On Feb 13, 9:33*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*Mxsmanic wrote:
Kurt Ullman writes:

So, if they care, they would find out who is running the flight and
stay away.

If they knew that there are substantial safety differences--but they don't.

* If they cared they would know and find out.

They don't try to look it up because they don't realize that there's a
difference worth checking into.

* * Then they aren't really interested and certainly not paying
attention.

That Dateline, USA Today, the NYT, the AP and a multitude of other
sources point out from time to time.

They talk about accidents, but not safety.

* *The last Dateline (or maybe the one on CBS, I get them confused)
talked about lousy safety records, poor pilot training and requirements,
long commutes, etc. Same with the last CNN chat about regional airlines
and the last AP article I saw. Much umbrage and angst from the Fourth
Estate recently.

--
I get off on '57 Chevys
I get off on screamin' guitars
* * * --Eric Clapton

Recently (1-- 3 years ago) a passenger airliner crashed allegedly from
later determined PILOTS ERRORS near Buffalo:

The pilot's file shows he was apparently unqualified if not
inexperienced

The co-pilot's file apparently ditto

Plus they both were reportedly fatigued

The co-pilot pay for the commuter gigs is something like $26 thousand
a year

I do not fly unless my dear wife pushes, and the above is certainly
plenty of reasons enough

A few months ago we flew in a small passenger commuter plane RT
Atlanta-Gulfport Miss
and do acknowledge the trips went smoothly, except those
Jackson-Hartsfield end of concourse concrete steps, no other
complaint

I am slightly surprised the Buffalo commuter airline has an insurance
underwriter, because I would
expect them to rationally beg off of doing business with such an
alleged certified airline