bcff-osr-mh-nu 

September 6, 2010 • 'i| T OFIRATIONS 

Mr. Dennis J. DeVany, Chief -,,;,i r/, ,r ^ o CL 

Essential Service Division X-53 '-^ ^^^ in A KJ: bb 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: GREAT LAKES AVIATION COMPLAINT 

I would like to provide feedback regarding Great Lakes Aviation, which currently has the bid to 

provide service to Manistee, MI (MBL). Great Lakes routinely fails to 1) properly maintain their 

equipment, which results in numerous delayed and/or cancelled flights; 2) provide alternative 

transportation to stranded passengers, 3) provide adequate meal and lodging reimbursement for 

passengers stranded by mechanical problems, and 4) respond to customer complaints. 

I have been delayed or stranded by Great Lakes on many occasions, the most recent of which 

occurred on September 3,2010. Great Lakes cancelled three consecutive flights from 

Milwaukee, WI (MKE) to Manistee (MI). As a result, some passengers were stranded for nearly 

30 hours in the Mitchell airport. Great Lakes staff failed to secure alternative transportation for 

passengers. 

SITUATION 

This most recent incident is typical of Great Lakes and their lack of commitment to the Manistee 

and Milwaukee markets. Great Lakes Aviation has two daily flights from Milwaukee, WI to 

Manistee, MI. Flight 5296 is to leave MKE at 12:30 pm and arrive in MBL at 2:15 pm, while 

Flight 5295 is to leave at 6:45 pm and arrive in Manistee at 8:30 pm. 

On Thursday, September 2, Great Lakes cancelled both flights to MBL due to 'mechanical 

problems.' My flight on September 3 was to leave at 12:30 pm, but was also cancelled due to the 

same mechanical problem. Why was this not fixed on Thursday, or overnight? Again, three 

consecutive flights were cancelled to Manistee, and others were cancelled to Rhinelander. Four 

RhineJander passengers were stranded overnight in Milwaukee, some more than 24 hours, for a 

trip that would have taken only 4 hours by car. GLA refused to make alternative arrangements 

for transportation. 

CONCLUSION 

Great Lakes Aviation fails to properly maintain their aircraft, which is dangerous and results in 

frequent delayed or cancelled flights. They then fail to properly accommodate passengers by 

securing alternative means of transportation, fail to provide sufficient meals and lodging, and fail 

to respond to customer complaints. 

The solutions to this problem are rather simple. First, GLA should have more than one aircraft 

serving their Midwest routes. Second, maintenance should occur pro-actively, and should be 
designed to correct problems before they occur. Third, GLA staff should provide passengers 

with alternative transportation when flights are delayed or cancelled. And fourth, staff should 

provide appropriate service to customers (meal reimbursement, communications, etc.). 

Great Lakes Aviation is not committed to serving the Milwaukee market and Manistee 

customers. Their lack of proper aircraft maintenance is all the proof needed. As a seasoned 

traveler who has flown more than 1.2 million domestic miles, I am appalled by their behavior 

and appeal to your Division to force GLA to properly maintain its aircraft, have a second aircraft 

available, and provide adequate customer service (including alternate travel accommodations 

when flights are delayed or canceled. Thank you for your consideration. 

Respectfully, 

Dr. Jerry W. Gilley 

15611 CR 424 

Lindale, TX 75771 

i gilley@uttyler.edu 

970-420-0919