Greetings!

With the big airplane companies focusing primarily on the Long-Haul market over the last 5-10 years with the inception of the 787,A350,777X and so on, what do you guys think will happen with the smaller regional airports that are served today by an aging CRJ and ERJ fleet.

Here’s a quick example, my hometown airport is CAE and right now has the following daily flights plus a few more that I left off in the best interest of time.

Delta to ATL:
8 Flights Daily
(2) on the MD-88
(4) on the 717’s
(2) on the RJ-900

AA to DCA:
3 Flights Daily all on the ERJ-145

United to ORD:
2 Flights Daily, one a RJ-200 and the other an ERJ-145


In the future with airports like CAE and dozens of others in the smaller regional markets, what will happen as these planes continue to age and are phased out? Will the amount of daily flights shrink and get replaced by larger mainline jets such as the A319, A320, and 737? Or will the CS100 become the new workhorse in the regional markets ?

And one more thing, with CAE being stuffed in between CLT and ATL, does anyone think it’s possible to see any new carriers that could come in and offer daily service?

Personally I’d love to see someone like Spirit, Jet Blue, or Frontier come in and offer flights to BOS, FLL, MCO, BWI, and BNA.

Just curious.

- Thanks!

It always surprised me how much of that regional traffic there is in the USA compared to Europe. Seems like the big American carriers need to serve every blank spot on the map, in Europe that's far less the case. There are quite some regional airports in Europe that don't see any regional airlines, or maybe only a few flights if they're lucky. Instead, the regional airports in Europe have mostly been taken up by LCCs like Ryanair and Wizzair.

I think this will eventually happen in the USA as well. The legacy airlines will concentrate at the major airports, pushing the LCCs out. Those LCCs will find their way to the regional airports. Currently the only LCC in America that concentrates at regional airports is Allegiant, but they're by far not as big as Ryanair for example.

Strange thing is that both Wizzair and Frontier are eventually owned by the same parent company, only on different sides of the pond. Both are LCCs, but Frontier concentrates at the big major airports and Wizzair at the small regional airports.

SCFirefighter wrote:

Here’s a quick example, my hometown airport is CAE and right now has the following daily flights plus a few more that I left off in the best interest of time.

Delta to ATL:
8 Flights Daily
(2) on the MD-88
(4) on the 717’s
(2) on the RJ-900

AA to DCA:
3 Flights Daily all on the ERJ-145

United to ORD:
2 Flights Daily, one a RJ-200 and the other an ERJ-145




- Thanks!

How can I answer this without seeing the whole flight list? You're not explaining the whole picture.


EDIT: Off the top of my head, DFW, IAD & IAH are missing.

I think there will be a dividing line, especially if EAS goes away: either an airport can support 2-3X service on 70+ seat RJs or it can’t. If it can, it will stick around. If it can’t, it won’t. I think you will see some airports gain because of this and a lot lose as people choose to drive or otherwise use surface transport to get to what regional airports have reasonable service left. If we had a better train system like in much of Europe and East Asia, such a migration would be even more pronounced.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

It always surprised me how much of that regional traffic there is in the USA compared to Europe. Seems like the big American carriers need to serve every blank spot on the map, in Europe that's far less the case. There are quite some regional airports in Europe that don't see any regional airlines, or maybe only a few flights if they're lucky. Instead, the regional airports in Europe have mostly been taken up by LCCs like Ryanair and Wizzair.

I think this will eventually happen in the USA as well. The legacy airlines will concentrate at the major airports, pushing the LCCs out. Those LCCs will find their way to the regional airports. Currently the only LCC in America that concentrates at regional airports is Allegiant, but they're by far not as big as Ryanair for example.

Strange thing is that both Wizzair and Frontier are eventually owned by the same parent company, only on different sides of the pond. Both are LCCs, but Frontier concentrates at the big major airports and Wizzair at the small regional airports.

From what I've seen, in Europe the train system is far more advanced/exhaustive connecting these regional cities than in the US. Partly it is the US's size, but for the example the OP gave of CAE, instead of having quick rail access to CLT or RDU or ATL, they have regional flights.

I can't really speak to why LCC's have been able to make it work in Europe but it is an interesting contrast for sure.

727LOVER wrote:

SCFirefighter wrote:

Here’s a quick example, my hometown airport is CAE and right now has the following daily flights plus a few more that I left off in the best interest of time.

- Thanks!

How can I answer this without seeing the whole flight list? You're not explaining the whole picture.


EDIT: Off the top of my head, DFW, IAD & IAH are missing.

According to Wikipedia, all those have service:

American Eagle Charlotte, Dallas/Fort Worth, Philadelphia, Washington–National
Delta Air Lines Atlanta
Delta Connection Atlanta, New York–LaGuardia
United Express Chicago–O'Hare, Houston–Intercontinental, Washington–Dulles


Nonstops between CAE and Florida are certainly possible, though likely less than daily. And Columbia's in a tough spot competing with dozens of other airports that would like to see low-margin nonstop service to Florida.

Within the next couple decades, I think limited numbers of pilots will have more of an impact than aircraft types/availability. I'd expect markets like CAE to remain essentially flat, though there will always be little ups and downs in frequency/capacity. There was an interesting blog post and discussion on this general topic a few days ago: http://crankyflier.com/2017/11/13/how-t ... r-service/

PatrickZ80 wrote:

It always surprised me how much of that regional traffic there is in the USA compared to Europe. Seems like the big American carriers need to serve every blank spot on the map, in Europe that's far less the case. There are quite some regional airports in Europe that don't see any regional airlines, or maybe only a few flights if they're lucky. Instead, the regional airports in Europe have mostly been taken up by LCCs like Ryanair and Wizzair.

I think the difference is that in Europe the distances are shorter and smaller cities are better served by train or at least bus service. Meanwhile in the US there are airports like LSE (just to use one I'm familiar with) that are about a 2.5 hour drive from MSN and 3 hours from MSP, the closest two big cities. As far as train service goes, La Crosse is only served by one Amtrak train in each direction per day. I honestly have no idea what kind of bus service is available there as I haven't looked into it.

If at some point in the future regional airports like this lose their service and EAS goes away, I think there should be at least some sort of public transportation link to the closest big airport. It doesn't have to be a flight, but at least some sort of bus or train service.

The regional market is very tough because most people will vote for service with their wallets. The fact that CAE (great city by the way) is 90 minutes from CLT makes it hard to keep many flights in CAE. If someone can save $100, then they will drive the 90 minutes to CLT. That is being played out across the country, any regional airport that is within 2 hours of a major airport is bleeding traffic to those airports because people want the cheapest fare. The ironic thing is, that many times, someone thinks they are saving a couple hundred bucks, but in reality is giving it right back in place of gas, parking, time, etc. CAE also has GSP and AUG wiithin 90 minutes. That causes less people to utilize CAE becasue they have another option that might be closer/cheaper/better schedule, etc. This also is symptomatic across the country where you have three or four regional airports with an hour or two of each other. Thus, the airlines have to serve these cities with RJ's and minimal flights to meet the demand.

dmstorm22 wrote:

From what I've seen, in Europe the train system is far more advanced/exhaustive connecting these regional cities than in the US. Partly it is the US's size, but for the example the OP gave of CAE, instead of having quick rail access to CLT or RDU or ATL, they have regional flights.

I can't really speak to why LCC's have been able to make it work in Europe but it is an interesting contrast for sure.

I would guess that the reason LCCs can make regional airports work in Europe is precisely because the rail system is better there. Passengers can fly to the regional airport on an LCC and then catch a train to the nearby big city that was their actual destination. You can't do that in most places in the US. The best you can do is rent a car and drive to your destination.

Yflyer wrote:

I would guess that the reason LCCs can make regional airports work in Europe is precisely because the rail system is better there. Passengers can fly to the regional airport on an LCC and then catch a train to the nearby big city that was their actual destination. You can't do that in most places in the US. The best you can do is rent a car and drive to your destination.

Ground transportation is indeed much better and much more reliable in Europe. Most airports got their own railway stations and rail links between the airport and the city, with very frequent services. At the airports that are not directly served by rail, extensive bus transportation is available to all nearby rail stations and cities in the wide area and they run just as frequent. I've heard someone here mentioning a place in the USA that only sees one train in each direction per day. Can't imagine a single place in Europe that underserved. Here in the Netherlands the major rail network is served with a train every 20 or 30 minutes, at some places even every 10 minutes. Even for long distance trains there's a train every hour or so. These trains run strictly on schedule and are very reliable.

I've been wondering the very same thing about my original hometown airport, FWA (Fort Wayne International Airport, Fort Wayne, IN), which has always been a small, regional airport. It is only served by RJs operated by AA Eagle (serving ORD, DFW, and CLT), DL Connection (serving ATL, MSP, and DTW), and UA Express (serving ORD and EWR). The only large aircraft are Allegiant's Airbus planes (serving SFB, AZA, PDG, PIE, and seasonally, MYR). Will FWA always be regional, with only ERJs and CRJs serving there, or could the larger E-Jets and C-Series eventually come? Or could FWA lose all legacy-regional service and go all-LCC in future, or even lose all service altogether to the relatively nearby IND which has many more options on both US3 and LCCs? (This year, I've been using IND for its nonstops from DEN on WN instead of flying via connections and RJs into FWA, and will do so next month for Christmas.)

SmithAir747

CAE will be just fine, given that it serves a sizable local market and is centrally located within a state that is home to nearly 5 million people. Notable institutions near CAE include the University of South Carolina, Fort Jackson (the largest U.S. Army installation for Basic Combat Training) and the South Carolina State House (state capitol). As aging 50 seat RJs are retired, larger regional jets such as the CRJ-700, CRJ-900 and E-Jets will replace them. In turn, some frequencies and routes those types fly today could be upgraded to mainline. I really can't see CAE getting any additional mainline service (beyond DL to ATL) in the near future, with the possible exception of AA to CLT.

As far as other airlines are concerned, CAE certainly deserves credit for its efforts to woo the LCCs and ULCCs. NK and G4 both tried serving popular destinations in Florida in recent years - without success. It was publicly reported that WN turned down a CAE incentive package in 2010, opting instead to add service to South Carolina via CHS and GSP. CHS seems to be doing quite well for WN (no surprise there, given that Charleston has been voted the #1 destination in the U.S. for the past 5 years in a row), but the same cannot be said for GSP. Given that WN's struggling GSP operation serves an even larger market than CAE, it is quite reasonable to assume that WN would have failed at CAE by now. Oh and who could forget about UA's notorious, unprofitable EWR-CAE flight...

SmithAir747 wrote:

I've been wondering the very same thing about my original hometown airport, FWA (Fort Wayne International Airport, Fort Wayne, IN), which has always been a small, regional airport. It is only served by RJs operated by AA Eagle (serving ORD, DFW, and CLT), DL Connection (serving ATL, MSP, and DTW), and UA Express (serving ORD and EWR). The only large aircraft are Allegiant's Airbus planes (serving SFB, AZA, PDG, PIE, and seasonally, MYR). Will FWA always be regional, with only ERJs and CRJs serving there, or could the larger E-Jets and C-Series eventually come? Or could FWA lose all legacy-regional service and go all-LCC in future, or even lose all service altogether to the relatively nearby IND which has many more options on both US3 and LCCs? (This year, I've been using IND for its nonstops from DEN on WN instead of flying via connections and RJs into FWA, and will do so next month for Christmas.)

SmithAir747

Fort Wayne? They have a growing Burmese population, so I'd imagine a good amount of people going from Burma to Indiana goes via ORD, so I think realistically FWA will retain ORD at least.

I’ve talked to several people involved with the Columbia Regional Airport (COU) and they’re looking towards a bright future. They’re planning on having a new terminal built within the next five years since their current 1960s era terminal is overcapacity. The flights they’ve had have been very successful having only to pay the airlines a guarantee once.

SmithAir747 wrote:

I've been wondering the very same thing about my original hometown airport, FWA (Fort Wayne International Airport, Fort Wayne, IN), which has always been a small, regional airport. It is only served by RJs operated by AA Eagle (serving ORD, DFW, and CLT), DL Connection (serving ATL, MSP, and DTW), and UA Express (serving ORD and EWR). The only large aircraft are Allegiant's Airbus planes (serving SFB, AZA, PDG, PIE, and seasonally, MYR). Will FWA always be regional, with only ERJs and CRJs serving there, or could the larger E-Jets and C-Series eventually come? Or could FWA lose all legacy-regional service and go all-LCC in future, or even lose all service altogether to the relatively nearby IND which has many more options on both US3 and LCCs? (This year, I've been using IND for its nonstops from DEN on WN instead of flying via connections and RJs into FWA, and will do so next month for Christmas.)

SmithAir747

It is still a good 2 hours drive from IND, and it's a decent size city (500k in the metro area). It can certainly sustain some flights to major hubs.

A reduction in frequency, yes, that's possible. But zero legacy carriers? I doubt it.

Fort Wayne? They have a growing Burmese population, so I'd imagine a good amount of people going from Burma to Indiana goes via ORD, so I think realistically FWA will retain ORD at least.

They're mostly refugee population to start with, I doubt those people would really fly back to Burma that much.

Somewhat on a different tangent, I love going through the old OAGs (late 70s/early 80s) I have and seeing so many places that have a multitude of flights by a myriad of airlines. What strikes me the most, however, is that usually the majority, if not all flights , go on very short hops and longest trip is usually to the nearest big hub. These places might have lost a majority of their flights, but instead of multi- Peoria- Springfield, IL flights, they get nonstop to Florida, Arizona, and Las Vegas. Decent tradeoff IMO.
My hometown airport ( Boise, ID BOI) still gets decent service due to isolation, state capital, university, decent locally based businesses, etc. They once again topped 3M pax this year. One nice thing about being out west is no other decent sized airport within 5 hours drive.

First, this is a great question. I think there are a couple of answers to this question.
1. What is the future of EAS? If it is cut, or pared back significantly, then that could impact service to the smallest regional airports as another poster has said.
2. What changes can be made to pilot training to address the shortage/potential future shortage?
3. Where is the next nearest airport? Are there opportunities to consolidate service?

An airport like Columbia, which has multiple airlines servicing multiple locations, probably isn't going anywhere. It has mainline service to at least one airport and regional service to others.

But a place like Escanaba, MI, might lose service at some point in the future, because they have two regional flights per day to Detroit and Green Bay is about an hour (or so) away. Or at least I've done that drive in an hour.

I also think your starting premise is slightly faulty. While there is a lot of attention on the larger wide bodies like the A350, 777X, and the upcoming MOM, the airline manufacturers haven't been ignoring the narrow body space. Boeing and Airbus have both launched updated narrow body options in the last few years, Bombardier just sold part of the CS program to Airbus, and Embraer, Mitsubishi, and Sukhoi are all working on next generation regional jets.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

The regional market is very tough because most people will vote for service with their walletsThat is being played out across the country, any regional airport that is within 2 hours of a major airport is bleeding traffic to those airports because people want the cheapest fare. The ironic thing is, that many times, someone thinks they are saving a couple hundred bucks, but in reality is giving it right back in place of gas, parking, time, etc.

This! When I lived in Upstate NY.. I never understood folks who lived in Saratoga, Schenectady, Troy or Albany that would drive all the way down to LGA/JFK to save $300 on a round trip ticket, instead of flying out of Albany International. Who wants to start and end vacations with long drives to and from the city...I would have folks tell me how they saved a ton of money flying into JFK, then had a relative or friend drive all the way down to drop them off / pick them up.... as if that person's time were free.

ODwyerPW wrote:

piedmontf284000 wrote:

The regional market is very tough because most people will vote for service with their walletsThat is being played out across the country, any regional airport that is within 2 hours of a major airport is bleeding traffic to those airports because people want the cheapest fare. The ironic thing is, that many times, someone thinks they are saving a couple hundred bucks, but in reality is giving it right back in place of gas, parking, time, etc.

This! When I lived in Upstate NY.. I never understood folks who lived in Saratoga, Schenectady, Troy or Albany that would drive all the way down to LGA/JFK to save $300 on a round trip ticket, instead of flying out of Albany International. Who wants to start and end vacations with long drives to and from the city...I would have folks tell me how they saved a ton of money flying into JFK, then had a relative or friend drive all the way down to drop them off / pick them up.... as if that person's time were free.

The weird thing is that in America flying out of a regional airport seems to be more expensive than flying out of a major airport. In Europe that's the other way around, thanks to mainly Ryanair and Wizzair. In fact, some major airports are bleeding traffic to cheaper regional airports.

As an example, I compared two options for a return flight from Paris to Budapest on 10 january 2018 and back on 17 january 2018. First option is Ryanair, flight from Beauvais to Budapest. This return flight would cost € 44,78. Add a transfer from Paris city centre to Beauvais airport to that (sold by Ryanair) and the total price would be € 76,58. Second option is Transavia from Orly to Budapest. On the same dates a return flight from Paris Orly to Budapest would cost € 80,-, so that's already more expensive than the Ryanair flight from Beauvais including the transfer. And on top of that € 80,- for the Transavia flight you also have to get from Paris city centre to Orly airport, because that's not included.

How can Ryanair be so cheap out of Beauvais (small regional airport) and Transavia so expensive out of Orly (major airport)? The answer is landing fees, which are much lower at regional airports.

What America needs is a Ryanair-like airline that undercuts the high fares out of major airports by using cheaper regional alternatives.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

ODwyerPW wrote:

piedmontf284000 wrote:

The regional market is very tough because most people will vote for service with their walletsThat is being played out across the country, any regional airport that is within 2 hours of a major airport is bleeding traffic to those airports because people want the cheapest fare. The ironic thing is, that many times, someone thinks they are saving a couple hundred bucks, but in reality is giving it right back in place of gas, parking, time, etc.

What America needs is a Ryanair-like airline that undercuts the high fares out of major airports by using cheaper regional alternatives.

The closest thing in the US to what you described is probably Allegiant.

TUSDawg23 wrote:

The closest thing in the US to what you described is probably Allegiant.

True, however as far as I know Allegiant doesn't sell transfers from those regional airports to the major city centers. They can't because such transfers don't exist. Closest would be the Norwegian transfer service between Newburgh Stewart airport and New York city centre. Norwegian is making this work because they think from a European point of view. They see it working in Europe and introduce it in America as well.

The transfers are a huge part of the success of Ryanair. I mean, Beauvais airport is in the middle of nowhere and without transfers you don't get anywhere from there. But they simply made a deal with a local bus company to keep a scheduled service between Beauvais airport and Paris city centre. Ryanair (and Wizzair too) is selling the tickets for those busses. Now Beauvais is not so isolated anymore, getting from there to Paris is a piece of cake. They do this on a lot of other airports they serve as well.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

How can Ryanair be so cheap out of Beauvais (small regional airport) and Transavia so expensive out of Orly (major airport)? The answer is landing fees, which are much lower at regional airports.

What America needs is a Ryanair-like airline that undercuts the high fares out of major airports by using cheaper regional alternatives.

You may have inadvertently hit on the difference in the States. In many cases, the regional airports aren’t cheaper. To the OP’s point, IINM CAE’s CPE is higher than CLT’s. That’s unheard of in Europe.

There's a mile of difference between an airport like CAE and airports in the EAS network. Columbia is close to 20 times larger (at well over a million passengers) than the largest EAS airports (around 55k passengers), and most EAS are far smaller.

On the current trajectory for small airports in the US:
--At an airport as large as Columbia the added capacity by moving remaining 50-seat to 76-seat aircraft would likely be absorbed with little impact.

--For more medium-sized regional airports (places like Idaho Falls, Jacksonville NC, Lincoln, Killeen, etc) there will typically be some service cuts on the margins if fuel shoots up and/or 76-seat RJ's are the smallest aircraft. In some markets added capacity will be absorbed but in others it will mean three flights instead of four, or maybe an airport today connected to three hubs becomes linked to only two.

--On the low margins there would be some risk at the smallest unsubsidized airports -- places like Williamsport, Hobbs, Longview. Some would survive mostly intact while others will probably see reduced flying. That may mean perhaps 10-25 flights per week instead of the 15-50 they have today.. Some may be dropped unless state or local subsidy comes through.

EAS is a different matter because so much depends on what happens to the program. If it goes away some of the biggest markets may survive without subsidy -- Joplin, Houghton/Hancock, Waterloo, Butte -- but we might see some hold on with fewer flight, such as only one flight on Tuesday/Wednesday/Saturday/Sunday during slower months. Others might be dumped without state or local subsidy, the possibility of which varies greatly from state to state and market to market.

I doubt that we will see ULCC's like Allegiant or imitators make a big difference in regional airport service much beyond what they currently do. That doesn't mean there are zero new opportunities for success out there, but the nice of connecting smaller markets to big vacation destinations with less-than-daily discount flights is pretty finite and it doesn't represent any sort of larger connectivity.

SBN Delta working to upgrade ATL flights to larger regional jets. RFP was submitted several years back for SBN-JFK flights. BOS market is in demand and could possibly see
a future RJ flight.

United possible addition of daily E175 flight to DEN

Allegiant both airports working on seasonal service to MYR.

On the International side if the airport can get the incineration facilities repaired and certified by the USDA they can work with a carrier for flights to CUN. The GAF has been open for some time now.

TUSDawg23 wrote:

PatrickZ80 wrote:

ODwyerPW wrote:

What America needs is a Ryanair-like airline that undercuts the high fares out of major airports by using cheaper regional alternatives.

The closest thing in the US to what you described is probably Allegiant.

Spirit used to often serve the outlying airports. More recently, it's sticking to the major cities. Even so, Spirit is still considered an ULCC. I would also note that bus service has improved quite a bit in the US with the growth of Megabus here. It covers a good number of eastern cities (including CAE) -- https://us.megabus.com/journey-planner/map

I think smaller cities will continue to be served, as spokes to hubs with some ULCC flights thrown in. Some of the EAS only cities will likely go away A lot of those cities are simply boondoggles that can live without 9 seaters flying a couple flights a day.

SurfandSnow wrote:

CAE will be just fine, given that it serves a sizable local market and is centrally located within a state that is home to nearly 5 million people. Notable institutions near CAE include the University of South Carolina, Fort Jackson (the largest U.S. Army installation for Basic Combat Training) and the South Carolina State House (state capitol). As aging 50 seat RJs are retired, larger regional jets such as the CRJ-700, CRJ-900 and E-Jets will replace them. In turn, some frequencies and routes those types fly today could be upgraded to mainline. I really can't see CAE getting any additional mainline service (beyond DL to ATL) in the near future, with the possible exception of AA to CLT.

As far as other airlines are concerned, CAE certainly deserves credit for its efforts to woo the LCCs and ULCCs. NK and G4 both tried serving popular destinations in Florida in recent years - without success. It was publicly reported that WN turned down a CAE incentive package in 2010, opting instead to add service to South Carolina via CHS and GSP. CHS seems to be doing quite well for WN (no surprise there, given that Charleston has been voted the #1 destination in the U.S. for the past 5 years in a row), but the same cannot be said for GSP. Given that WN's struggling GSP operation serves an even larger market than CAE, it is quite reasonable to assume that WN would have failed at CAE by now. Oh and who could forget about UA's notorious, unprofitable EWR-CAE flight...

I'd argue that the population GSP serves is much bigger than CAE, especially given that its's closer to CLT and ATL via car.

Electric aircraft with a range over 500kms will transform the short haul regional market as we know it.

Currently we are seeing upscaling to the largest narrowbody aircraft due to the huge amount of traffic we are seeing at city airports.

These cities often have smaller secondary airports often located in a better position. But as population density grows around these airports the complaints also increase. Curfews have been introduced, airlines left and they are now being used for general aviation.

It is only a matter of time. These quiet electric aircraft will be everywhere. They will be used as point to point aircraft between these smaller secondary airports. They will also be used to introduced new thin feeder routes to the major hubs. Eventually when they get larger and longer ranged they'll replace most of the narrowbody market.