Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

Air Service to Small Cities

Recommended Posts

There is a lot of concern in Western Canada re Greyhound ceasing service.  Perhaps the US solution to providing service to small communities is something that should be looked at by our country. 

US awards 12 small airports grants for new flights

  • 19 July, 2018
  • SOURCE: Flight Dashboard
  • BY: Edward Russell
  • Washington DC

The US Department of Transportation has awarded nearly $10 million in grants to 12 small- and medium-sized airports to attract new air service.

The Small Community Air Service Development (SCASD) grants will support revenue guarantees, marketing and, in some cases, fees for new routes aimed at expanding air service to the airports across the country, the DOT says in a notice issued on 10 July. The grants are for fiscal year 2017, as the last year grants were awarded was 2016.

The grants to Augusta (Georgia), Bakersfield (California), Casper (Wyoming), Fairbanks (Alaska), Farmington (New Mexico), La Crosse (Wisconsin), Lincoln (Nebraska), Rapid City (South Dakota), Roanoke (Virginia), Sioux City (Iowa), Tulsa (Oklahoma) and Wenatchee (Washington) were all backed by airlines, though no carriers committed to adding the proposed services.

 
 

Of the nine airports that received SCASD grants in 2016, Amarillo, Billings, Missoula and Sun Valley have landed the new routes they sought. Alaska Airlines has added flights to Sun Valley from its Portland (Oregon) hub, and American Airlines has added flights to Amarillo from Phoenix, and to Billings and Missoula from Dallas/Fort Worth.

Alaska supported Tulsa for its SCASD grant this year. The airport is seeking new nonstop service to Seattle Tacoma on the carrier.

American supported applications from six grant winners. The Oneworld carrier will consider new service to August from Washington National; Bakersfield, Lincoln and Roanoke from Dallas/Fort Worth; and Fairbanks and Rapid City from Phoenix.

Utah-based SkyWest Airlines supported applications from five grant winners. The regional carrier will consider adding service to Casper from Phoenix for American; Farmington from either Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix or Salt Lake City for either American, Delta Air Lines or United Airlines; La Crosse from Detroit, Newark, New York JFK or LaGuardia, or Philadelphia for American, Delta or United; Sioux City to enver for United; and Wenatchee to San Francisco for United.

La Crosse says service to Detroit as Delta Connection is its preferred new market, in its application.

United supported applications from both Augusta and Fairbanks. It will consider adding flights to Augusta from Washington Dulles, and to Fairbanks from one of its western hubs that include Denver, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Brownsville (Texas), Elmira (New York), Florence (South Carolina) and Shreveport (Louisiana) have also received grants to support existing air service or additional frequencies.

 

Quote

The Airline Deregulation Act (ADA), passed in 1978, gave air carriers almost total freedom to determine which markets to serve domestically and what fares to charge for that service. The Essential Air Service (EAS) program was put into place to guarantee that small communities that were served by certificated air carriers before airline deregulation maintain a minimal level of scheduled air service.  The United States Department of Transportation (the Department) is mandated to provide eligible EAS communities with access to the National Air Transportation System.  This is generally accomplished by subsidizing two round trips a day with 30- to 50-seat aircraft, or additional frequencies with aircraft with 9-seat or fewer, usually to a large- or medium-hub airport.  The Department currently subsidizes commuter and certificated air carriers to serve approximately 60 communities in Alaska and 115 communities in the lower 48 contiguous states that otherwise would not receive any scheduled air service.

History of EAS

Before airline deregulation, air carriers' operating certificates for most of these communities required air carriers to schedule and provide two daily round trips at each point on their certificates.  During the pre-ADA debates, the prospect of allowing carriers to terminate scheduled air service without prior Government approval raised concern that communities with relatively lower traffic levels would lose service entirely as carriers shifted their operations to larger, potentially more lucrative markets.  To address this concern, Congress added section 419 to the Federal Aviation Act, which established the EAS program to ensure that smaller communities would retain a link to the National Air Transportation System, with Federal subsidy when necessary.  Under this program, the Department determines the minimum level of service required at each eligible community by specifying a hub through which the community is linked to the national network, a minimum number of round trips and available seats that must be provided to that hub, certain characteristics of the aircraft to be used, and the maximum permissible number of intermediate stops to the hub.  https://www.transportation.gov/policy/aviation-policy/small-community-rural-air-service/essential-air-service

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should my tax dollars be spent to support an airline route when it’s not viable for a bus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AAS said:

Why should my tax dollars be spent to support an airline route when it’s not viable for a bus?

Good training for small (plane size not stature of the crew)  aircraft pilots.  Share the wealth, share the pain .   If you live outside of major cities, can no longer drive and rely on a bus,  you would be screwed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Good training for small (plane size not stature of the crew)  aircraft pilots.  Share the wealth, share the pain .   If you live outside of major cities, can no longer drive and rely on a bus,  you would be screwed.

Share the wealth, share the pain......Yes, but, er..I see..... then...... I have no idea what you are referring to..😯

If you live outside of major cities, can no longer drive and rely on a bus,  you would be screwed......perhaps "Shanks Mare" would be back in style...think of the exercise value....what about horse and buggy...."((The Amish Speed Wagon))......lots of options out there, just slip back before Greyhound was here (89 years ago).😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

Share the wealth, share the pain......Yes, but, er..I see..... then...... I have no idea what you are referring to..😯

If you live outside of major cities, can no longer drive and rely on a bus,  you would be screwed......perhaps "Shanks Mare" would be back in style...think of the exercise value....what about horse and buggy...."((The Amish Speed Wagon))......lots of options out there, just slip back before Greyhound was here (89 years ago).😆

Kip: Lots of  Canadians benefit from tax dollars. eg. Waterways, bicycle paths  , public golf courses that only a minority use etc etc  etc. That is what I mean. So I see no reason why we should not also subsidize air services for small communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd support basic bus service vs an airline. Buses use roads that the general public uses anyway vs airports in small communities that almost no one uses. Buses stop in every little fart place if need be. I grew up using them before I could drive or afford my own car. I can't imagine life without them, especially in the summer. I'd have spent a lot more time stuck in town vs on my grandparents farm that was 12 hrs away.

Most small airports are already tax dollar funded anyway as landing fees, etc rarely cover the operating costs.  It's usually the town's general tax base that covers these costs. I've recently jumped on a bus because the sked flight couldn't land.  Unfortunately those who will make the decisions likely never have used the bus as a essential means to travel in this big country. 

I'm going to take a guess that the Trent -Severn waterway isn't  revenue neutral. It would be a tough sell that its there for more than recreation now and that's fine as long as its recognized that yes it does take tax dollars

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Subsidized transportation has been a part of Canada since Confederation. With 90% of the population living within 200km of the US border, that leaves lots of extra space elsewhere. 

My question is what happened to the bus traffic in these Canadian towns?

Edited by blues deville
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, blues deville said:

My question is what happened to the bus traffic in these Canadian towns?

It died from lack of use (and the grittyness of the travellers)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

South of the border in Washington state they successfully implemented a subsidized bus service into rural areas after a Greyhound pulled the plug. It’s a federal program and the service is networked so riders can buy a single ticket to any part of the country. 

Edited by J.O.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fido said:

It died from lack of use (and the grittyness of the travellers)

Thanks for the detailed response. :)

So “lack of use” to me means some people have have found alternate methods. Has new local air services provided people with a better form of connecting to our major cities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, blues deville said:

some people have have found alternate methods

In the cases where the small town is less than an hour I see the community orginized their own mini bus through the town council or seniors club.  The little takes them right to the mall or downtown on an alternating schedule.  Then the bus stays there until it is time to go home.  Indian bands have their own buses to bring people into town to go for hospital visits etc.

Shorthaul air service only serves people who want to connect into the big network.

With all of the BS at the airports these days it is faster to drive between Edmonton and Calgary.

Edited by Fido
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this