posted
In many sparsely populated parts of the West, Amtrak alone provides regional public intercity transportation. Examples include Northern Montana, to and from Albuquerque, West Texas between San Antonio and El Paso, and Western Colorado and Eastern Utah.
Larger population centers like Boise, Pocatello, Billings, the Southern Montana Cities, Cheyenne, Amarillo, Flagstaff, Rapid City, Grand Forks, Minot, Abilene, Wichita Falls, Sioux Falls, etc. have enjoyed scheduled air service through the hubs in Denver, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, and Dallas-Ft. Worth.
However, the transportation infrastructure and dollar collapse is about to change things.
The New York Times reports in
"American cancels 1,000 flights in new sign of trouble"
"Major carriers like Northwest Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines have been grounding older, fuel-guzzling planes.
"The planes most vulnerable to higher fuel prices, however, may be regional jets that seat 50 or fewer passengers. Most are operated by regional airlines under contract to major carriers. And the major carriers are looking for ways to rid themselves of some of these money-losing arrangements.
"Mike Boyd, a consultant, expects the North American fleet of regional jets to begin plunging this year from 1,675 to 1,042 by 2013. That would reduce service to many cities.
"American said in November that it wanted to sell its American Eagle unit, which operates about 200 of the smaller, less efficient jets.
"Continental Airlines scaled back, by 69 regional jets, the flying it pays Expressjet to perform. Trying to fly those planes under it own name, Expressjet lost $70.2 million last year compared with a profit of $92.6 million in 2006. Even with low ticket prices, it was only able to sell 56 percent of the seats on those planes.
Most of the population centers in the West that have enjoyed scheduled air service depend largely if not entirely upon such aircraft. Between lines defined by Seattle and Los Angeles, and Minneapolis, Kansas City, and Ft. Worth, fewer than a dozen locations have the traffic to support baby 737 and AirBus planes. Places like Boise, Billings, Grand Forks, Amarillo, Rapid City, Casper, Trinidad, etc. could see discount air fares disappear completely with only a few flights a day. A place like Pocatello or Pierre could go down to morning and afternoon flights to Salt Lake City.
Instead of a few areas along Amtrak transcontinental routes relying on Amtrak for regional intercity transportation, large areas of the West could find Amtrak the only way out of town.
For Northern Montana, Albuquerque, and Western Colorado, Amtrak may be fairly good as is. For other areas, it is not so good. At Grand Forks, Spokane, Wichita, Kingman, and Hastings, it is not so good. The train goes through in the middle of the night.
For Southern Montana, Cheyenne, Amarillo, Rapid City, Pierre, Boise, Pocatello, etc. there is no Amtrak. People in vast areas of the West could find themselves with little or no public transportation at all.
Very soon, Amtrak could find itself relied upon by millions of people as a near exclusive provider of regional intercity public transportation.
Recognition of the responsibility of the central government for supporting transportation for residents of the interior goes back to long before Abraham Lincoln and his support of the Union Pacific.
Rail, not air, is the economic mode of regional public intercity transportation in this area.
Meanwhile, understanding of what is happening and planning for it remains zero at both Amtrak and NARP Headquarters, though understanding well above zero in parts of the NARP board and rail riders in this territory.
Amtrak in the West needs more trains in existing routes for coverage in reasonable times and restoration of old routes for areas not now served.
As a rail rider advocacy group, the time has come for NARP to call for such Amtrak expansion in the West.
Greg Member # 66
posted
I think what's happening with the regional jets is that when fuel costs get high enough, they are no longer economically viable - not unlike gas turbine powered trains.
Even if air service to these smaller cities becomes less frequent, more expensive, and less comfortable (return to turbo props instead of regional jets?), it will still be much faster than most rail alternatives.
If fuel becomes sufficiently expensive, then the time/cost trade-offs would shift toward rail.
PullmanCo Member # 1138
posted
GAS TURBINE POWERED TRAINS????
HUH???
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Union Pacific withdraw the last of her GE gas turbine locomotives (the 8500HP 1-30 class) in FEBRUARY 1970???
Diesels have ruled the western roads since the 60s. Even GN and MILW eventually took their catenary down for diesel.
I know of no locomotive builder in the US who is going to try and repeat what UP did. Reliability of a turbine at surface level is not especially good. This is due to accelerated wear and tear caused by grit and dust prevalent in the atmosphere (in other words, dust storms) near the surface.
The political question is whether or not Congress will appropriate funds to Amtrak for service expansion. Even after they do, it may be up to two years before Amtrak can react to a change in conditions (the last I checked, there isn't a single passenger car builder in the US capable of 10 cars a month). If you believe they should, it's time to be an advocate:
So I doubt the airlines will completely abandon the routes, just drop the larger more costly jets in favor of smaller more economical turboprops, like Greg mentions.
I personally hate them and they scare the hell out of me. But look for more turboprops at your local western regional airport in the near future.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
Another piece of "the sky is falling" reportage. If and when the sky really does fall, it will most likely be from something that the news media misses completely.
amtraxmaniac Member # 2251
posted
Chief: not necessarily. Many markets that previously have had regional jet service and recently lost it, have NOT seen it replaced with turboprops. BFL for instance; we've lost half of our Delta Express (Skywest) flights and Continental has pulled out completely. USAirways Express has decreased frequency over the last year as well. To my knowledge ALL these carriers fly turboprops (not sure about Continental), yet we've seen NONE of them. American pulled out many years ago. They were flying an MD 88 (how ironic considering the curent situation with the MD 80's) to DFW and we NEVER say a turbo prop in it's place.
Keep in mind that the turbo prop's are operated by the same contract carriers as the regional jets are. If the major airlines are cutting back or completely cutting ties with these commuter carriers...that means the turbo props along with the regional jets go bye-bye.
Greg Member # 66
posted
To PullmanCo, the comparison of regional jets and gas turbine powered trains was only in regard to economics based on fuel costs, not on actual use in the west. Just based on terrain issues alone, that type of train would be a poor choice for the west.
As for the Bakersfield air service, one has to wonder how many seats the market can support for air service in Bakersfield at current prices. Based on the airline response (reduced capacity), it may not just be an issue with the operating costs of the regional jets.
Is the future in Bakersfield one in which you need a rail connection to Sacramento or the Bay Area or a bus connection to Los Angeles to access air service unless you want to pay a steep premium for the limited air connections that remain?
What we may be seeing in the airline industry is a period of reduced service to the least economically viable routes. Fuel costs have pushed airline operating expenses sharply higher. If ticket prices can't be raised high enough to cover those increased costs, something has to give.
amtraxmaniac Member # 2251
posted
Greg: BINGO! That's been the situation up and down the whole San Joaquin Valley-hense the popularity of its corridor train. I've said it once, I'll say it again: TRAINS ARE VITAL TO CITIES WHO CANNOT SUPPORT AN AIRLINE MARKET! Why can't Amtrak opponents understand that? So what do we do with cities like Boise, Amarillo, Cheyenne, Tulsa....all moderately sized cities with no rail service? Well, with the exception of maybe Tulsa and Amarillo which are PROBABLY served by Southwest Airlines...what choices do they have? But its the BIG cities and BIG states taht have reasonable air service. These BIG cities and BIG states yield BIG political voices in D.C. Do you think Senator So and So from California gives a CRAP about train service in Podunk?
PullmanCo Member # 1138
posted
The economics of gas turbine locomotives, which were tried from the late 40s until 1970 on the Union Pacific, are tried and true:
They were economically unaffordable to maintain account dust and grit "wear and tear" to the turbine units.
See the following books:
Keekley, Big Blow: Union Pacific's Super Turbines (Cockle, 1977)
Lee, Turbines Westward (AgPress, 1975)
The 8500 HP GE turbines (1-30) came on the roster 1958-60, and were all gone by 1970.
10 years does not even fully depreciate the locomotive!!!
amtraksupporter Member # 5619
posted
The Delta Northwest merger will take public transportation back yet another step in the Upper midwest north of the Salt Lake City Denver line.
See "Airline giants Delta and Northwest agree to merger"
Today in that area you have choices of Delta through Salt Lake City, United through Denver, and Northwest through Minneapolis/St. Paul. Delta thorugh Minneapolis will not price compete with Delta through Salt Lake City.
Amtrak has a new enlarged mission serving the West.
MightyAlweg Member # 5407
posted
quote: So what do we do with cities like Boise, Amarillo, Cheyenne, Tulsa....all moderately sized cities with no rail service? Well, with the exception of maybe Tulsa and Amarillo which are PROBABLY served by Southwest Airlines...what choices do they have? [/QB]
That really depends on the city. I was surprised to learn that even small cities like Boise have over a hundred flights per day with Boeing and Airbus jets, in addition to some regional jet service and turboprops.
For Boise, they've got plenty going out of their beautifully rebuilt airport terminal. Alaska, Delta, Northwest, Frontier, ExpressJet, Horizon, SkyWest, Southwest, United and USAirways all serve Boise Airport with over a hundred flights per day on primarily single aisle jet aircraft like 737's, 757's, MD-80's and A320's. Horizon does use turboprop aircraft on some flights into Boise. You can get to most big cities in the west nonstop from Boise, but if you are going to New York or London or Atlanta or Hawaii you're going to have to go through Portland or Denver to get there.
Tulsa is a little smaller than Boise, but has a lovely new airport terminal with dozens and dozens of flights per day. American, United, Southwest, Delta, Northwest, Continental, Frontier, and ExpressJet all serve Tulsa, with a mix of Boeing, Airbus, and small regional jets.
When you get to a small city like Amarillo, things change noticeably. A small terminal is served by just a handful of airlines, although there are still about 50 arrivals and 50 departures each day. Southwest is the big player with 30 arrivals and 30 departures each day, with American, Continental and Great Lakes picking up the rest. The aircraft mix is split 50/50 between 737's and Embraer regional jets.
But when you get to Cheyenne, that's something else. Cheyenne has a small but modern airport that is served by only one airline; Great Lakes Airlines, which I have never heard of. Great Lakes offers eigth arrivals and eight departures per day to Cheyenne, and all flights depart for or arrive from Denver. If Great Lakes Airlines goes out of business tomorrow, Cheyenne is cut off except for Greyhound and private cars. That's surprising to me. There's no Starbucks at Cheyenne Airport, but they do offer free unlimited stay parking. When was the last time you saw an airport with free parking?
Overall, I don't think we need to worry one bit about the Boise's and Tulsa's of the USA. The free market will provide air transportation to people there if they are willing to buy a ticket. Amarillo may not be the most convenient to get to by air, but the 50 inbound flights per day serve that small city appropriately I imagine.
As for Cheyenne... yikes. But as the biggest city in Wyoming, if that's all they can muster and they feel they need more, then perhaps the good people of Wyoming need a better voice in Washington. The Vice President is from Wyoming and seems to represent the independent streak of that state well, so perhaps the people of Wyoming aren't waiting around for Washington DC to come to their rescue after all?
Would I love to see trains like the Pioneer return to Boise, and have Amtrak expand into entirely new markets? Of course. But even with a round of airline mergers and bankruptcies on the way, even our small cities seem to be well served by the strongest players in American aviation.
MightyAlweg Member # 5407
posted
Off Topic, but I just had to laugh when I saw that the route map for Great Lakes Airlines doesn't even get them near any of the Great Lakes.
Perhaps they are just waiting until they run through all their current business stationery before they come up with a new name? Maybe Rocky Mountain Airlines? Great Western Airlines? Mountain West Airlines? Anything that doesn't have to do with a lake they get nowhere close to? Ha!
amtraxmaniac Member # 2251
posted
COmpetitiveness though....Is the fare to go from Tulsa to LAX as competitive as fares from DFW to LAX??? That may be why Boise is so busy...there are no other airports IN THAT STATE...and the closest major airport might be SLC or posibbly Portland. Boise airport is larg because there is no other transportation options for at least 500 miles! Point being, for these smaller and medium size towns with some air service, can air fares be TRULY competitive. There going to be even LESS affordable now with fuel costs. That being said, Idahoans have NO other option but to fly...regardless of costs escalating...and the airlines won't pull out of that market because customers there will pay up because the HAVE NO CHOICE!!!!! Lack of competitive choices HURTS CONSUMERS. That's another MAJOR problem with the NWA/Delta merger....now prices in these smaller markets are even MORE elastic.
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
Regular air travelers are quick to note that the most expensive US city of any size in which to fly is Des Moines.
DSM is served only by legacies and/or their commuter "partners". It was once served by a low-cost named Vanguard Airlines, but that one was in the "vanguard" for folding up.
There is no rail service and not likely to be any anytime soon.
But I-80 is relatively uncongested, and there even has been a new "by pass" built around the city's SE quadrant. 70mph is allowed in Iowa; and all told O'Hare is about a five hour drive. I'd dare say that corporate travel departments expect employees, especially if more than one are traveling together to fly from ORD in view of the DSM fare structure.
Finally, regarding Patrick's comments with respect to the NW/DL merger. I highly doubt if a "new standard of customer and in-flight service" will arise from the combination; everything Patrick suggests will occur has also been suggested in the pages of the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. Considering how now almost three years later, USScare and America West are essentially operating two airlines within an airline, I can only hope those who formulated this one have their "acts together'.
Also, may I suggest to the Flight Officers of both airlines that you collectively bargain the merging of your seniority rosters; you don't want to see some of the "kinky stuff' an arbitrator could serve up. While arbitrators may be "wise men", be assured from one who has "been there done that" (in the railroad industry, but remember air transport Labor Relations are also controled by the Railway Labor Act) I guarantee you their wisdom has come from sources other than day to day transportation company operations.
Oh, and if you want to know what "kinky" means, ask your older sibling. Better yet, read Skygods, The Fall of Pan Am; ISBN: 1888962119. Direct your attention to the Chapter addressing the merger of seniority lists between Pan Am and a smaller carrier named National Airlines they acquired.
MightyAlweg Member # 5407
posted
quote:Originally posted by amtraxmaniac: That may be why Boise is so busy...there are no other airports IN THAT STATE...and the closest major airport might be SLC or posibbly Portland. Boise airport is larg because there is no other transportation options for at least 500 miles!
All things considered, it would be unfair to claim that there are "no other transportation options for at least 500 miles" or that there are "no other airports" in all of Idaho. The residents of the Gem State actually have quite a few airline options to choose from, aside from the hundred flights per day offered at Boise International Airport.
There are active airports with multiple flights per day out of several other small Idaho cities.
Lewiston (Population: 31,000) via both Horizon Airlines twice daily service to and from Boise and Seattle, and SkyWest Airlines twice daily direct service to and from Salt Lake City.
Idaho Falls (Population 55,000) has a small airport equipped for 737's that has daily service from four airlines; SkyWest to Salt Lake City, Horizon Air to Boise, Northwest Airlines to Minneapolis, Allegiant Airlines to Las Vegas, and United Express to Denver.
Pocatello (Population 45,000) has an airport that offers ten flights per day on SkyWest with direct service to and from Salt Lake City. Like in Cheyenne, they also offer free parking.
Moscow, Idaho (Population 25,000) has a small airport served by four Horizon Air flights per day. Two flights go on to Lewiston, with connecting service to Seattle. And two flights fly directly to Boise. The proximity of Washington State University and the University of Idaho keep the airport particularly busy during semester breaks.
So it would be unfair to say that the great state of Idaho is unserved by aviation at its smallest cities. There is clearly a system of turboprop feeder routes leading to Seattle, Boise and Salt Lake City from a small collection of airlines in Lewiston, Idaho Falls, Pocatello, and Moscow.
Idaho may be one of the least populous states in the Union, and may be considered a hick backwater by the provincial elites and bureacrats way out in Washington DC, but Idaho has a thriving air transportation system linking all of its major population centers.
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
So long as our Moderator is presently allowing leeway regarding the discussion of air transport industry affairs, I'd like to share with the forum this material that does much to set forth where the industry is today and how it got there:
New York Times reporter Micheline Maynard is one journalist who knows the industry she covers (she also reports on auto industry affairs with equal insight). Her reportage linked above is clearly indicative of that.
sbalax Member # 2801
posted
Interesting article, Mr. Norman. Thanks for posting the link. I believe many of us on here have an interest not only in rail passenger transportation but other forms of passenger transportation as well. My own interests extend to cruise ship travel and, as part of an "airline family", air transportation as well.
The cutbacks will extend beyond the regional service. Continental has just announced that they will pull out of Chicago Midway entirely. And Southwest stands to lose a significant amount of revenue with the loss of the ATA codeshare.
Frank in still cloudy SBA
irishchieftain Member # 1473
posted
Looks like the NYT is just not capable of a balanced view anymore.
SWA is not the perfect airline by a long shot. They've come under heavy scrutiny for slacking off in regards to inspections targeting wing skin cracks.
Also seems like deregulation has resulted in the same kind of mess that we see on the rails, i.e. mega-mergers among the larger airlines, and thus a limited number of players. That is not the spirit of competition. I say the ATA's prediction is coming true, in a big way. Deregulation and "competition" (both encouraging unscrupulous business tactics) are Libertarian ideals, not conservative, anyway.
As regards Micheline Maynard, her reportage emphasizes not only aviation but also the automobile industry, and would have a natural bias towards them. That's a rather narrow viewpoint to be working from.
Henry Kisor Member # 4776
posted
As a regular reader of the Times, I have to agree with Mr. Norman about Ms. Maynard's chops as a transportation reporter. She knows her stuff through and through.
irishchieftain Member # 1473
posted
She's not a "transportation reporter", like I said. She is an airline and automobile reporter. To be fair, there is no historic precedent for the collapse of commercial aviation, so Ms. Maynard is "flying blind" (pardon the pun).
amtraksupporter Member # 5619
posted
MightyAlwig said:
quote:
The residents of the Gem State actually have quite a few airline options to choose from, aside from the hundred flights per day offered at Boise International Airport.
Idaho has a thriving air transportation system linking all of its major population centers.
This appearance merits a detailed examination. What may look like a thriving air transportation system from Orange County looks much less so on further examination.
Idaho is one big place from one end to the other. The lead picture on the state department of transportation's web site is a single engine airplane. http://itd.idaho.gov/
Of the five airports mentioned, Lewiston and Moscow are fairly close together, as are Idaho Falls and Pocatello. The latter two lie at the east end of the Snake River Valley and Boise at the west end. This leaves most of the state a long way from an airport, and the 240 miles of the relatively populated Snake River Valley along the UP main line with no service between the two ends.
Sandpoint has no scheduled air service, only the Empire Builder, at 11:40 p.m. westbound and 1:40 a.m. eastbound. The nearest airport is 80 miles away in Spokane.
The gas crisis leaves in doubt how long the present level of air service there will continue.
Likewise, the Delta Northwest merger leaves more doubt of the continuance of the present service level.
While local carriers have shifted from prop planes to regional gets, the number of flights has gone down. According to my Nov. 2003 printed Skyguide, Pocatello had two flights to Boise and Idaho Falls, three.
For April 23, 2008, according to www.eskyguide.com, Pocatello now has none and Idaho Falls two. To get to Boise from Pocatello, Delta has seven connections through Salt Lake City taking from 3 to 5 hours, about the same time as on the old Pioneer schedule. Round trip fares ranged from a low of $387 to incredible high of $692 for a 237 mile trip.
From Idaho Falls to Boise, Alaska/Horizon operates two turbo props at 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. for $141 one way.
If you want to go to Salmon, check out the Cessna 206 at
The number of flights listed says nothing about the availability of discount fares. People living in Southern California do not realize how they benefit from the present industry fare structure. For most places in the country, people there enjoy competition from all the carriers through all of their hubs. If Delta is full to JFK, you might still find a discount fare on Northwest through Memphis.
Elsewhere in the country it doesn't work that way, and people don't enjoy the low fares that Southern California does. This is a big issue in the upper midwest where you have access only to hubs in Salt Lake City, Denver, and Minneapolis.
The story doesn't end here. The present level of air service in Idaho illustrates how our air fare tax system and federal air subsidies actually work. The system works on the principle of from each according to his ability and to each according to his need. The system would delight Karl Marx.
We fund air service related capital improvements through the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
Air travelers pay an excise tax based more or less on the value of the ticket. The funds go to build runways, build airport structures, control towers, and air traffic control infrastructure.
The costs of operating the system have a large fixed cost component. The basic airport infrastructure of building a runway, a control tower, and operating it costs the same regardless of the number of people or airplanes using it. Air plane controllers get paid the same, more or less, whether they handle a few operations a shift in a place like Idaho Falls or hundreds at O'Hare in Chicago.
The same applies to operating passenger search systems. The personnel sitting on their rears at Pocatello get paid like the ones with endless lines in Los Angeles, and the x-ray machines cost the same.
The government operates with the same standards of service and personnel in Moscow, Idaho as it does in Washington, DC.
However, the revenue from the air passenger tax is variable based on passenger traffic. The tax generates enormous revenue relative to costs from routes like Los Angeles to New York, Chicago to New York, and New York to Washington.
It's a system of from each according to ability to each according to need.
The tax system subsidizes the large fixed costs at low volume airports from large tax revenues at the lhigh volume airports. What may look like a lot of air service in Idaho does not reflect operations of the "free market" but a Washington subsidy scheme that doesn't require low volume airports to pay the full costs of their operations and transfers income from populated parts of the country to the unpopulated ones.
It's another case of hypocrisy of these conservative Republicans all against Amtrak because it doesn't make a profit but all for Marxian income redistribution schemes like the air tax when it benefits their political patrons in the airline, banking, and oil industries.
SubwayNut Member # 3948
posted
I am currently in College and living in Colorado Springs. My hometown is New York City, I definitely feel that I pay the least for air tickets home when compared to most of my friends. For example from NYC-Denver there are amazingly FIVE airlines that fly the route non-stop. There's no non-stop service from nyc to the smaller airport in the springs (that's served basically only by regional jet service) but I am still usually able to find amazing air fares such as a $129 one way COS-Houston-Denver trip that's my trip home. I would definitely prefer to spend my two days and two nights on Amtrak coming home but can't justify paying more for it (it's always $160ish with the student discount) for a coach seat.
I have to say that those of us who fly routes between major cities or with a major city at one end of the trip definitely benefit the most from airline deregulation.
posted ![[Frown]](frown.gif)