U.S. "Essential Air Service" Subsidies

fazeman

A brewing topic in aviation, government and public circles has been the government subsidized program known as Essential Air Service.

Established in 1978 under the Airline Deregulation Act, Essential Air Service was to ensure that small communities would continue to receive air service on the basis that they retained a link to the national air transportation system. These towns were eligible if they were already served by airlines prior to deregulation and had to be at least 70 miles from a major airport. This program was designed to last for only ten years. I guess the ten year time frame was to allow for people to adjust to the possibility of life without air service and for new airlines to pick up the slack under deregulation.

But, in 1987, Congress passed the Airport and Airway Safety and Capacity Expansion Act to ensure that these communities remained strong. In November, 2007 there were 102 towns in the lower 48 states that were subsidized at the annual tune of $110 million dollars. A drop in the bucket for the government? Yes. But, it proves that the government has been unable to grasp the continual changes in the free market. Some officials love this program because it serves their community.

With a national average of only three passengers per flight on the 19 seat Beech-1900 turboprop, escalating maintenance and fuel costs along with more stringent safety standards, I have to wonder whether these government officials and lobbyists will press for higher subsidies. The Bush administration wants to cut the program to $50 million while Congress wants to increase fiscal funding to $117 million.

I agree with some experts about the continued subsidies for Alaska and a few areas in the lower 48 states But, the rest should be eliminated.

One passenger deplanes from a flight between Denver and Pueblo. Nice for the passenger, bad for the tax payer.

What's your take on this matter?

gospodin

Just another example of "pork-barrel" politics. Our government literally throws away money to an estimated amount of $15 billion annually, not counting things like this "war" we're supporting. How do they figure this "Essential Air Service" benefits the people? This is just a convenience to a handful of passengers. We would be better served by increasing rail service and subsidizing mass transit programs.

fazeman

Steve,

Like you, I was thinking "pork-barrel" politics all the way. And I totally agree with you on increased rail service and continued subsidization of mass transit programs.

I am very willing to ride the rail if we had one in my city. Norfolk has already broken ground on the first leg (7.5 miles) of the Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) light rail system. But representatives from a few surrounding cities like Virginia Beach remain uncommitted because of their self serving and jealous ways. Norfolk has alway been the catalyst for change in the Hampton Roads area.

Attached Thumbnails

 

CcrlR737pilot

Depends on where and if there are alternaives. If Amtrak could be used there or another rail service then no EAS. I can't see how some airlines can use the Cessna 208 Grand Caravan for less than 5 people. What about other countries that use the Grand Caravan and other small aircraft for short haul.

Air Taxi could be another better alternative but we don't know if that will work than the EAS.

Prestwick Pioneer

Wouldnt routes liek these be better served by PC12s and things like that? Fewer engines fewer seats etc. I think in the context of Alaska as you previously mentioned, The Scottish Highlands and Islands, The Irish Aran Islands, places like Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Columbia etc where places are a damn sight more inaccesible then subsidised air services should form a part. There are probably a few more a/c types that could do the route better than that Be1900D. Its just not worth it for 1 passenger though, is it? Dont they have anything that could be airfreighted out of Pueblo to fill the hold and drive the route towards break-even. Is there a road to this community, or is it cut off and needs an air service?

Prestwick Pioneer

Maybe the services could be taken over by DayJet with Eclipses or a similar type?

Garuda747400

subsidised air travel, lucky bast____- lucky if some communities in scotland can even catch a local bus service

gospodin

Quote: Originally Posted by Garuda747400 subsidised air travel, lucky bast____- lucky if some communities in scotland can even catch a local bus service

Heck, I thought you Scots just hiked up your kilts, got out your bagpipes and walking staffs and walked everywhere. That's how Braveheart did it...

fazeman

Quote: Originally Posted by CcrlR737pilot Depends on where and if there are alternaives. If Amtrak could be used there or another rail service then no EAS. I can't see how some airlines can use the Cessna 208 Grand Caravan for less than 5 people. What about other countries that use the Grand Caravan and other small aircraft for short haul. Air Taxi could be another better alternative but we don't know if that will work than the EAS.

As you know, Amtrak has had its own set of problems in attracting more ridership. Ongoing hurdles continue to trip them up like the lack of "passenger only" tracks, funding, labor, etc.

Even though Amtrak's passenger traffic has increased by 6% to 25 million over the previous year, they will continue to depend on subsidies until their problems are settled.

And funding can be tough to receive. In 2003, former Amtrak president, David Gunn was questioned by Senator John McCain before a congressional hearing. McCain, a leading Amtrak critic, made a point that he wanted to eliminate all Amtrak subsidies. Gunn replied by asking the Senator if he would support the elimination of funding for Essential Air Service in his state of Arizona. McCain couldn't even reply to that.

Quote: Originally Posted by Prestwick Pioneer Wouldnt routes liek these be better served by PC12s and things like that? Fewer engines fewer seats etc. I think in the context of Alaska as you previously mentioned, The Scottish Highlands and Islands, The Irish Aran Islands, places like Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Columbia etc where places are a damn sight more inaccesible then subsidised air services should form a part. There are probably a few more a/c types that could do the route better than that Be1900D. Its just not worth it for 1 passenger though, is it? Dont they have anything that could be airfreighted out of Pueblo to fill the hold and drive the route towards break-even. Is there a road to this community, or is it cut off and needs an air service?

I know next to nothing about the airlines that fly the Essential Air routes. One would think that these routes could generate passengers to fill at least half of those 19 seats. As far as airfreight goes, maybe the airlines are satisfied with the subsidies alone.

CcrlR737pilot

Quote: Originally Posted by Prestwick Pioneer Maybe the services could be taken over by DayJet with Eclipses or a similar type?

That might work, but the costs associated with one would work?

Prestwick Pioneer

Im sure 30 or so years ago, this kind of service could have been done by an "entrepreneur" and a Beech 18 or a Beaver or Otter, but these days with everything so heavily regulated, there aint much money going to be made, but if I was in Government, I would want to see more for my peoples tax dollars. As an enthusiast, I would prefer to see a Beech 18!!!!

Prestwick Pioneer

Quote: Originally Posted by CcrlR737pilot That might work, but the costs associated with one would work?

I wasnt talking about one, I was talking about a Nationwide service, franchised and run properly. Costs could be kept down with one fleet type, operator, spares sources, crew qualifications, fuel costs, economics of scale etc. You could get a job flying one!!

gospodin

Quote: Originally Posted by Prestwick Pioneer I wasnt talking about one, I was talking about a Nationwide service, franchised and run properly. Costs could be kept down with one fleet type, operator, spares sources, crew qualifications, fuel costs, economics of scale etc. You could get a job flying one!!

Logistically a nightmare. If England ran a service like that, it would be possible and might even be cost effective. Trying a national program, even a franchised one, on a country as large as the US with a large population would be asking for problems. It could be done, but it would be a definite money pit, and fiscal abuse would be bad. No, I don't think government has any place in private industry, and flying businessmen from their remote homes shouldn't be subsidized. Let 'em rent a plane on their own, or drive.

fazeman

Quote: Originally Posted by Prestwick Pioneer Im sure 30 or so years ago, this kind of service could have been done by an "entrepreneur" and a Beech 18 or a Beaver or Otter, but these days with everything so heavily regulated, there aint much money going to be made, but if I was in Government, I would want to see more for my peoples tax dollars. As an enthusiast, I would prefer to see a Beech 18!!!!

The operational costs and safety regulations associated with operating an aircraft of more than ten seats is much greater than one of ten seats or less. With the dismal load factors on EAS routes, costs and regulations will make or brake a carrier operating the Beech 1900. Two carriers who operated this aircraft have gone by the wayside for these two reasons: RegionsAir due to safety factors and most recently, Big Sky because of a 3% load factor on their service in Montana.

On a brighter note, two EAS carriers, Cape Air and Pacific Wings (under the brand name, New Mexico Airlines) are using the nine seat Cessna 402C aircraft. Hopefully, the lower operating costs and less stringent safety standards associated with this aircraft will keep these two airlines flying.

A glimmer of hope: The Cessna 402C:

Attached Thumbnails

 

Horizon CRJ700

So thats what with all of the great lakes beech 1900s that I always see whenever I fly to DEN, ABQ, PHX. I always wondered because It seemed that In NM, all the routes had been covered. Apparently not, as I saw a B1900 in ABQ over spring break. Its not that far to drive from Santa Fe to ABQ, would much rather do that than fly in a noisy prop. Ah, pork barrel politics, reminds me of the bridge out to some remote island in Alaska which only had like 50 ppl on it.

fazeman

Quote: Originally Posted by Horizon CRJ700 So thats what with all of the great lakes beech 1900s that I always see whenever I fly to DEN, ABQ, PHX. I always wondered because It seemed that In NM, all the routes had been covered. Apparently not, as I saw a B1900 in ABQ over spring break. Its not that far to drive from Santa Fe to ABQ, would much rather do that than fly in a noisy prop. Ah, pork barrel politics, reminds me of the bridge out to some remote island in Alaska which only had like 50 ppl on it.

Thanks for sharing your Beech 1900 sightings. In New Mexico, four out of five towns under EAS are in the southern part of the state. They all have flight service to ABQ.

One of those towns is Alamogordo. I was stationed near there at Holloman AFB in 1982/83. Occasionally, I would make package deliveries to the small airport but never paid much attention to the prop aircraft and never new EAS existed.