Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Great Lakes Out Gulfstream In To Montana  
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5333 times:

The Essential Air Service contract for Montana starting in May goes to Gulfstream International. The US DOT has given this contract to Gulfstream.

The DOT sided with the communities views, rather than the lowest bidder in this case.

http://billingsgazette.com/news/stat...2-4d8e-50aa-b564-99bed4c45e4d.html

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesmoot4208 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1312 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5238 times:

Gulfstream doesn't have enough B1900Ds do they? Perhaps they will trim some of their Intra-Florida/Bahamas routes

User currently offlineUSAIRWAYS321 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1848 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5196 times:

This is a good move to listen to the wishes of local residents. Often, the roads in Montana get bad enough in winter that intra-state air travel is necessary. Gulfstream flying these routes into Billings, rather than Denver, will benefit these communities far more than the Great Lakes service did.

User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4980 times:

Quoting USAIRWAYS321 (Reply 2):
This is a good move to listen to the wishes of local residents. Often, the roads in Montana get bad enough in winter that intra-state air travel is necessary. Gulfstream flying these routes into Billings, rather than Denver, will benefit these communities far more than the Great Lakes service did.

And that being said,hopefully Gulfstream will add Helena to the list as well.


User currently onlinekgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4300 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4792 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting smoot4208 (Reply 1):
Perhaps they will trim some of their Intra-Florida/Bahamas routes

I know they've already dropped TPA-MIA -- flying as CO Connection -- since AA put mainline jets on that route. I understand that one of the Bahama routes out of FLL will also be cut.


User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 4584 times:

FLL-NAS has been cut as well. Kinda strange, 3M used to have about 30 flights a day there.


xx
User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4484 times:

Ahh yes...so it begins! All they really need is about 3 or 4 1900s up their to operate the Montana routes! Maintenance might be an issue though, does anyone know where 3Ms closest maintenance base is to BIL?


ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4484 times:

they're going to have their own maintenance in Billings, but I am assuming they'll send their planes to WASI for heavy checks down in SGF...


xx
User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4460 times:

Quoting USXguy (Reply 7):
they're going to have their own maintenance in Billings, but I am assuming they'll send their planes to WASI for heavy checks down in SGF...

Thats good to hear! Maybe they can actually set up shop, and run a decent operation out of BIL. ZK tried to run it as an extension of DEN, and well look where that got us?



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 8):
Thats good to hear! Maybe they can actually set up shop, and run a decent operation out of BIL. ZK tried to run it as an extension of DEN, and well look where that got us?

I really do think Gulfstream will offer a much more reliable product than ZK ever has. Many times pax from these Montana commmnities have been stranded in small Wyoming cities, because ZK would divert a mx to somplace like Riverton or Gillette, and wait for maintenance crews to come repair the craft.

Great Lakes is so hell bent on DEN, that they overlook the needs of the very communities they serve--(in this case until it was too late) In an effort to get the USDOT to show they really cared, they made the decision to operate flights from 6 of the EAS cities to BIL, as of Feb 10th, , because the regional board of the 7 EAS cities said they preferred the Gulfstream operation over the Great Lakes operation. This change over was however too late to garner support for their service, and they have allready lost a great deal of confidence and trust in the coummunities they serve, as they never listened to the communities prior to Gulfstreams interest in the markets.

Great Lakes is going to have to get the everything to DEN mentality out of their system. Many times, communities rely on service to more than 1 area. One for local intra-sate business, and one for connections. Perfect example is Moab and Vernal UT. These two communities could use service to both SLC and DEN. DEN for connections to many other places and SLC for intra-state business and cargo. Why ZK thinks they need to offer everything to DEN is beyond me. Intrastate government travel in UT will not permit a DEN connection, so they opt for the Automobile rather than the trip to DEN and back to Moab or Vernal. (Montana was the very same) ...

I do believe that Gulfstream has their eye on a bigger piece of the Intermountain area, and we will see them be far more reliable than ZK.


User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4303 times:

the person at Gulfstream who handles the EAS is a very experienced individual when it comes to operating 1900s and the history of these markets, so they should do fine. Its just sad that Big Sky is no longer around, and was a casualty (and perpetrator as well) of aggressive EAS bidding.


xx
User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4194 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 9):
Great Lakes is so hell bent on DEN, that they overlook the needs of the very communities they serve--(in this case until it was too late)
Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 9):
Great Lakes is going to have to get the everything to DEN mentality out of their system. Many times, communities rely on service to more than 1 area. One for local intra-sate business, and one for connections. Perfect example is Moab and Vernal UT.

I agree with most of what you say, but I disagree with your whole DEN point of view. At one point, all of the Montana cities were served by BIL, and the loads were abysmal. ZK has to get the aircraft back to DEN at some point, so they can be routed through CYS for maintenance. Because the loads to and from BIL where so bad, they started to get creative, and try routing some of the cities through DEN. You cannot argue that BIL is a better place for connections then DEN, and ZK saw that and tried to take advantage of DEN. Another reason our completion rates were low was because of the weather and our operating restrictions. We have no GPS, and most of the smaller communities up their have only NDBs and very high approach mins. That is the big reason why we diverted or canceled more often then not.

In regards to the other cities in the system, that is pretty much what EAS is, you can't be real picky about what cities you want air service too. DEN is ZKs hub, and that is where we are based, and that is where we fly too. MHK and JLN were both EAS cities ZK served to MCI, and now they have Eagle to DFW. They still only have one destination to fly too. If ZK was to fly to SLC from Moab or Vernal, who would the pax connect too? We don't have an agreement with DL, so the pax would get to SLC and have to connection abilities. DEN makes the most sense for us, between UA and F9, pax have by far the most connection options then any other city we fly too!



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4079 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 11):
In regards to the other cities in the system, that is pretty much what EAS is, you can't be real picky about what cities you want air service too. DEN is ZKs hub, and that is where we are based, and that is where we fly too. MHK and JLN were both EAS cities ZK served to MCI, and now they have Eagle to DFW. They still only have one destination to fly too. If ZK was to fly to SLC from Moab or Vernal, who would the pax connect too? We don't have an agreement with DL, so the pax would get to SLC and have to connection abilities. DEN makes the most sense for us, between UA and F9, pax have by far the most connection options then any other city we fly too!

ZK's DEN operation is to get passengers to DEN and beyond. As in the case with Montana, the cities spoke up and ZK lost out, not only for Not listening to them from the beginning, but also because of their horrendous reliablity in the Montana markets...and most others.

As for no connectivity in SLC-- UA serves LAX, SFO, ORD, DEN, from SLC, so there are connection options available as well. In the caase of Moab & Vernal, SLC , DEN or both was in the tender by the EAS.

All in all, it seems the Voss empire of ZK is steadily dwindling due to mis-management and his wanting to run everything thru DEN. Case in point--why on earth ELY-CNY-DEN, when ZK has an operation in LAS as well?


User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3892 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 12):
As for no connectivity in SLC-- UA serves LAX, SFO, ORD, DEN, from SLC, so there are connection options available as well. In the caase of Moab & Vernal, SLC , DEN or both was in the tender by the EAS.

I don't understand, your argument for SLC is that UA serves LAX, SFO, ORD and DEN, yet if they go to DEN, they have 200 more options then the options you listed right their. What benefit would the passengers get if they were to fly to SLC, rather then DEN in regards to connectivity? While I am not arguing that management as well as other things greatly hamper ZKs effectiveness, I just don't see your argument for DEN. UAL and F9 seem to think DEN is a great hub, why can't ZK? If people are desperate to go though SLC, then they can drive. EAS is to allow some service to these smaller cities, not go everywhere the residents want to go.

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 12):
Case in point--why on earth ELY-CNY-DEN, when ZK has an operation in LAS as well?

You do know their is more to running an airline then just pointing your finger and sending planes where you want them to go? right? ELY-CNY-DEN was around before LAS ever started for us, and it has been stated many times that ELY will be served with LAS, when the time comes. They have to work out fleet utilization issues if they route another 1900 out of the DEN system, and add it to the FMN/LAS system. My guess is once we leave BIL (whenever that actually happens) then you will see a surplus in aircraft and the ability to get creative with equipment down in the LAS/FMN/PHX/ONT system, and even the possibility of LAX opening up! We have been short equipment for years now and that is why most of our stuff routes through DEN, so we can somewhat run an airline (and not a bus service like most want)



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3648 times:

Great Lakes isn't known for their "low fare" mentality. the person in charge of Eagle's EAS stuff was in charge of putting together the Air Midwest/US Express EAS bids and did JLN with a low fare model - and guess what - Joplin became the darling of the EAS system. I think every seat was only $49 each way to MCI and the route did so well they decided to try DFW using SCASD/City funds. Unfortunately that route didn't do so well because of no codeshare with American and the local fares just couldn't compete with a connection thru MCI. Had the MCI-JLN fares been higher, I think that JLN-DFW would have succeeded.

Even today, if you look at SeaPort they use a lower-fare model when compared to Great Lakes and they're doing exceptionally well. I can't really comment on Pacific Wings because they charge 4 times the fare when booked thru the GDS vs their site, so to do an interline connection will just make travelers RUN, and run FAST.



xx
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3622 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 13):
I don't understand, your argument for SLC is that UA serves LAX, SFO, ORD and DEN, yet if they go to DEN, they have 200 more options then the options you listed right their. What benefit would the passengers get if they were to fly to SLC, rather then DEN in regards to connectivity?

My argument is not that SLC is better than DEN in terms of connectivity, What I am saying is that SLC for the Utah cities would create more passenger use than the flights solely to DEN. Its the same argument in Montana. Cities in Montana find the need for a lot of traffic between cities in Montana. Cities in Ut find the same need., and not to get from VEL to SLC via DEN.
My point is further this. The people in Montana spoke, and said ZK was not what the majority needed,wanted, or found to be effective in what they had EAS service for. They wanted service to their major Montana business center, and not so much to DEN. So why didn't ZK adjust it to include both DEN & BIL? And they are fine with BIL connectivity which is far less in volume than DEN

Im afraid there are a lot of other cities out there who are not hell bent on DEN as well. AFter all a company with operations at the other end of the country is coming to Montana to fill a need that ZK could not adequately fill. Maybe ZK should look at that and adjust their thinking, or continue down the path they are now on, and watch their contracts and passengers erode.

[Edited 2011-02-02 16:18:48]

User currently offlineboslax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3143 times:

Quoting USAIRWAYS321 (Reply 2):
This is a good move to listen to the wishes of local residents. Often, the roads in Montana get bad enough in winter that intra-state air travel is necessary. Gulfstream flying these routes into Billings, rather than Denver, will benefit these communities far more than the Great Lakes service did.

If the US taxpayers are footing a $10.9 subsidy so Montana residents can fly intra-state when the roads are bad, then lets get rid of EAS. Intra-state flying has been dead for years. This is a total waste of money.

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 9):
Great Lakes is so hell bent on DEN, that they overlook the needs of the very communities they serve

Denver is only the 5th largest airport in the U.S. Geez, what's wrong with having access to a huge connecting hub. Montana passengers will now most likely have to double connect thru Billings to get to their final destination. Great Lakes provided UA and Frontier codes beyond Denver. I think most other EAS communities would prefer online connecting access into a huge hub. If the needs of the Montana communities is to fly to Billings, well than the State should subsidize it.

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 12):
All in all, it seems the Voss empire of ZK is steadily dwindling due to mis-management and his wanting to run everything thru DEN.

This is a big hit to ZK. The $10.9 million Montana EAS represents approximatey 9% of ZK's total revenue. I realize Great Lakes is not the best operator out there and Voss spends plenty of time apologizing to communities, but Gulfstream is no walk in the part either. Time will tell, but I think this is not a smart decision.


User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3087 times:

Being that I worked for Big Sky for 4 years, I think I'll participate in this thread. First of, GQ died because Fred Deeluew (or however it was spelled) was an idiot and instead of making GQ operate in the black out west, if things didn't bring cash in within a month, he pulled the plug and tried elsewhere. The DL Connection out of BOS killed GQ. It stripped Montana of any and all extra aircraft, forcing the cutting of routes to PDX, GEG, GTF, FCA/GPI, and BOI.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 11):
At one point, all of the Montana cities were served by BIL, and the loads were abysmal.

So you fly for ZK? Ok, let's look at why the loads from the highline and eastern Montana cities were abysmal. Great Lakes promised for what? Over a year to get their operation going? Finally when they did, the folks had already figured out how to do what they needed to do without flying, so when a new airline came in with higher fares than GQ (which yes, we can argue about maybe GQ's fares being too low to make any money at all even with EAS, but it is what it is), folks don't know the name, and coupled with the delays of entry in service, they basically snubbed Great Lakes. It is what it is, not saying it's all your fault cb, because I bet if ZK had the aircraft available they would've started the routes ASAP.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 11):
You cannot argue that BIL is a better place for connections then DEN, and ZK saw that and tried to take advantage of DEN.

I can, because 75% of the people flying on those EAS routes were trying to get to BIL, MSO, or HLN. The time it will take them (assuming no MX or WX diversions or delays) to get all the way to DEN on a bloody B1900D, transfer to Skywest to get them back to MT, that will kill the best part of a day. They could drive for 6-7 hours, accomplish the same feat with a tank or two of gas and a hotel room and still be ahead compared to the cost of the ticket.

To fly routes inside of Montana, you better connect in BIL, or you'll get what ZK had, no loads.


User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3075 times:

Quoting boslax (Reply 16):
If the US taxpayers are footing a $10.9 subsidy so Montana residents can fly intra-state when the roads are bad, then lets get rid of EAS. Intra-state flying has been dead for years. This is a total waste of money.

GQ did make money flying intra-state without EAS, but not enough according to our idiotic president and MAIR Holdings, so instead of staying with cash-makers, they took shots at the moon, and shuttered the company.


User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

Quoting USXguy (Reply 14):
Great Lakes isn't known for their "low fare" mentality. the person in charge of Eagle's EAS stuff was in charge of putting together the Air Midwest/US Express EAS bids and did JLN with a low fare model - and guess what - Joplin became the darling of the EAS system. I think every seat was only $49 each way to MCI and the route did so well they decided to try DFW using SCASD/City funds. Unfortunately that route didn't do so well because of no codeshare with American and the local fares just couldn't compete with a connection thru MCI. Had the MCI-JLN fares been higher, I think that JLN-DFW would have succeeded.

Yeah, something I have never quite understood about ZK. Their mentality is to cover the costs of the flight through the EAS bid, and any seat they sell is profit over it! They would also rather charge 300 bucks, and fly one person, as opposed to 50 bucks and fly 6 people for the same cost. Ohh well..in the end it might be ZKs demise!

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 15):
My argument is not that SLC is better than DEN in terms of connectivity, What I am saying is that SLC for the Utah cities would create more passenger use than the flights solely to DEN. Its the same argument in Montana. Cities in Montana find the need for a lot of traffic between cities in Montana. Cities in Ut find the same need., and not to get from VEL to SLC via DEN.

While I understand your point and the reasons to operate within the state, I still don't see why ZK should go out of their way to operate to cities that are convenient for everyone. We don't have an operation out of SLC and it would be more expensive to set up operations out of SLC, just for a couple of cities that are served in Utah. It is cheaper and more efficient to route them through a hub (DEN) then to set up operations in every major city, in every state! Every major airline in the world does this, so I don't see why EAS cities have to be different?



Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 15):
My point is further this. The people in Montana spoke, and said ZK was not what the majority needed,wanted, or found to be effective in what they had EAS service for.
So why didn't ZK adjust it to include both DEN & BIL?

Thats a bit misleading, the people of Montana voted ZK out because of the reliability and inefficient operations that we ran. We did operate to BIL from all of the cities in Montana, multiple times a day and no one flew us. So we tweaked the schedules to these cities to operate to DEN to try and stimulate the loads, and that didn't work either. I cannot argue about our completion factors and I can understand the frustration that Montana folks (and every passenger who flies us) but we did have a decent operation out of BIL and we did adjust to include both BIL and DEN!



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3006 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 19):
I can understand the frustration that Montana folks (and every passenger who flies us) but we did have a decent operation out of BIL and we did adjust to include both BIL and DEN!

Do you have a timetable or remember what the flights were out of BIL?


User currently offlineAirport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2962 times:

Quoting boslax (Reply 16):
If the US taxpayers are footing a $10.9 subsidy so Montana residents can fly intra-state when the roads are bad, then lets get rid of EAS. Intra-state flying has been dead for years. This is a total waste of money.

Have you ever lived in Montana? Further, have you ever tried to drive between HLN/BZN/GTF and BIL in the middle of winter? I'm not sure you're comprehending the sheer size of the state, nor the conditions of some of the roads in between cities during the harsh winters. It's truly some of the most dangerous driving, if your car breaks down in the middle of nowhere between cities in the dead of winter where temperatures can get down to -20 and -30 degrees, then you're in serious trouble unless you have some kind of emergency plan. Numerous people die or come close to dying like this.

The point of EAS in Montana, other than to drive business traffic and foster intra-state travel, is to give people a far safer alternative to high-risk driving which would otherwise be the only method of travel.

I'm really hoping that Gulfstream sees what Big Sky had going in its final days where they started developing what was ultimately a successful base in BOI. 2-3x daily BOI-IDA on Beech 1900s would be perfect for that route. In addition, it would be fantastic to see air service restored on BOI-SUN, PIH, BIL, BZN, and I definitely think a 1-2x daily BOI-PSC, EKO, MSO, and perhaps HLN (capital to capital route) in the next few years when traffic numbers start to really pick up again could ultimately be successful, provided it had feed to other carriers.

In addition to capturing intra-state business and government traffic as well as NIFC and U.S. Wildland Firefighting traffic, these routes also carried a lot of cargo and mail during the QX and GQ days. I'm almost certain if a hub was slowly developed, smartly managed, and fostered for long-term growth, it would be a success with Beech 1900s, and perhaps larger aircraft down the road. A Q400 is far too large, but a 1900 or a Q200 is just right for these routes (Hence why QX had between 3-5x daily flights each between BOI-LWS/IDA/PIH/SUN/TWF during the 1990s).

Cheers,
Anthony/Airport

[Edited 2011-02-02 17:54:22]

User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2854 times:

Quoting boslax (Reply 16):
Great Lakes is not the best operator out there and Voss spends plenty of time apologizing to communities, but Gulfstream is no walk in the part either. Time will tell, but I think this is not a smart decision.

This is true, and another topic I did not want to bring up, but 3M is really no better then ZK! Lets see how long it will take for them to set up shop up their in BIL! Also, do they have any codeshare agreements up in BIL?

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 17):
So you fly for ZK? Ok, let's look at why the loads from the highline and eastern Montana cities were abysmal. Great Lakes promised for what? Over a year to get their operation going? Finally when they did, the folks had already figured out how to do what they needed to do without flying, so when a new airline came in with higher fares than GQ (which yes, we can argue about maybe GQ's fares being too low to make any money at all even with EAS, but it is what it is), folks don't know the name, and coupled with the delays of entry in service, they basically snubbed Great Lakes. It is what it is, not saying it's all your fault cb, because I bet if ZK had the aircraft available they would've started the routes ASAP.

Gulp..guilty as charged in regards to flying for them, but no worries about offending me, we all question some of the things ZK does and I never take the stuff my company does personally   ZK did promise a lot and in the end bit off way more then they could chew. At the time ZK bid and won the Montana contract, we were still operating out of MCI and STL and our fleet and crews were stretched beyond thin. Big Sky was a great company all around, far far better then ZK and it would have been hard for anyone to fill in the shoes of Big Sky, but we definitely shot our selves in the foot with all of the promises to the cities and such.

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 17):
I can, because 75% of the people flying on those EAS routes were trying to get to BIL, MSO, or HLN. The time it will take them (assuming no MX or WX diversions or delays) to get all the way to DEN on a bloody B1900D, transfer to Skywest to get them back to MT, that will kill the best part of a day. They could drive for 6-7 hours, accomplish the same feat with a tank or two of gas and a hotel room and still be ahead compared to the cost of the ticket.

I agree, and I can honestly say I have no idea why MSO or HLN were in our EAS bid contract. I know they had been rumors that we were looking at starting ops to those cities, but obviously it was too little too late.

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 20):
Do you have a timetable or remember what the flights were out of BIL?

Ohh boy, If only I have my previous schedules with me, but off the top of my head I know we had at least 2 flights a day to these cities. Last summer, we started out in DEN, and flew DEN-GCC-MLS-BIL. We would have an early morning flight from HVR and GGW-OLF-BIL! Then a morning SDY-GDV round robin from BIL. Then an afternoon HVR round trip, as well as a GGW-OLF round trip both from BIL. Then in the evening their would be another BIL-SDY-GDV-BIL flight and then at night, a HVR and OLF-GGW terminator. MLS would be served twice from BIL on flights to DEN and then an overnight flight from DEN. LWT was the only city not connected through BIL as that would go DEN-WRL-LWT, but as of recent that did change and it is now LWT-HVR-BIL. Recently everything has changed, with flights from GDV to DEN as well as connecting ISN with some of the montana system, but I can say we did operate a decent operation out of BIL for a while their!



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

Quoting boslax (Reply 16):
Denver is only the 5th largest airport in the U.S. Geez, what's wrong with having access to a huge connecting hub. Montana passengers will now most likely have to double connect thru Billings to get to their final destination. Great Lakes provided UA and Frontier codes beyond Denver. I think most other EAS communities would prefer online connecting access into a huge hub. If the needs of the Montana communities is to fly to Billings, well than the State should subsidize it

Cause even if it is the 5th largest airport in the US, the Billings doctor providing a day service to the community of Wolf Point doesn't give a care about how big DEN is or how many airlines it has and he doesn't care about flying from Wolf Point to Denver and back to Billings. He just wants to get to Wolf Point to do a days service at the weekly Clinic in Wolf Point that will see aproximately 30-50 patients that need medical care as there is no doctor in the area.
He doesn't want to get on a 1900 to WolfPoint at Denver, and have ZK divert to Riverton where he is stuck with no way out, cause the roads are all iced over and you can only travel at 15 miles per hour, back up into Montana. This scenario palys out all the time in these highline Montana Cities


User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2763 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 23):

Cause even if it is the 5th largest airport in the US, the Billings doctor providing a day service to the community of Wolf Point doesn't give a care about how big DEN is or how many airlines it has and he doesn't care about flying from Wolf Point to Denver and back to Billings. He just wants to get to Wolf Point to do a days service at the weekly Clinic in Wolf Point that will see aproximately 30-50 patients that need medical care as there is no doctor in the area.

Well...we did fly BIL to OLF, and they still did not fly with us! Ticket prices had a lot to do with it, but the option was still there!

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 23):
He doesn't want to get on a 1900 to WolfPoint at Denver, and have ZK divert to Riverton where he is stuck with no way out, cause the roads are all iced over and you can only travel at 15 miles per hour, back up into Montana. This scenario palys out all the time in these highline Montana Cities

And why do you think 3M will be any better? If it is weather related, then no one will be going in or out. Montana has brutal winters (you don't me telling you that) and if it is bad enough, how does 3M plan on getting into these airports?



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
25 ridgid727 : Obviously the passengers wont get stuck in Riverton WY, Sheridan WY, or Gillette WY for 2 days with hotel vouchers that are worthless, as the locals
26 Post contains images GQfluffy : This. And those Doctors were a major PITA on GQ, I can only imagine how they'd act towards ZK with delays and being stuck somewhere.
27 cbphoto : Hmm..because 3M is going to divert you to some really nice place instead? I still fail to see your logic, if it is weather related, and the eastern p
28 ridgid727 : I guess if 3M does the same thing and dumps the passenger off in Riverton due to a MX, or WX they will meet the same resistance that ZK has. I beleiv
29 USAIRWAYS321 : False. I don't know where you are from, but especially in the Northwest and Mountain West, where our states are larger, and our roads can get quite t
30 Mir : 3M has very limited experience operating in weather like Montana's. They can't even run a good operation in Florida, so what makes you think they'd r
31 Post contains images cbphoto : Summed it up pretty well. I mentioned earlier that 3M will bring it's own issues up to Montana, but they are under new ownership (I believe) so maybe
32 StressedOut : Personally I think part of the problem is that Voss doesn't believe in customer service. As far as I am aware ZK gets their EAS check regardless of ho
33 cbphoto : Absolutely and it has a bad trickle effect on the entire company. Upper management does not care about customer service, and the employees see this (
34 StressedOut : Not much. I understand how hard it is for you all. Hopefully things get better. Considering his attitude towards customer service and the age of the
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Great Lakes Out Gulfstream In To Montana posted Tue Feb 1 2011 19:30:00 by ridgid727
Great Lakes Ceasing Operations In OSH posted Sun Jan 12 2003 22:26:54 by Brett80211
Great Lakes Flight 121 Diverted To BIS posted Fri Oct 25 2002 06:46:13 by Serge
Great Lakes Airlines B1900D Diverted To BFF... posted Sat Feb 2 2002 05:24:35 by Serge
Great Lakes Cyclone On The Way. Watch Out Chicago! posted Mon Oct 25 2010 19:56:26 by BigSaabowski
New Great Lakes Service: PRC / VIS / MCE to ONT posted Tue Jul 22 2008 03:36:13 by Flyboy7974
Is It Time For Great Lakes To Re-name & Rebrand? posted Sun Sep 9 2007 05:38:53 by Spencerii
Great Lakes In Trouble At DEN posted Wed Apr 25 2007 17:18:59 by Goldenshield
Great Lakes To Replace Skyway At ESC/IMT/IWD/MBL posted Mon Feb 12 2007 21:53:00 by A330323X
First Thunderstorms Of The Year In The Great Lakes posted Thu Mar 31 2005 04:06:29 by FlyMKG