4 ms·

This makes no sense to me. The cost of having a copilot is one shared by every carrier. Eliminating that does not give one a competitive advantage as all carrie

This makes no sense to me. The cost of having a copilot is one shared by every carrier. Eliminating that does not give one a competitive advantage as all carriers will get a similar cost reduction. It smacks an elitist "fuck employees, we hate having them, it's our money" That's not even considering the safety implications.

cromka 4y ago
> This makes no sense to me It maximizes earnings through reduction of the cost, not through competitive advantage (i.e. bigger sales volume). In other costs: it's saving more vs making more money. Two non-exclusive ways of improving your overall financial status.
sebzim4500 4y ago
Clearly they don't believe it's a zero sum game.
Calamitous 4y ago
I suspect it has more to do with the availability of employees rather than the cost. But I’ll admit that’s based on my hearing anecdotal tales rather than hard facts.
- acdha 4y ago
  Isn’t that the same thing? What I’ve heard is that the pay isn’t attractive enough to get enough new pilots and a ton of older ones retired when the airlines screwed them during the pandemic. If you have a reputation for dumping your employees any time you can save a little money, the base pay expectations are going to need to go up.
kwanbix 4y ago
And what happens if THE pilot has a heart attack or similar problem that prevents it from flying the plane?
- null0ranje 4y ago
  It’s the insurance company’s problem. /s
  - phkahler 4y ago
    Plane crashes are a major problem for the airlines. When it happens, we all hear about it, often with horrific imagery of wreckage and talk of hundreds of dead people. That's a problem for the popularity of the industry and they'd probably rather pay the victims/insurance than have people lose trust in their safety.
mrtksn 4y ago
Maybe its not competitive advantage against other airlines but is definitely competitive advantage against other forms of transport. If they can reduce cost they can reduce price and this may result in growth of the market. It will also increase the supply of human resources which would make fast market expansion possible. I don't know about the security implications but I'm inclined to believe that lowering costs is good for business.
- hattar 4y ago
  What form of travel are airlines competing with in the US? Travel by train is basically so bad that it’s for entertainment purposes only and any distance over 300 miles is more expensive and time consuming by car. The fact that the airport/TSA experience can be so difficult and airlines are still fine is a testament to the lack of viable alternatives.
  - mrtksn 4y ago
    I don't know, are interstate highways empty? Price reduction can compete against the trips not taken at least. Also, it might be about the availability of pilots. How is the demand for air travel doing? If it is very strong then 1 pilot per plane would mean twice the pilots in the market. Then it's up to hardware producers to supply the pilots with planes and increase market.
- Wowfunhappy 4y ago
  Not even other forms of transit--if transit is cheaper, people will travel more.
noisy_boy 4y ago
My understanding is that qualified pilots are in short supply and by removing the position of copilot, the collective pilot pool doubles which also somewhat reduces the leverage pilots have over airlines due to supply shortage.
arthurgibson 4y ago
I view this as more of a public safety concern. There are plenty of areas to cut costs imo.
soheil 4y ago
Safety implications are total bs, the moment a plane that has one pilot goes down congress will pass a law than requires a minimum of 6 pilots for every plane. So that would be idiotic on the part of airlines to lobby for if they suspected significant additional risks. Also keep in mind buses have one driver and it's just as bad if a bus crashes, but I suppose you don't care since you don't take buses much, talk about "elitists". No one is "fucking employees" when that leads to bottom line growth in a crippling and money losing industry with insane regulations and red tapes like required no smoking signs in brand new airplanes.
- ddalex 4y ago
  So you say that no way a company will prioritise short term profits at the expense of a small long term risk ? I'd agree that risk is not affected only if the plane can take off, navigate, land and park on the runway entirely on its own (effectively replacing a pilot)
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  Several international airlines still allow smoking in the cabin. Passengers transferring from those flights need to be told what to do.
- pixl97 4y ago
  >Also keep in mind buses have one driver and it's just as bad if a bus crashes, Buses go 400MPH at 40k feet? I guess I should travel by bus more often.
  - soheil 4y ago
    A difference without a difference. A bus crash at 60MPH on a freeway can be just as deadly for everyone inside. There is a deadly bus crash with multiple fatalities almost once a month: https://www.google.com/search?q=bus+crash+multiple+fatalities&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=bus+crash+multiple+fatalitie...
    - hulitu 4y ago

cromka 4y ago

> This makes no sense to me It maximizes earnings through reduction of the cost, not through competitive advantage (i.e. bigger sales volume). In other costs: it's saving more vs making more money. Two non-exclusive ways of improving your overall financial status.

sebzim4500 4y ago

Clearly they don't believe it's a zero sum game.

Calamitous 4y ago

I suspect it has more to do with the availability of employees rather than the cost. But I’ll admit that’s based on my hearing anecdotal tales rather than hard facts.

acdha 4y ago
Isn’t that the same thing? What I’ve heard is that the pay isn’t attractive enough to get enough new pilots and a ton of older ones retired when the airlines screwed them during the pandemic. If you have a reputation for dumping your employees any time you can save a little money, the base pay expectations are going to need to go up.

kwanbix 4y ago

And what happens if THE pilot has a heart attack or similar problem that prevents it from flying the plane?

null0ranje 4y ago
It’s the insurance company’s problem. /s
- phkahler 4y ago
  Plane crashes are a major problem for the airlines. When it happens, we all hear about it, often with horrific imagery of wreckage and talk of hundreds of dead people. That's a problem for the popularity of the industry and they'd probably rather pay the victims/insurance than have people lose trust in their safety.

mrtksn 4y ago

Maybe its not competitive advantage against other airlines but is definitely competitive advantage against other forms of transport. If they can reduce cost they can reduce price and this may result in growth of the market. It will also increase the supply of human resources which would make fast market expansion possible. I don't know about the security implications but I'm inclined to believe that lowering costs is good for business.

hattar 4y ago
What form of travel are airlines competing with in the US? Travel by train is basically so bad that it’s for entertainment purposes only and any distance over 300 miles is more expensive and time consuming by car. The fact that the airport/TSA experience can be so difficult and airlines are still fine is a testament to the lack of viable alternatives.
- mrtksn 4y ago
  I don't know, are interstate highways empty? Price reduction can compete against the trips not taken at least. Also, it might be about the availability of pilots. How is the demand for air travel doing? If it is very strong then 1 pilot per plane would mean twice the pilots in the market. Then it's up to hardware producers to supply the pilots with planes and increase market.
Wowfunhappy 4y ago
Not even other forms of transit--if transit is cheaper, people will travel more.

noisy_boy 4y ago

My understanding is that qualified pilots are in short supply and by removing the position of copilot, the collective pilot pool doubles which also somewhat reduces the leverage pilots have over airlines due to supply shortage.

arthurgibson 4y ago

I view this as more of a public safety concern. There are plenty of areas to cut costs imo.

soheil 4y ago

Safety implications are total bs, the moment a plane that has one pilot goes down congress will pass a law than requires a minimum of 6 pilots for every plane. So that would be idiotic on the part of airlines to lobby for if they suspected significant additional risks. Also keep in mind buses have one driver and it's just as bad if a bus crashes, but I suppose you don't care since you don't take buses much, talk about "elitists". No one is "fucking employees" when that leads to bottom line growth in a crippling and money losing industry with insane regulations and red tapes like required no smoking signs in brand new airplanes.

ddalex 4y ago
So you say that no way a company will prioritise short term profits at the expense of a small long term risk ? I'd agree that risk is not affected only if the plane can take off, navigate, land and park on the runway entirely on its own (effectively replacing a pilot)
lern_too_spel 4y ago
Several international airlines still allow smoking in the cabin. Passengers transferring from those flights need to be told what to do.
pixl97 4y ago
>Also keep in mind buses have one driver and it's just as bad if a bus crashes, Buses go 400MPH at 40k feet? I guess I should travel by bus more often.
- soheil 4y ago
  A difference without a difference. A bus crash at 60MPH on a freeway can be just as deadly for everyone inside. There is a deadly bus crash with multiple fatalities almost once a month: https://www.google.com/search?q=bus+crash+multiple+fatalities&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=bus+crash+multiple+fatalitie...
  - hulitu 4y ago