III.B. Public Perception

With the increase in the number of flights to many communities

conducted in airplanes with a seating capacity of 30 seats or less,

some members of the public are questioning whether they are receiving

an appropriate level of safety in small propeller-driven airplanes

compared to the level of safety they receive in larger aircraft. This

public concern is partly a result of the integration of commuter

carriers with major airlines under an arrangement known as code-

sharing. The term "code-sharing" refers to the computerized airline

reservation system that lists a commuter flight in the reservation

system under the same code used by a major carrier. A passenger who

books with a major carrier may have a leg of the flight automatically

booked with a smaller commuter affiliate of the major carrier.

With the media attention to recent commuter accidents, the

passenger may also believe that the flight involves more risk because

the smaller airplane and its operation may not have to meet the same

safety standards. Most passengers probably do not realize that some

differences in standards are necessary because of differences in the

airplane and operation and that some of the accidents that are

categorized by the media as "commuter" accidents occurred in flights

that were being conducted under part 121; that is, in airplanes with

over 30 passenger seats.

The differences in regulations were initially based on

differences in the types of operations and differences in the size of

airplanes; these differences in many instances still apply. But other

differences, such as certain performance and equipment requirements,

operational control requirements, and passenger information

requirements are not size- or operationally-based. Some differences

between the two sets of regulations must be maintained while others

can be eliminated to improve the safety of commuter operations.