From the SkyWest earnings call:

Captain imbalance will delay delivery of the final four E175s in the Alaska and Delta contracts (1 Alaska and 3 Delta).

SkyWest has reached agreements with partners to reduce flying hours due to pilot shortage and training issues.

Fourth quarter will be down 13-14% from the third quarter.

2023 block hours will be 20% below 2022.

Future growth will be from higher utilization of aircraft covered under existing contracts.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/455022 ... transcript


I was blown away by this. An airline with 530 planes reducing flying by 20 percent is a huge deal. Leadership made it clear this has nothing to do with demand, just pilots and training.

Higher utilization of aircraft? Isn't it pretty high as it stands now?

Put 'em on Chapter 11 watch. Even if they reached agreements with marketing carriers it's tough to sustain a business on 80% of revenues long term without restructuring, including aircraft orders:

As of December 31, 2021, we have firm purchase commitments for 29 E175 aircraft and spare engines totaling
$0.8 billion. Over the next several years, if we continue to add new aircraft to our fleet, we anticipate using significant
amounts of capital to acquire these aircraft.
There can be no assurance that our operations will generate sufficient cash flow or liquidity to enable us to
obtain the necessary aircraft acquisition financing to replace our current fleet, or to make required debt service payments
related to our existing or anticipated future obligations.

From the 2021 Annual Report: https://materials.proxyvote.com/Approve ... ML?page=27

With regional and major pay scales converging the regional model is going to die.

The majors will get the pilots on the books earlier and they can start using better more efficient planes that are currently scoped out

When your entire business model is based around being an outsourcer who exploits cheap labor and that cheap labor ceases to exist, things like this happen. Hopefully it keeps happening.

EAS cities will feel the brunt of this the most.

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm gonna get lit up for this...
Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

evank516 wrote:

Wondering if more airlines will consider purchasing the A220? Is it really as cost efficient as it was marketed to be?

on an ASM cost, the 220 is much better, however many of the markets SKYWEST flies into can not come close to breaking even using a 220 bird.

87GROUNDED wrote:

EAS cities will feel the brunt of this the most.

I agree ... many will lose service completely

Going the scheduled charter route to circumvent 1500hr rule?

32andBelow wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

I'm gonna disagree. If the city pair doesn't work for a network operator at 2022 labor rates, an independent operator with lower revenue potential but all the same expenses doesn't stand a chance.

That said, I'm sure somebody will try it, either out of desperation or investor naiveté. Perhaps both.

32andBelow wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm gonna get lit up for this...
Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

ScottB wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm gonna get lit up for this...
Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

Yup.

And at the other extreme, the experienced pilots already at the regional level are not gonna sit around while every major airplane is hiring pilots hand over fist. And for those that do not desire to transition to a major because of age, seniority, domicile, or some combination, the cost to retain them has gone up substantially.

The economic model of a regional "airline" that's really just an outsourced staffing agency (with low cost pilots) has been obliterated. Without discount labor, there's no economic justification for most regional airlines to even exist.

airplanedriver6 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

I'm gonna disagree. If the city pair doesn't work for a network operator at 2022 labor rates, an independent operator with lower revenue potential but all the same expenses doesn't stand a chance.

That said, I'm sure somebody will try it, either out of desperation or investor naiveté. Perhaps both.

You might just have to think smaller. In Alaska they have small airlines that pay well and can retain pilots that want to be home every night and make a decent wage. But you will never become huge doing that

The regionals can also pivot to being ground services and maintenance companies mainly which is probably higher margin anyways

WaywardMemphian wrote:

Going the scheduled charter route to circumvent 1500hr rule?

In some or many respects its more to circumvent the Part 121 PIC (Captain) requirements, which requires 1,000 hours at a Part 121 carrier. SkyWest and most regionals now have a Captain problem more than a "pilot problem". Since legacy and LCCs are now hiring pilots from regionals without having to be a Captain at the 121, its going to get worse. FO's are essentially flying for 1-2 years and then just going onward without upgrading.

So the SkyWest Charter world will actually help fix their biggest problem (1,000 hours of 121 experience) in order to upgrade as a Captain.

32andBelow wrote:

airplanedriver6 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

I'm gonna disagree. If the city pair doesn't work for a network operator at 2022 labor rates, an independent operator with lower revenue potential but all the same expenses doesn't stand a chance.

That said, I'm sure somebody will try it, either out of desperation or investor naiveté. Perhaps both.

You might just have to think smaller. In Alaska they have small airlines that pay well and can retain pilots that want to be home every night and make a decent wage. But you will never become huge doing that

I'd suggest that Alaska is unique for many, many reasons, and most of those reasons are not even a consideration in the lower 48.

But yes, I'm sure that somebody, somewhere, will make a go of it with three airplanes, a couple pilots, and a dream. They will be the exception.

airplanedriver6 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

airplanedriver6 wrote:

I'm gonna disagree. If the city pair doesn't work for a network operator at 2022 labor rates, an independent operator with lower revenue potential but all the same expenses doesn't stand a chance.

That said, I'm sure somebody will try it, either out of desperation or investor naiveté. Perhaps both.

You might just have to think smaller. In Alaska they have small airlines that pay well and can retain pilots that want to be home every night and make a decent wage. But you will never become huge doing that

I'd suggest that Alaska is unique for many, many reasons, and most of those reasons are not even a consideration in the lower 48.

But yes, I'm sure that somebody, somewhere, will make a go of it with three airplanes, a couple pilots, and a dream. They will be the exception.

In a way it may be a return to the past for SkyWest and other regionals. Many used to rely on the outstation basing model to keep costs down and inevitably some pilots would end up putting down roots in those smaller cities and decide the lifestyle was worth a smaller paycheck. Could we see a return to that under a prorate model or blend of CPAs and prorate with an efficient turboprop like the ATR 42?

Alias1024 wrote:

airplanedriver6 wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

You might just have to think smaller. In Alaska they have small airlines that pay well and can retain pilots that want to be home every night and make a decent wage. But you will never become huge doing that

I'd suggest that Alaska is unique for many, many reasons, and most of those reasons are not even a consideration in the lower 48.

But yes, I'm sure that somebody, somewhere, will make a go of it with three airplanes, a couple pilots, and a dream. They will be the exception.

In a way it may be a return to the past for SkyWest and other regionals. Many used to rely on the outstation basing model to keep costs down and inevitably some pilots would end up putting down roots in those smaller cities and decide the lifestyle was worth a smaller paycheck. Could we see a return to that under a prorate model or blend of CPAs and prorate with an efficient turboprop like the ATR 42?

I think the model has to change. In a short time the majors are going to be owners of a bunch of 75 seaters and no one to fly them economically. I think we will see the return of the turboprop and proper hub feed. The long thin hub bypassing routes supported by RJs will disappear. Ops at some airports will improve because of them being gone (LGA).

MIflyer12 wrote:

Put 'em on Chapter 11 watch. Even if they reached agreements with marketing carriers it's tough to sustain a business on 80% of revenues long term without restructuring, including aircraft orders:

As of December 31, 2021, we have firm purchase commitments for 29 E175 aircraft and spare engines totaling
$0.8 billion. Over the next several years, if we continue to add new aircraft to our fleet, we anticipate using significant
amounts of capital to acquire these aircraft.
There can be no assurance that our operations will generate sufficient cash flow or liquidity to enable us to
obtain the necessary aircraft acquisition financing to replace our current fleet, or to make required debt service payments
related to our existing or anticipated future obligations.

From the 2021 Annual Report: https://materials.proxyvote.com/Approve ... ML?page=27

They've had this language for years in risk factors. It's pretty basic and in no way indicates they are at risk of bankruptcy.

airlinepeanuts wrote:

Higher utilization of aircraft? Isn't it pretty high as it stands now?

We usually have AS painted 175s parked at PDX for days now as spares.

This was what 2020/21 was shaping up to be when Covid hit. I remember predictions that regionals would grow, scope would get shredded etc on here. Nope, it was bubbling under and only delayed.

"The regional model is dying because regional and mainline wages are converging" and "the regional model is dying because baristas are paid better" can't both be right.

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm gonna get lit up for this...
Could OO find success with branded ops?

I sorta think that's what SkyWest Charters will be.

jbs2886 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Put 'em on Chapter 11 watch. Even if they reached agreements with marketing carriers it's tough to sustain a business on 80% of revenues long term without restructuring, including aircraft orders:

As of December 31, 2021, we have firm purchase commitments for 29 E175 aircraft and spare engines totaling
$0.8 billion. Over the next several years, if we continue to add new aircraft to our fleet, we anticipate using significant
amounts of capital to acquire these aircraft.
There can be no assurance that our operations will generate sufficient cash flow or liquidity to enable us to
obtain the necessary aircraft acquisition financing to replace our current fleet, or to make required debt service payments
related to our existing or anticipated future obligations.

From the 2021 Annual Report: https://materials.proxyvote.com/Approve ... ML?page=27

They've had this language for years in risk factors. It's pretty basic and in no way indicates they are at risk of bankruptcy.

It's clear they don't have pilots to fly current ops, and they say growth is coming from increased utlization. They don't need - and can't afford - $800 million in new planes. Maybe Embraer will allow generous deferrals - and maybe not, in which case Ch 11 allows the order to go bye bye.

SkyWest might see marketing carriers buy up OO debt and then seek to convert it to equity, effectively taking over the carrier. See AA/DL/UA stakes in Republic.

Also from the call:

Demand for their product is strong
New expensive pilot agreement, and currently working with partners to help pay for it.
Half the fleet is paid for.

Chapter 11 is a bit premature, I think.

ScottB wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm gonna get lit up for this...
Could OO find success with branded ops?

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

Yeah - I thought he was describing a Physician. Lousy pay, long hours and a real low quality of life for the first several years.

MLIAA wrote:

ScottB wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

We don’t have enough pilots due to the airlines themselves creating these pay to fly jobs years ago and letting bottom feeders keep people from wanting to become pilots. It will take years to catch up and it’s a good time for the airlines to right size and shift more or everything to one operator.

NLINK wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

ScottB wrote:

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

We don’t have enough pilots due to the airlines themselves creating these pay to fly jobs years ago and letting bottom feeders keep people from wanting to become pilots. It will take years to catch up and it’s a good time for the airlines to right size and shift more or everything to one operator.

Correct - and I am your example. 46 years old, planned to be a pilot, but bailed in my 20s because I couldn't afford to spend a decade on the CRJ-200, moving every other year as the airlines opened and closed bases due to contract changes with the majors. Flew for United as a flight attendant for a while because I wanted to be in the industry and I made more money as a unionized mainline FA than I would have as an RJ first officer. Ended up leaving the industry altogether during the United bankruptcy because I was unwilling to take the paycut.

Now that system is collapsing. Not feeling a bit sorry. Hope they pay the folks well that look after those 175s out in the desert.

At risk flying is what I think is in the most trouble of disappearing. I’m concerned that OO/DL will be dropping TWF, LWS, PIH, CDC, CNY, and EKO from SLC.

MLIAA wrote:

ScottB wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

I think there will be an opening for 50 seat independent ops if the regional model goes way and the majors start cutting cities all over the place

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

Starting pay at 9E is still $52/hr and keep in mind that that number is per flight hour, with hours capped at 1,000 every 12 months. So yes, it's a bit of hyperbole (although not much!) to say that baristas are better-paid, but they also don't have to sit reserve in some high-cost base like NYC or LAX and live out of a suitcase. Plus the training program for a barista costs a bit less.

Yes, the pay rates are going up, and that's going to necessitate a fair bit of shrinking on the regional side just because it's probably more economical to have pilots flying mainline equipment when pay rates for topped-out captains at YV or OO are ~75% of what someone with similar seniority would make flying a narrowbody at AA/AS/DL/B6/WN/UA. Maybe we will finally see the E175-E2 in the U.S., flying as mainline, but probably with 85 to 90 seats.

TW870 wrote:

NLINK wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

We don’t have enough pilots due to the airlines themselves creating these pay to fly jobs years ago and letting bottom feeders keep people from wanting to become pilots. It will take years to catch up and it’s a good time for the airlines to right size and shift more or everything to one operator.

Correct - and I am your example. 46 years old, planned to be a pilot, but bailed in my 20s because I couldn't afford to spend a decade on the CRJ-200, moving every other year as the airlines opened and closed bases due to contract changes with the majors. Flew for United as a flight attendant for a while because I wanted to be in the industry and I made more money as a unionized mainline FA than I would have as an RJ first officer. Ended up leaving the industry altogether during the United bankruptcy because I was unwilling to take the paycut.

Now that system is collapsing. Not feeling a bit sorry. Hope they pay the folks well that look after those 175s out in the desert.

I know dozens of pilots who are in your age group, started at the same time and now knocking down 300k+ with great quality of life after surviving the hard knocks of starting a career—all Gulfstream or Global captains, never did a day of airline reserve in a fleabag commuter pad. Most in the NY area. Lots think senior captains were born senior—a myth.

ScottB wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

ScottB wrote:

There's no opening for 50-seat independent ops if you can't find the pilots to fly the planes at wages that make the service viable. Any carrier operating 50-seat aircraft in scheduled passenger service will encounter the same issues as SkyWest, Mesa, Republic, etc.

All of this is driven by the fact that increased minimum requirements for an ATP have made regional carrier wages unattractive for prospective new workers. There is no "pilot shortage." There is a shortage of people who are willing to invest six figures to get a job that (intro level) pays less than a Starbucks barista at the airport and has really crappy quality of life for the first several years.

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

Starting pay at 9E is still $52/hr and keep in mind that that number is per flight hour, with hours capped at 1,000 every 12 months. So yes, it's a bit of hyperbole (although not much!) to say that baristas are better-paid, but they also don't have to sit reserve in some high-cost base like NYC or LAX and live out of a suitcase. Plus the training program for a barista costs a bit less.

Yes, the pay rates are going up, and that's going to necessitate a fair bit of shrinking on the regional side just because it's probably more economical to have pilots flying mainline equipment when pay rates for topped-out captains at YV or OO are ~75% of what someone with similar seniority would make flying a narrowbody at AA/AS/DL/B6/WN/UA. Maybe we will finally see the E175-E2 in the U.S., flying as mainline, but probably with 85 to 90 seats.

Buddy, I was in the pilot training pipeline during the "lost generation" (after 1500 went into effect but before salaries started increasing) and got out while working on Commercial; the salary was one reason but the final dagger was the 1500 hour rule. Not even $100ish/hr starting salaries at a regional, which many are offering, is bringing me back. I can't be the only one.

Something tells me you could offer new hires on a CR9 $200/hr and ALPA would still crow about it being not enough.

TW870 wrote:

NLINK wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

This isn’t really true anymore. 10 years ago the starting wage for regionals was probably around $20/hr. Today most regionals start around $90/hr and within 2 years, pilots are upgrading and making six figures.

The regionals cannot staff enough pilots to also keep the legacies staffed, everyone is canceling flights. Pay isn’t the problem anymore. We have reached the point of not having enough pilots.

We don’t have enough pilots due to the airlines themselves creating these pay to fly jobs years ago and letting bottom feeders keep people from wanting to become pilots. It will take years to catch up and it’s a good time for the airlines to right size and shift more or everything to one operator.

Correct - and I am your example. 46 years old, planned to be a pilot, but bailed in my 20s because I couldn't afford to spend a decade on the CRJ-200, moving every other year as the airlines opened and closed bases due to contract changes with the majors. Flew for United as a flight attendant for a while because I wanted to be in the industry and I made more money as a unionized mainline FA than I would have as an RJ first officer. Ended up leaving the industry altogether during the United bankruptcy because I was unwilling to take the paycut.

Now that system is collapsing. Not feeling a bit sorry. Hope they pay the folks well that look after those 175s out in the desert.

I was in the same boat. I could not justify spending more than I already had. I ended up moving a different career direction also mostly because the pay and being very unstable. I’m glad I did.

I still have some friends at headquarters and others that are pilots.

I was in my mid-30's when I got my license in 2000. Pay for the regionals was less than half of what I made as a union metalworker; most of the instructors were taking their time building hours as they were making more than at Mesa. Freight dogging some clapped out Beech required 2,500 hours - no thanks!

mesasurf wrote:

At risk flying is what I think is in the most trouble of disappearing. I’m concerned that OO/DL will be dropping TWF, LWS, PIH, CDC, CNY, and EKO from SLC.

LWS and TWF wont drop

airlinepeanuts wrote:

Higher utilization of aircraft? Isn't it pretty high as it stands now?

I'm not sure this quite makes sense. Currently, utilization is down due to a lack of crews necessitating less regional flying than would normally be desired (hence long-sitters in outstations and inefficient trips in most cases). I don't see how you increase utilization of the aircraft without more crews...

alasizon wrote:

airlinepeanuts wrote:

Higher utilization of aircraft? Isn't it pretty high as it stands now?

I'm not sure this quite makes sense. Currently, utilization is down due to a lack of crews necessitating less regional flying than would normally be desired (hence long-sitters in outstations and inefficient trips in most cases). I don't see how you increase utilization of the aircraft without more crews...

They probably aren’t using their crews as efficiently as they could be. Making longer lines on one frame that are legal for 1 crew could help utilization. Switching planes takes time.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Yeah - I thought he was describing a Physician. Lousy pay, long hours and a real low quality of life for the first several years.

Not really an apples to apples comparison. An MD is one of the most singularly useless things in the world without the follow up residency (a handful of people go work for marketing or research firms, but those jobs are few and far between). The first few years for a newly graduated physician are spent in residency, which is paid training. Average salary is starting in the 50/60s though per hour it’s nothing sometimes— however, you’re the world’s best paid lackey with minimal liability for at least three years. The difference is, without your residency you can’t get licensed (much less hired) to practice independently. Once practicing independently, things change considerably.

ScottB wrote:

Yes, the pay rates are going up, and that's going to necessitate a fair bit of shrinking on the regional side just because it's probably more economical to have pilots flying mainline equipment when pay rates for topped-out captains at YV or OO are ~75% of what someone with similar seniority would make flying a narrowbody at AA/AS/DL/B6/WN/UA. Maybe we will finally see the E175-E2 in the U.S., flying as mainline, but probably with 85 to 90 seats.

We can take it to another thread but I don't believe pilot wage $ productivity and RJ per seat-mile fuel efficiency are going to be high enough to put 175E2s at mainline with AA/DL/UA/AS, in part given the other costs of going mailine. IMHO, as E75s and CR9s age out we're going to see 7M7s and 319neos (and some DL A220s) replace RJs at lower frequency -- or routes (& cities) dropped entirely.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

TW870 wrote:

NLINK wrote:

We don’t have enough pilots due to the airlines themselves creating these pay to fly jobs years ago and letting bottom feeders keep people from wanting to become pilots. It will take years to catch up and it’s a good time for the airlines to right size and shift more or everything to one operator.

Correct - and I am your example. 46 years old, planned to be a pilot, but bailed in my 20s because I couldn't afford to spend a decade on the CRJ-200, moving every other year as the airlines opened and closed bases due to contract changes with the majors. Flew for United as a flight attendant for a while because I wanted to be in the industry and I made more money as a unionized mainline FA than I would have as an RJ first officer. Ended up leaving the industry altogether during the United bankruptcy because I was unwilling to take the paycut.

Now that system is collapsing. Not feeling a bit sorry. Hope they pay the folks well that look after those 175s out in the desert.

I know dozens of pilots who are in your age group, started at the same time and now knocking down 300k+ with great quality of life after surviving the hard knocks of starting a career—all Gulfstream or Global captains, never did a day of airline reserve in a fleabag commuter pad. Most in the NY area. Lots think senior captains were born senior—a myth.

Oh I get that. On my career path I would probably be able to hold 767 Captain at Delta in NYC now, or be a relatively senior narrow body captain in NYC. But the issue is that I and thousands of others like me threw in the towel and that is why we have the staffing situation we do. Yes, right now would be great. But tons of my cohort just didn't want to do a decade on the CR2 in expensive cities doing day after day of 5-leg days and 0430 shows for the same pay I was making working the counter in a restaurant. I am more than happy in my current career so I don't mean to be sour grapes. I was just trying to explain the thinking about why some of us left.

TW870 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

TW870 wrote:

Correct - and I am your example. 46 years old, planned to be a pilot, but bailed in my 20s because I couldn't afford to spend a decade on the CRJ-200, moving every other year as the airlines opened and closed bases due to contract changes with the majors. Flew for United as a flight attendant for a while because I wanted to be in the industry and I made more money as a unionized mainline FA than I would have as an RJ first officer. Ended up leaving the industry altogether during the United bankruptcy because I was unwilling to take the paycut.

Now that system is collapsing. Not feeling a bit sorry. Hope they pay the folks well that look after those 175s out in the desert.

I know dozens of pilots who are in your age group, started at the same time and now knocking down 300k+ with great quality of life after surviving the hard knocks of starting a career—all Gulfstream or Global captains, never did a day of airline reserve in a fleabag commuter pad. Most in the NY area. Lots think senior captains were born senior—a myth.

Oh I get that. On my career path I would probably be able to hold 767 Captain at Delta in NYC now, or be a relatively senior narrow body captain in NYC. But the issue is that I and thousands of others like me threw in the towel and that is why we have the staffing situation we do. Yes, right now would be great. But tons of my cohort just didn't want to do a decade on the CR2 in expensive cities doing day after day of 5-leg days and 0430 shows for the same pay I was making working the counter in a restaurant. I am more than happy in my current career so I don't mean to be sour grapes. I was just trying to explain the thinking about why some of us left.

Someone hired this year at DL can hold 767 captain in NYC. There’s captains on it now who are younger than the very jets they command!

The pipeline will straighten out over time. These higher wages will shift to bringing more people in, and not having to spend a decade at a regional vastly changes the game. Get hired at a regional at say 23-25, upgrade in two years into easily six figures, then go to a legacy or major around age 30. That’s a vastly vastly improved career path than it was ten years ago.

It wasn’t much more than 5-7 years ago it was an 8 year upgrade for a CRJ!

Part of an extended market failure. We need for isolated and rural areas to have modern timely affordable transportation available. Those fly-over dimly lighted areas are that way for a reason. Regulations and costs of training and lousy entry work life for pilots. Regulations limiting one pilot operations, the dynamics of ultra efficiency pricing aviation out of all but metropolitan areas. That 1500 hour rule is just one of the absurdities that has resulted in the majority of counties in the US losing population. You don't want to get me started on the other major market failure - medical care. Another poster and I have toyed with the idea of what might be done with aviation. And actually there is a connection between the aviation and medical market failures for rural and isolated communities.

There has to be some percentage of regional flying that would still be profitable even if brought to mainline.

I'd imagine each mainline carrier has a plan for bringing regional flying in-house, and trimming the schedules to only serve city pairs that are profitable at the mainline cost structure.