Indiana (SBN) well to the SE of Muskegan which has a Skywest flight to Chicago at 6:30 and 8:00am on a CRJ200 and is fully capable of enplaning 85-95 passengers on a United 737-800 keeps these flights because Skywest has a maintenance base at SBN and does overnight maintenance on any and all models of their CRJ's from United, Delta and American. Hence small communities surrounding SBN like Kalamazoo and Muskegan loose service because of pilot shortages.

HYS Airport in Hays, Kansas has filed with DOT to SUPPORT SkyWest in reducing the frequencies down to 10 Weekly.

I believe this is the first airport to file in support? Will others follow?

Docket: DOT-OST-1998-3497-0106

"Hays Regional Airport is requesting that our EAS carrier, SkyWest Airlines, be relieved from the
frequency requirements set forth in U.S.C. 41732(b)(1)(A) regarding the scheduling of flights
effective March 4, 2022, through February 2023."

As far as I can tell, no other city has filed, and SkyWest is still flying 10 Weekly in those cities like CGI, TBN, DEC etc

Alex

atrude777 wrote:

HYS Airport in Hays, Kansas has filed with DOT to SUPPORT SkyWest in reducing the frequencies down to 10 Weekly.

I believe this is the first airport to file in support? Will others follow?

Docket: DOT-OST-1998-3497-0106

"Hays Regional Airport is requesting that our EAS carrier, SkyWest Airlines, be relieved from the
frequency requirements set forth in U.S.C. 41732(b)(1)(A) regarding the scheduling of flights
effective March 4, 2022, through February 2023."

As far as I can tell, no other city has filed, and SkyWest is still flying 10 Weekly in those cities like CGI, TBN, DEC etc

Alex

they are smart and it will help in the rebidding process to retain SkyWest. Why put OO's feet to the fire in an extraordinarily difficult period for the industry and the unstable nature of EAS as it is structured now. The next step down seems to be 9 seaters which kills markets

RJNUT wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

HYS Airport in Hays, Kansas has filed with DOT to SUPPORT SkyWest in reducing the frequencies down to 10 Weekly.

I believe this is the first airport to file in support? Will others follow?

Docket: DOT-OST-1998-3497-0106

"Hays Regional Airport is requesting that our EAS carrier, SkyWest Airlines, be relieved from the
frequency requirements set forth in U.S.C. 41732(b)(1)(A) regarding the scheduling of flights
effective March 4, 2022, through February 2023."

As far as I can tell, no other city has filed, and SkyWest is still flying 10 Weekly in those cities like CGI, TBN, DEC etc

Alex

they are smart and it will help in the rebidding process to retain SkyWest. Why put OO's feet to the fire in an extraordinarily difficult period for the industry and the unstable nature of EAS as it is structured now. The next step down seems to be 9 seaters which kills markets

Skywest should have it’s feet held to the fire. They saw this coming and was still bidding on other EAS routes.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-e ... olidation/

I suppose this is the answer to SkyWest's response to DOT saying they must sustain 12 weekly flights.

Cut the non stops, and turn them into Triangle or Tag Flights.

It's a bummer but if this is what it takes to hold the 12 flights weekly, there is the answer.

Alex

atrude777 wrote:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-eas-consolidation/

I suppose this is the answer to SkyWest's response to DOT saying they must sustain 12 weekly flights.

Cut the non stops, and turn them into Triangle or Tag Flights.

It's a bummer but if this is what it takes to hold the 12 flights weekly, there is the answer.

Alex

They're actually not allowed to do that either without DOT okaying it.

I know a lot of communities think the sun shines out of OO's nether regions, but frankly what they're doing at the moment is nothing short of outrageous. They should at the very least be stripped of some funding for they are doing here. This isn't what was agreed, and they are simply running roughshod of the rules. I hope some of these cities see the light of day and give them the boot.

BangersAndMash wrote:

atrude777 wrote:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-eas-consolidation/

I suppose this is the answer to SkyWest's response to DOT saying they must sustain 12 weekly flights.

Cut the non stops, and turn them into Triangle or Tag Flights.

It's a bummer but if this is what it takes to hold the 12 flights weekly, there is the answer.

Alex

They're actually not allowed to do that either without DOT okaying it.

I know a lot of communities think the sun shines out of OO's nether regions, but frankly what they're doing at the moment is nothing short of outrageous. They should at the very least be stripped of some funding for they are doing here. This isn't what was agreed, and they are simply running roughshod of the rules. I hope some of these cities see the light of day and give them the boot.

Agreed, no full time pay if you don't work full time but in the EAS case, SkyWest has been a shining sun. If a city gives them the boot, where are they going to go? No other carrier with a major code-share is willing to take on new EAS routes. These EAS cities are extremely fortunate to have the service they have (ask FMN, Great Lakes left them high and dry) and need to be willing to work with the times or everyone will lose.

DEC and DVL are 2. Not sure on the others. Might be a bunch of the ones from points guy yesterday that are turning into tag/triangle routes.

This has to be basically all their EAS routes.

DEC
https://www.wandtv.com/news/skywest-to- ... eadb8.html

DVL
https://kfgo.com/2022/03/10/535091/

I can easily see Skywest being forced to continue services. There is just no replacement services available, because Skywest decimated the other EAS carriers by jumping into all of these markets for cash flow after March 2020.

I consider myself to be pretty knowledgeable of airport codes, but had no idea what DVL was ).

Since these are EAS locations, United will have to serve the markets until a replacement airline comes in. I have no idea if triangle routes are allowed for EAS service.

Does anyone have a list of these cities?

kbmiflyer wrote:

I consider myself to be pretty knowledgeable of airport codes, but had no idea what DVL was ).

Since these are EAS locations, United will have to serve the markets until a replacement airline comes in. I have no idea if triangle routes are allowed for EAS service.

I almost just typed it out instead of the code

FlyingElvii wrote:

I can easily see Skywest being forced to continue services. There is just no replacement services available, because Skywest decimated the other EAS carriers by jumping into all of these markets for cash flow after March 2020.

Probably will save Air Choice Ones life. They are down to just one contract. Now they can bid on all the midwest ones coming open and I am not sure Cape/Southern/others have enough capacity to bid them all.

FlyingElvii wrote:

Does anyone have a list of these cities?

Here's TPG article OP was talking about, I think some or maybe all of these routes will be cut or multi stop. https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-eas-consolidation/

masonh2479 wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Does anyone have a list of these cities?

Here's TPG article OP was talking about, I think some or maybe all of these routes will be cut or multi stop. https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-eas-consolidation/

Im guessing a lot of these will be included in the cuts

Another one

Meridian, MS
https://www.wtok.com/2022/03/10/skywest ... -meridian/

Jshank83 wrote:

Another one

Meridian, MS
https://www.wtok.com/2022/03/10/skywest ... -meridian/

Did Hattiesburg/Laurel also go?

SkyWest operates 38 EAS cities on behalf of UA, United operates two on their own (COD and PQI). This ending of 29 cities means they (UA/SkyWest) will be only left with 9 EAS cities (assuming PBG and OGS aren’t part of the 29 as they were previously announced).

I wonder why they aren’t cutting any of the EAS cities under the DL brand, there are 15 of them.

Jshank83 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Does anyone have a list of these cities?

Here's TPG article OP was talking about, I think some or maybe all of these routes will be cut or multi stop. https://thepointsguy.com/news/skywest-eas-consolidation/

Im guessing a lot of these will be included in the cuts

I can see Contour bidding for a couple of these, but not all of them. The pilot shortage is hitting every small carrier hard.

Just guessing, but MEI/PIB and PAH look like good possibilities for them. CKB/SHD to CLT could work as well, these are the kind of markets they have been successful in. I think it would depend more on crew availability, than anything else.

Mason City/Ft. Dodge should have been bid as a tag in the first place, IMO.

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

SkyWest operates 38 EAS cities on behalf of UA, United operates two on their own (COD and PQI). This ending of 29 cities means they (UA/SkyWest) will be only left with 9 EAS cities (assuming PBG and OGS aren’t part of the 29 as they were previously announced).

I wonder why they aren’t cutting any of the EAS cities under the DL brand, there are 15 of them.

PQI will be gone 5 minutes after Susan Collins leaves the Transportation Committee.

OO will be forced to serve these until they find a replacement - and right now, I’m not sure who can replace them. Denver Air Connection, Cape Air, and Southern Airways Express seem to be the obvious 3 candidates, but it’s going to take time to sort it all out, and who knows if they can even staff the planes right now.

Jamestown is confirmed here in addition to Devils Lake
https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/n ... ke-airport

Hattiesburg confirmed along with Meridian
https://www.wdam.com/2022/03/10/skywest ... l-airport/

SkyWest intends to formally file the 29 closures with the Feds tomorrow (Fri Mar11), but obviously they have been contacting at least some of the affected airports in advance, hence the press release. Unsure if we will get a full list of the 29 today, or maybe have to wait until tomorrow.

Well with high oil and flight reductions, perhaps that will off set pilot shortage here soon....

sprxUSA wrote:

Well with high oil and flight reductions, perhaps that will off set pilot shortage here soon....

For guys with less than atp hours maybe. Guys with atp+ are still a rarity for the majors and especially regionals. A lot of pilots retired early due to Covid plus the training and time it takes pilots to reach 1500 is either not worth it or too expensive for many.

Looking forward to all the budget hawk Congressional Reps putting out press releasing mentioning how they will strive to find a solution to continue service in these important communities.
Edit: Already happened "Senator Hoeven says his office will be petitioning the federal Department of Transportation to ensure continuing air service to Devils Lake and Jamestown without any disruptions"

CGI
https://www.kfvs12.com/2022/03/10/skywe ... girardeau/

I remember when Mesaba ran the route as MEM-GLH-PIB. Those two cities changed hands every decade, From Mesaba to Silver, Seaport, Boutique, and Skywest. Who will be next or will be there a next at all.