MUST HAVE HIT A NERVE...

Based on the number of views of the post I placed here on Saturday morning, guessing I hit a nerve somewhere. Without a doubt, it has received the most attention of any other post other than a couple that were more personal in nature.

If you have never had the opportunity to put a piece of work into the public domain that you know will result in blowback, it should be a bucket list item. The paper we put out there two weeks ago was one where even a Washington DC weatherperson could comfortably forecast that wind speeds would increase significantly. Based on certain responses you might receive; I promise you will not know whether to laugh or cry.

Even #ALPA is meeting with pilots that fly for fee for departure carriers today. So, there must be something afoot.

For those of you suggesting the paper is advocating for a reduction in the number of airports with commercial air service - read again.

For those of you suggesting the paper is about doing away with the EAS program in its entirety - read again.

As was said in the paper, just because we are talking about an issue - a significant issue - does not mean we are advocating for the likely end result. Those who just need to say yes to clients and involved stakeholders should stop shooting at it and start thinking about how you would make life better for an airport that might lose its commercial air service.

Since United's announcement last week where it cut regional partner service in 17 markets - there are a significant number of cuts to EAS markets appearing in the May 2022 schedules. Thinking there are more to come.

I really do like being the messenger that gets shot as it has happened a number of times to me. The tea leaves are not that hard to read or quantify for that matter.

THE PREMISE IS SIMPLE

The world we live in is a zero-sum game with 2019 levels of service being the baseline. Enough pilots + the right sized aircraft = sustainable commercial air service. We don't have enough pilots. The right sized airplane is going away. Wage and oil economics do not work.

Therefore, if it is zero sum and 1 variable in the equation is less than before and the fact that there are no immediate fixes to the second variable in the equation - then small community air service would naturally be smaller. Not because of a lack of want. Just the math.

Therefore, in my view, if air service is to be the best it can be, and the equation above cannot be solved for - then what are the alternatives? One that we offered was to consolidate the infrastructure. Another might be to rethink the broken EAS program. Less EAS would result in more pilots being available.

Both were discussed in the paper along with a myriad of things that should be considered if your job was to say something other than yes, of course today's system will last forever.

For those who would like to read the paper or would like to read it again, it is attached below.

#swelbar