As a means to work around the pilot shortage, Skywest has opted to create a new Part-135 public air charter subsidiary that will operate using CRJ200s equipped with 30-seats.

As a Part-135 operator, the company would be able to hire pilots who have 500 hours, versus 1,500 required at 121 operators.

Skywest hopes to begin flights in October launching with 3-4 aircraft and ramping up to a fleet of 18 CRJ200s serving 25 cities by April 2023.


DOT Application for certification:
https://www.regulations.gov/document/DO ... -0071-0001

news story
https://airlineweekly.com/2022/06/skywe ... w-carrier/

WOW!! Talk about out-of-the-box thinking! Setting up a farm team to feed the farm team. I'm not sure if the economics are going to work with 30 seats, even with EAS money, but it's a clever win-win work around.

Lol... And everyone was throwing a fit about Republic trying to lower the R-ATP minimums to 750 hours for their academy students.

Wonder what the same crowd will say about this? Lowers the bar even further in my opinion. Now you can have the same exact CFI fly the same exact regional jet with 500 hours versus a minimum of 1,000 at SkyWest. If they're (they as in the Colgan families, politicians, Sully, etc) really concerned about "safety," then this should obviously be declined.

I thought the problem at SkyWest and other regionals was the lack of captains? The regionals are losing captains to the majors and LCC/ULCCs at a rapid pace.

Perhaps this will be a 2-tier deal where captains in their 135 ops will need fewer hours and will use this EAS division to build up time quickly so they can be directly moved into the left seats of their 121 ops once they reach SkyWest's current requirements?

LAXintl wrote:

CRJ200s equipped with 30-seats.

What are we going to call this variant? The CRJ-330? LOL

FLALEFTY wrote:

I thought the problem at SkyWest and other regionals was the lack of captains? The regionals are losing captains to the majors and LCC/ULCCs at a rapid pace.

Perhaps this will be a 2-tier deal where captains in their 135 ops will need fewer hours and will use this EAS division to build up time quickly so they can be directly moved into the left seats of their 121 ops once they reach SkyWest's current requirements?

135 CRJ would still require an ATP in this case, but age 65 doesn't apply. Maybe Skywest thinks they can attract enough retired guys to sit in the left seat...

Might we see a sudden interest in the 328JET and ERJ-135 again?

usflyer msp wrote:

Might we see a sudden interest in the 328JET and ERJ-135 again?

No. Part of the value in this that the pilots will already be trained on the crj when they get to 1500 hours.

Also I see a subfleet of 3-4 old aircraft potentially spread around the county as a reliability challenge to say the least

strfyr51 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

Might we see a sudden interest in the 328JET and ERJ-135 again?

No. Part of the value in this that the pilots will already be trained on the crj when they get to 1500 hours.

Also I see a subfleet of 3-4 old aircraft potentially spread around the county as a reliability challenge to say the least

I could see AMR and UAL doing the same thing even if UAL only did it on the west Coast and AA in the Southwest. It would be a "Damn Hot" training feeder and Minor Leage franchise. I'll bet they got the idea from Alaska/Horizon franchise. Part 135 to 121 on the same airplane? A Capital Idea!!

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

32andBelow wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

No. Part of the value in this that the pilots will already be trained on the crj when they get to 1500 hours.

Also I see a subfleet of 3-4 old aircraft potentially spread around the county as a reliability challenge to say the least

I could see AMR and UAL doing the same thing even if UAL only did it on the west Coast and AA in the Southwest. It would be a "Damn Hot" training feeder and Minor Leage franchise. I'll bet they got the idea from Alaska/Horizon franchise. Part 135 to 121 on the same airplane? A Capital Idea!!

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

It’s not loophole, it’s written into the FARs. It’s not about logic, it’s about risk exposure—30 or fewer people the headlines are not there; the FAA is off the hook. Put Big League Airlines name in the headline with 50 passengers, they care.

Lots of mountainous airports in Europe are the same way. 19 passengers or fewer—no or little training requirements; propose flying an A320 into the airport, lots of requirements.

Italianflyer wrote:

WOW!! Talk about out-of-the-box thinking! Setting up a farm team to feed the farm team. I'm not sure if the economics are going to work with 30 seats, even with EAS money, but it's a clever win-win work around.

Not for the FO who will make no money, and who will have to pay for their traing, this will 100% be play to fly. This will not be a win for the pilots at the reagnals and magoris where a new race to the bottom will begin. This will not be be a win for the passengers who book a flight not knowing the airline is useing a loophole skirt saftey regaulchions. I hope the FAA doses not alow this. This also shows exacly why we need unions.

32andBelow wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

No. Part of the value in this that the pilots will already be trained on the crj when they get to 1500 hours.

Also I see a subfleet of 3-4 old aircraft potentially spread around the county as a reliability challenge to say the least

I could see AMR and UAL doing the same thing even if UAL only did it on the west Coast and AA in the Southwest. It would be a "Damn Hot" training feeder and Minor Leage franchise. I'll bet they got the idea from Alaska/Horizon franchise. Part 135 to 121 on the same airplane? A Capital Idea!!

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

This wouldn't be the first time that an airline changes the seating arrangement of an aircraft to move from 121 to 135. Great Lakes tried this before the ship sunk, with the 1900D.

DiamondFlyer wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

I could see AMR and UAL doing the same thing even if UAL only did it on the west Coast and AA in the Southwest. It would be a "Damn Hot" training feeder and Minor Leage franchise. I'll bet they got the idea from Alaska/Horizon franchise. Part 135 to 121 on the same airplane? A Capital Idea!!

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

This wouldn't be the first time that an airline changes the seating arrangement of an aircraft to move from 121 to 135. Great Lakes tried this before the ship sunk, with the 1900D.

My theory is that if every major airline started doing this the faa would start taking notice.

And I doubt it would be sustainable as pay to fly. There’s too many small box haulers and real 135s you can fly for instead.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

I could see AMR and UAL doing the same thing even if UAL only did it on the west Coast and AA in the Southwest. It would be a "Damn Hot" training feeder and Minor Leage franchise. I'll bet they got the idea from Alaska/Horizon franchise. Part 135 to 121 on the same airplane? A Capital Idea!!

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

It’s not loophole, it’s written into the FARs. It’s not about logic, it’s about risk exposure—30 or fewer people the headlines are not there; the FAA is off the hook. Put Big League Airlines name in the headline with 50 passengers, they care.

Lots of mountainous airports in Europe are the same way. 19 passengers or fewer—no or little training requirements; propose flying an A320 into the airport, lots of requirements.

When the FFA wrhote the FARs they 100% diid not intend for crj's or any turbine much larger than a pt6 to be opreted under, 135. So I wold call it a loop hoole it is 100% agenst the spirit of the regulation.

The whole thing is monkey business

SkyWest isn’t leading here, this is the same loophole that JSX, Contour, and Key Lime use. Unless the FAA puts an end to it, this is going to be the replacement for 50 seat flying that isn’t strong enough for large RJs.

heretothere wrote:

SkyWest isn’t leading here, this is the same loophole that JSX, Contour, and Key Lime use. Unless the FAA puts an end to it, this is going to be the replacement for 50 seat flying that isn’t strong enough for large RJs.

It’s going to be when the side is the plane says delta or United that they may catch on. It’s already unclear to many travelers who is actually operating their flight

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

It is unknown if the major airlines will be willing to co-brand with the proposed SkyWest 135 ops, so this might put them on the same footing as another non-affiliated airline such as Key Lime Air. While they could be subsidized by EAS fees, will that be enough to make this venture profitable? And Mesa is another regional airline starving for pilots, will they be looking at a similar 135 operation, too?

4engines4short wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

A bet the faa will not like this if every airline starts doing it. It’s a clear loophole in the refs being exploited. Either deny this or lower the pilot mins. There’s no logical reason why this is safe for a rural city in Kansas and not for anywhere else

Also this will only help with FOs. You will still need enough captains to fly all the flights.

It’s not loophole, it’s written into the FARs. It’s not about logic, it’s about risk exposure—30 or fewer people the headlines are not there; the FAA is off the hook. Put Big League Airlines name in the headline with 50 passengers, they care.

Lots of mountainous airports in Europe are the same way. 19 passengers or fewer—no or little training requirements; propose flying an A320 into the airport, lots of requirements.

When the FFA wrhote the FARs they 100% diid not intend for crj's or any turbine much larger than a pt6 to be opreted under, 135. So I wold call it a loop hoole it is 100% agenst the spirit of the regulation.

Jets have been flown under 135 for donkey’s years. JSX and others for years now, quite successfully. The wrote a regulation, then, operators comply. The FAA had no intention, one way or the other, under 135.

Chapter 11 planning.

heretothere wrote:

SkyWest isn’t leading here, this is the same loophole that JSX, Contour, and Key Lime use. Unless the FAA puts an end to it, this is going to be the replacement for 50 seat flying that isn’t strong enough for large RJs.

They could try to run as many of these as possible in the house livery jets.

4engines4short wrote:

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

32andBelow wrote:

4engines4short wrote:

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

Colgan pilots hired with far fewer than 2,000 hours and captain who had several failures and “pay to fly” training.

no UA codeshare with this SkyWest project, just interline

KCaviator wrote:

Lol... And everyone was throwing a fit about Republic trying to lower the R-ATP minimums to 750 hours for their academy students.

Wonder what the same crowd will say about this? Lowers the bar even further in my opinion. Now you can have the same exact CFI fly the same exact regional jet with 500 hours versus a minimum of 1,000 at SkyWest. If they're (they as in the Colgan families, politicians, Sully, etc) really concerned about "safety," then this should obviously be declined.

Internal memo said the charter side will be held to the same safety standard as the 121 side..

RJNUT wrote:

no UA codeshare with this SkyWest project, just interline

If you buy it on the UA website how is a random passenger going to know the difference

Is SkyWest even gonna spin up their own res system?

32andBelow wrote:

RJNUT wrote:

no UA codeshare with this SkyWest project, just interline

If you buy it on the UA website how is a random passenger going to know the difference

Is SkyWest even gonna spin up their own res system?

i imagine they would have to have their own system. but selling on UA.com won't be a problem. they already sell non-codeshare flights on partners like Denver Air Connection, Southern Airways Express,etc.

Italianflyer wrote:

WOW!! Talk about out-of-the-box thinking! Setting up a farm team to feed the farm team. I'm not sure if the economics are going to work with 30 seats, even with EAS money, but it's a clever win-win work around.

I mean, Great Lakes did this years ago. Turned out well for them, as I recall…

Contour and JSX are flying 30 seat ERJ 145s to operate under 135 rules. It’s how service to small airports is being supported with the pilot shortages. A 135 subsidiary of skywest is probably a safer option for small airports than flying an even smaller airline in Cessna 208s.

I'm going to get flamed BIG Time for this, but here goes: The number and severity of accidents on the US's freeways has gone up significantly over the past few years, due to higher speed limits, distracted driving, and a reluctance on the part of law enforcement to enforce the higher speed limits.

If I had a choice between flying from CGI to ORD on a 30 seat Skywest CRJ with 500 hour pilots, or driving from CGI to the nearest airport that has scheduled air service, I'd choose flying because I trust the safety of a 500 hour pilot a lot more than I trust the safety of truck drivers who are watching porn instead of watching out for other vehicles on the road.

30 seat CR2s? We'll see how long this last.

I really have to wonder why SkyWest doesn't try this with Dash-8-200s if they can find those with decent time left or with life extensions carried out. Those are naturally 36-37 seat planes.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I really have to wonder why SkyWest doesn't try this with Dash-8-200s if they can find those with decent time left or with life extensions carried out. Those are naturally 36-37 seat planes.

It’s a new type.. more training, parts, etc. CRJs are a known commodity for them, likely amortized and probably not money losers even with only 30 seats on EAS routes. The low time FO’s would also be trained and typed for their 121 operation without adding another training event.

jbmitt wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I really have to wonder why SkyWest doesn't try this with Dash-8-200s if they can find those with decent time left or with life extensions carried out. Those are naturally 36-37 seat planes.

It’s a new type.. more training, parts, etc. CRJs are a known commodity for them, likely amortized and probably not money losers even with only 30 seats on EAS routes. The low time FO’s would also be trained and typed for their 121 operation without adding another training event.

SkyWest would be more likely to re-acquire Brasilias over Dash-8s since they used to operate those.

WA707atMSP wrote:

I'm going to get flamed BIG Time for this, but here goes: The number and severity of accidents on the US's freeways has gone up significantly over the past few years, due to higher speed limits, distracted driving, and a reluctance on the part of law enforcement to enforce the higher speed limits.

If I had a choice between flying from CGI to ORD on a 30 seat Skywest CRJ with 500 hour pilots, or driving from CGI to the nearest airport that has scheduled air service, I'd choose flying because I trust the safety of a 500 hour pilot a lot more than I trust the safety of truck drivers who are watching porn instead of watching out for other vehicles on the road.

I agree with you. But they should just lower the FO hiring law and not allow this crazy loophole

It’s going to be CRJs because the captains will probably fly both tickets and then FOs will Slide Over immediately to the 121 side when they qualify

Probably doesn't make any sense but just brainstorming here. Any chance we could see airlines pick up used Challenger 601/604s for this type of service? Afterall, they're essentially short CRJ-200s that can seat, looks like, max 19 passengers. Would they be able to operate with no flight attendant?

32andBelow wrote:

WA707atMSP wrote:

I'm going to get flamed BIG Time for this, but here goes: The number and severity of accidents on the US's freeways has gone up significantly over the past few years, due to higher speed limits, distracted driving, and a reluctance on the part of law enforcement to enforce the higher speed limits.

If I had a choice between flying from CGI to ORD on a 30 seat Skywest CRJ with 500 hour pilots, or driving from CGI to the nearest airport that has scheduled air service, I'd choose flying because I trust the safety of a 500 hour pilot a lot more than I trust the safety of truck drivers who are watching porn instead of watching out for other vehicles on the road.

I agree with you. But they should just lower the FO hiring law and not allow this crazy loophole

It’s going to be CRJs because the captains will probably fly both tickets and then FOs will Slide Over immediately to the 121 side when they qualify

Could we see captains who hit age 65 maintaining their employment and flying solely the 135 operation?

This is an exemption. Laws are laws. If the FAA doesn't approve, a few small cities must lose service. The issue is no economically viable way, other than living in the parents' basement, for 1500 hours.

I suspect the ATP requirement for the co-pilots will be relaxed. A political decision will have a political solution. I'm not saying zero regs, but 1500 was arbitrary.

lightsaber wrote:

This is an exemption. Laws are laws. If the FAA doesn't approve, a few small cities must lose service. The issue is no economically viable way, other than living in the parents' basement, for 1500 hours.

I suspect the ATP requirement for the co-pilots will be relaxed. A political decision will have a political solution. I'm not saying zero regs, but 1500 was arbitrary.

Just follow the European model. They don’t have a bunch of crashes

fwiw, Key Lime Air operates as a *scheduled* Part 121 carrier. They have both the approvals for FAA Part 135 Scheduled with the 9 seat Metroliners, and the rest operate under Part 121.

32andBelow wrote:

4engines4short wrote:

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

Marvin Renslow, the captain of 3407 had 3,379 total hours, over 1000 PIC. FO Rebecca Shaw had 2,244 hours of total time. The hours of experience was NOT the issue in 3407. FAR117 remains an arbitrary and capricious kneejerk response to a horrible crash and it absolutely needs to be re-evaluated. More serious discussions of training and accruing qualitative hours vs quantitative hours needs to still legitimately happen.

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

4engines4short wrote:

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

Marvin Renslow, the captain of 3407 had 3,379 total hours, over 1000 PIC. FO Rebecca Shaw had 2,244 hours of total time. The hours of experience was NOT the issue in 3407. FAR117 remains an arbitrary and capricious kneejerk response to a horrible crash and it absolutely needs to be re-evaluated. More serious discussions of training and accruing qualitative hours vs quantitative hours needs to still legitimately happen.

Precisely. There are plenty of pilots at 1500 hours who should not be in the cockpit of a jet at all and vice versa, there are plenty of pilots at 500-1000 hours who are excellent aviators and are more than qualified to do so. Forcing someone to sit and provide mediocre instruction or even worse, simply putt around the sky in their own plane for 1500 hours doesn’t necessarily mean someone is suddenly going to be any good at flying.

There has to be some way to evaluate or train that skill set fairly, but I’m not sure our friends in government will ever figure out how. One could easily argue the 1500 rule actually has made things less safe - all it takes is a pulse and 1500 hours for a job at a regional airline at this point, regardless of any eye sores in your flying background

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

4engines4short wrote:

I imagine we will be hearing from the colgon famailys soon, theay have stayed active in defending the 1500 hower rule, and for that i am thankfull.

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

Marvin Renslow, the captain of 3407 had 3,379 total hours, over 1000 PIC. FO Rebecca Shaw had 2,244 hours of total time. The hours of experience was NOT the issue in 3407. FAR117 remains an arbitrary and capricious kneejerk response to a horrible crash and it absolutely needs to be re-evaluated. More serious discussions of training and accruing qualitative hours vs quantitative hours needs to still legitimately happen.

The law wasn’t written because the Colgan crew wasn’t qualified. It was written to put more value on the pilot supply to increase pay and living conditions. The crew had been working all day and sleeping in airports because they couldn’t afford to live where they were based.

Since the law went into effect, Pilot wages, quality of life, and even airline safety have dramatically improved, all as a result in stricter qualifications being placed on entry-level commuter flying.

usxguy wrote:

fwiw, Key Lime Air operates as a *scheduled* Part 121 carrier. They have both the approvals for FAA Part 135 Scheduled with the 9 seat Metroliners, and the rest operate under Part 121.

Interesting, so all the DoJet flying is Part 121 now?

MLIAA wrote:

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

The colgan pilots who each had 2000+ hours.

The rule needs to be reviewed and all these people skirting around it proves why.

These 135 jets will be flying into the busiest airports in the country and they either have the ability or they don’t

Marvin Renslow, the captain of 3407 had 3,379 total hours, over 1000 PIC. FO Rebecca Shaw had 2,244 hours of total time. The hours of experience was NOT the issue in 3407. FAR117 remains an arbitrary and capricious kneejerk response to a horrible crash and it absolutely needs to be re-evaluated. More serious discussions of training and accruing qualitative hours vs quantitative hours needs to still legitimately happen.

The law wasn’t written because the Colgan crew wasn’t qualified. It was written to put more value on the pilot supply to increase pay and living conditions. The crew had been working all day and sleeping in airports because they couldn’t afford to live where they were based.

Since the law went into effect, Pilot wages, quality of life, and even airline safety have dramatically improved, all as a result in stricter qualifications being placed on entry-level commuter flying.

The rest part about the law is fine. The 1500 hour law just made an artificial crisis in airline staffing. Paying your way to an airline job is an impossible feat for most of the population

If pilots are flying airline transport, they should be airline transport certificates, simple. It’s not a 1500 hour, it’s an ATP rule.

Renslow had much less than 800 hours when hired and numerous checkride busts.

I think it sounds great actually! I doubt the subsidiarity will be profitable, but who knows? I wonder why Skywest didn't adopt the Comair Flight Academy? Or make a program similar? Maybe that is what they are going for?