The view from above. New ADI/Great Lakes flights between Watertown and Denver; a little bit good, a little bit bad.

With it just opening up last week, I had the opportunity to take the brand new ADI/Great Lakes Aviation flight between Watertown and Denver to catch the big concert I bought tickets for earlier this year; the Go Go’s & Huey Lewis, as well as to see a couple siblings as well as nieces & nephews.

The Watertown Public Opinion had their own fawning review of the flight last week, which returned flight service to Watertown for the first time in 11 months. But once you get past city aldermen who were happy to get flight service returned to the community, what’s the true picture on what you’re getting?  Read on.

Why did they start this flight? After not having flights for several months, the federal government was convinced that they should be brought back. And several million in subsidies didn’t hurt:

Federal aviation officials issued an order Thursday selecting Aerodynamics Inc. (ADI) to receive $4.5 million a year in subsidies to provide scheduled air service to Pierre as early as Aug. 1.

 The Pierre City Commission recommended ADI last month to the U.S Department of Transportation, after the city’s air service task force interviewed officials from ADI and from Great Lakes Airlines, which has been serving Pierre for decades. It was the second such recommendation in the past 18 months in a convoluted and messy process that has been a double rejection for Great Lakes which continues to serve Pierre.

and…

The order dated June 2 from DOT said ADI has a two-year contract under the Essential Air Service program to fly 12 weekly flights from Watertown and Pierre to Denver from Aug. 1, 2016 to July 31, 2018.  The annual subsidy for the Pierre-Denver leg will be $4.52 million, while for the Watertown leg ADI will receive $2.27 million.

Read it here.

Cities like Brookings (45 min to the SF Airport) which once had federally subsidized flights did not see them return to town, but as noted, Watertown, which is an hour and a half away, and Pierre which is 3 1/2 hours away successfully lobbied for their return.  I don’t see ensuring flight access to South Dakota’s State Capitol as an unnecessary evil, although I’m sure you all will be debating over it in the comment section. As for Watertown, those flights have generated a bit more controversy…

In 2014, the taxpayer-backed subsidies for flights in and out of Watertown and Devils Lake both ranked among the 10 most expensive for taxpayers, on a per-passenger basis. Among subsidized flights in the continental U.S., Watertown’s was the third-most expensive, and Devils Lake tied for eighth.

and..

Though Congress has made efforts to scale back the program, it has only increased in size. And for airports like the one in Watertown, the subsidy is important to keep the airport open—not only for residents flying out of town for the holidays but also to help grow the economy.

“When we have companies looking at Watertown, they need to be able to get in and out of here on a timely basis,” Thorson said.

The mayor said the per-passenger subsidy for his city skyrocketed this year after Great Lakes, the airline servicing the city, became so unreliable that residents stopped buying tickets.

10 Cities receiving the most in per-passenger subsidy, 2014 (excluding Alaska):

1. Chadron, Neb. — $977
2. Clovis, N.M. — $830
3. Watertown, S.D. — $738

Read that here.

Regardless of the subsidy debate, since they started flying this week, I jumped on that flight as opposed to one out of Sioux Falls, since my abode of Brookings is centrally located.

So, what kind of air service are we getting or our tax dollars?

For starters, we’re getting a darned nice jet flight, as opposed to a pokey turboprop, with a quick stop in Pierre. Literally, the flight leg between Pierre & Watertown was little more than a 1/2 hour. Pierre to Denver? 1 hour.   I found that pretty comparable to Sioux Falls to Denver, with the exception that getting through the TSA in Watertown is a breeze.

When arriving, you do disembark at the end of Terminal A, which seems older, and is a bit out in the boondocks, with no facilities. Even the bathroom is a bit of a walk. Getting luggage had us all hanging out at least a 1/2 hour or more before the bags appeared, which seems a bit much for 10-15 bags that had arrived when we did.

Getting back on the plane for the late flight the next day was a different story than flying out of Watertown.

Returning to the terminal to get boarding passes, we presented our TSA letters to have the pre-check added to our boarding passes. The gal at the Great Lakes Aviation desk told us “Just show those to the man at the TSA you’ll be fine.”  Well, we weren’t, as the helpful TSA pre-check guy told us “They have to be on the boarding pass, and Great Lakes doesn’t have that.”

Wait, what? So, someone was telling us a story, and I don’t think it was the TSA guy. He was quite direct that Great Lakes doesn’t have that on their boarding passes, which provides the golden ticket for not having to remove your shoes & belt, among other requirements.

Being given direct misinformation at the Great Lakes desk was probably the single biggest annoyance that we experienced. Either they offer the ability to put that code on boarding passes, or they don’t. If there was something that we should have done differently, even that’s an acceptable answer. But for a ticketing agent to tell travelers something that’s grossly incorrect, that’s a bad thing.

Once through the TSA lines, we were back to the terminal in the no-amenity zone, where noting about our flight was displayed on the board. So, we waited for our 5:30 flight. And we waited.  About 5:10-5:15, I got up to look at the board above the desk, and still nothing.

Literally one minute later, over the loudspeaker, we heard “FLIGHT 217 TO PIERRE IS BOARDING NOW” abruptly called, triggering my wife and I to quickly get in line, where they had us walking out the door to the plane.  It was like it was a mystery flight that suddenly appeared to whisk us away into the sky.

The plane trip back seemed even faster than the one that brought us to Denver, even with a refueling in Pierre. I took this picture of our Capital City as we came around to land. Above_PierreThe trip back to Watertown was so fast, they didn’t even bother to throw water at us. I swear we spent more time on the tarmack in Denver waiting to take off than the length of the flight between Pierre and Watertown. It was darned quick. And disembarking back in Watertown, our luggage beat us to the terminal.

So, how would I consider the quality of the flight experience?  I’d give it about a 6.5, or possibly a 7 on a scale of 1-10. The flight was outstanding. The Watertown terminal portion was good. The Denver terminal portion seemed scattered and disorganized.    Costs were good, and the first two bags for us were free. We only brought 1, so it was an even better bargain. I’d consider gate checking them next time, as those that did had them right away, as opposed to us who had to wait forever.

Would I consider using them again for a quick trip to Denver?  If it’s cheaper than Frontier, which I’m told also has reasonable flights between Sioux Falls and Denver, I think I would, even forewarned that I’m stuck going through the massively long TSA line. As long as they’re running a nimble, and lightning quick jet. There were a lot of Great Lakes Aviation branded turbo prop planes at the Denver airport by our terminal.

So, that’s the view from above on the new ADI/Great Lakes flights between Watertown and Denver; a little bit good, a little bit bad. But, even knowing what I’m in for, I may be willing to climb back on the horse again.

19 thoughts on “The view from above. New ADI/Great Lakes flights between Watertown and Denver; a little bit good, a little bit bad.

  1. JLB

    Thanks for posting this Pat.

    I flew from Pierre to Denver on Friday afternoon, and back to Pierre on Saturday morning (went to the Cubs/Rockies game on Friday night). I had a somewhat similar experience. The Pierre portion of checking in is amazing, nice airport and you can show up 40 min before the flight and have no trouble jumping on. The TSA line in Denver is long, but it is pretty quick. There was a minor hiccup checking in and the flight announcement was similar to how you described, but it got worked out. If you show up in Denver an hour and a half early and pay attention at the gate, you should be ok.

    Most importantly, it was 1000% better than the prior service we had in Watertown/Pierre, assuming the flights remain reliably on schedule. The ones the past week have been. I hope it stays that way!

  2. B K

    Nice report PP. The girls flew up to Watertown last week to visit Grandma for $49 each. Couldn’t drive it for that. I watched carefully and “wheels up” was at 805pm. Text saying they were there came at 831pm. It was a great thing for us and glad to have it. Hope it works out.

  3. JLB

    This article seems to just be complaining about EAS subsidies, which aren’t unique to Watertown or Pierre.

  4. Steve Sibson

    Pat, the biggest cost of your flight is being called a socialist by Cory Heidelberger 🙂

    1. Pat Powers Post author

      The proper response to Cory should be, “it takes one to know one.” Of course, it’s coming from a guy who spent the weekend attacking a chid’s art project.

  5. William Beal

    So, if I read this correctly, even if one is signed up with TSA Pre-Check and has an assigned number, it’s not valid flying TO Watertown? O understand it’s not really an issue flying from there 😉

    Still, it could be a real value for those of us “tweeners” in the Brookings area.

    I’d lobby against the subsidies, but if I lose that fight and they’re available, I’d take advantage of them.

    1. Pat Powers Post author

      Yep. I paid my $85, and it was no good with Great Lakes out of Denver. I’m flying to Orlando in less than 2 weeks, so I’m hoping I’m good, at least on the return leg.

  6. Lee Schoenbeck

    Jimmy Buffet concert next month at Red Rocks – new flight makes that a happening thing

  7. Jason Sebern

    I figured Republicans would be concerned about the “free market” and the need for “small government”? Isn’t that what the GOP stands for? These exorbitant subsidies certainly don’t fit into the Republican Party rhetoric.

  8. JLB

    My point was not to defend or criticize EAS. My point is that it was a pleasant experience, and as long as it is available, I will use it.

  9. anon1

    I did the Watertown/Denver round trip last week, and had a great experience. Plus, here’s something I learned at the ticket counter in Denver…

    When you check your bags and get your boarding passes, the main TSA security entrance is to your left. The lady at the ticket counter told us to go to our right instead. If you go that way, all the way to the wall, then turn left, you’ll run into another security checkpoint called the “bridge security”. It’s the checkpoint that the DIA employees go through, and leads you directly to the A gates where you board.

    Wheels up to wheels down, Watertown to Pierre, is 28 min. 40 sec!!

    As you mentioned, the Watertown subsidies from 2014 are very skewed, because no on was using the Watertown flights at that time. Great Lakes Aviation lost most of its’ pilots, due to government regulation changes, and was highly unreliable, eventually leading to them being asked to leave Watertown.

  10. jimmy james

    OK. Just thinking out loud here. $738 subsidy?

    How about the folks in the federal government pay Watertown residents $38 to fill up their tank for the drive. Then pay each flying citizen the cost of the flight. (Currently as cheap as $177 to Denver from Sioux Falls). Then they can pay each one a per-diem of, say $500, to eat and shop. Saving 23 precious government dollars.

    Could someone write up that legislation, please?

    1. jimmy james

      That per diem of $500 is a maximum benefit. $500 a day would, of course, be fiscally irresponsible.