Great Lakes

F

FDX8891

Well-Known Member
Alright guys, what's it really like?

Answers from people who are there right now or have been there in the recent past only, please.
 
I have never worked there but currently work with someone who has worked there in the very recent past. Pretty much like you read on all the posts about Lakes: Great pilot group, but other than that it's pretty bad.
 
Heard some rumot that they're in a pretty major management change-up. However I'm not, nor have I been there... take my thoughts accordingly.
 
The flying itself is fun as hell. Some of the places you go and approaches you shoot are unlike any other a US regional airline would do. However, other than that, it can be pretty painful. The pay is the obvious problem, although there have been rumors of raises in the next year (i'll more likely see pigs fly before this actually happens). The plan is really to spend a few years, get the time and get out. Hopefully the projected movement in the company will materialize soon and such things can occur.
 
What do you want to know? There is enough to say (as with any airline) to write a short book. There are plenty of Lakers, past and present, that frequent this website and I would listen to what they have to say. Changes are on the horizon so do your research on everything from union stuff to the companies financial status to EAS, all will play into the working environment there. The obvious hang-up for most is the compensation, it is right there black and white before you start so it is no surprise. Where do you want to go next? Many people have left lakes for other gigs rather than airline as it is a great way to build t-prop time, I went the air ambulance route and it could not have worked any better. Something else to know is the small outstation bases, if living in a smaller town rather than a big city is appealing, then that will be a plus as you may find yourself "home" almost every night.
 
Milesar said:
What do you want to know? There is enough to say (as with any airline) to write a short book. There are plenty of Lakers, past and present, that frequent this website and I would listen to what they have to say. Changes are on the horizon so do your research on everything from union stuff to the companies financial status to EAS, all will play into the working environment there. The obvious hang-up for most is the compensation, it is right there black and white before you start so it is no surprise. Where do you want to go next? Many people have left lakes for other gigs rather than airline as it is a great way to build t-prop time, I went the air ambulance route and it could not have worked any better. Something else to know is the small outstation bases, if living in a smaller town rather than a big city is appealing, then that will be a plus as you may find yourself "home" almost every night.
Click to expand...

Who pays the EAS bill when the govt is shut down?
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
Who pays the EAS bill when the govt is shut down?
Click to expand...

Exactly. The program itself has been reviewed multiple times in congress over the last few years, don't be surprised if there are significant cuts or elimination of the funding altogether.
 
Depends on how it is engined really. I've flown a Lakes with the flat Lycoming motor and it was ok. I've also flown one with a Warner on it (185 Warner and Aeromatic prop) and I liked it better. I have yet to fly one with a 220 Continental (I bet that is a neat machine) and there is one with a Menasco flying around that I'd love to try. I think that all in all a Great Lakes is a delightful experience. I noticed more wind in the rear cockpit in the Warner powered machine than I did with the Lycoming - this may just be perception though. Overall I would highly recommend a Great Lakes - it's no Waco but not everyone has the tummy to afford a Waco. Happy flying!

Great Lakes with a Menasco:


Great Lakes with a Warner:
1035071.jpg

Here is a Lakes with a 220 Continental:
h13.jpg


REALLY interesting development here, a Lakes with a Vendeyev radial - This may be a winner:
1373081.jpg
 
WacoFan said:
Depends on how it is engined really. I've flown a Lakes with the flat Lycoming motor and it was ok. I've also flown one with a Warner on it (185 Warner and Aeromatic prop) and I liked it better. I have yet to fly one with a 220 Continental (I bet that is a neat machine) and there is one with a Menasco flying around that I'd love to try. I think that all in all a Great Lakes is a delightful experience. I noticed more wind in the rear cockpit in the Warner powered machine than I did with the Lycoming - this may just be perception though. Overall I would highly recommend a Great Lakes - it's no Waco but not everyone has the tummy to afford a Waco. Happy flying!

Great Lakes with a Menasco:


Great Lakes with a Warner:
1035071.jpg

Here is a Lakes with a 220 Continental:
h13.jpg


REALLY interesting development here, a Lakes with a Vendeyev radial - This may be a winner:
1373081.jpg
Click to expand...

oh you
 
That Lakes with the Commie motor really looks good - it looks just right. That was always my quandry with the Lakes - the motor. The flat motors are, well, flat. The Warners were ok, but the plan could use a little more ass - just not quite enough power. The 220 Continentals I'm sure are great - but they kind of look weird to me - too much engine for the airframe (similar to how a Fairchild 24 with a Jacobs looks - kind of noseheavy). The Vendeneyev looks just about right - and at 350-400 HP I am sure it is kick ass. I'd want a scratch built Lakes - beefed up, with that motor.
 
Alright, so this Great Lakes with the commie motor got me to thinking. That was obviously a scratch built Lakes and I really like the motor on the airframe - it looks right for the machine. I read a little and that was de-rated from the 350-400hp to 285hp. Still, that is much more significant than the original 90hp Cirrus that the first ones had, or even the 185 Warner's like Harold Krier campaigned - so I'm sure it's a great performer. It made me think though...

There is a guy in Florida that tore down a Waco UPF-7 and rebuilt it to accommodate the commie motor. I read about that and there was a lot of modification to accommodate the motor beyond just engine mounts and things - in short, it probably would have been easier to scratch build than modify the existing airplane. The plane looks nice, but it was a lot of work - plus, you tear up a Waco so that isn't good.

My thinking is this: The Waco Taperwing was originally certified for engines up to 450HP. You can get a fuselage scratch built and if it is started from the get-go as a project that will have the commie motor it will be MUCH easier if you do this prior to the fuselage being welded up - that nips a LOT of what the guy with the modified UPF had to do in the bud. So - my thought is a scratch built Taperwing that can be made very light and built to accommodate this motor from the start. You could put the M14 on it without de-rating and have the full 400+ HP available. I think this would be a kick ass machine and since it would be a scratch built project no "real" Taperwings would be harmed in its production. The only issue I would have is the cowling/front of the airplane. My favorite Taperwings have this look to the engines (This showing a Wright R975, 440hp):
mainshot.jpg

I like this look with the exposed engine and big spinner.
I also like the speed-ring look:
question%20mark1.jpg


I've never seen a Vendeneyev with anything other than a full cowl, so I think I'm stuck with that - and I've never seen one with a "bump cowl" - so I'll have to figure that part out - but all in all I think a scratch built Taperwing with the commie motor would be absolutely kick ass. Thanks to the OP for starting this thread!
 
SIUav8er said:
dude! theres a controller at ZDV that used to do that! I heard him all the time, Im sure thats why the pilots do it haha
Click to expand...
ya, a handful of controllers here do it now as well....its the small things that get us through the day
 
Just FYI - someone is actually doing a scratch-built Taperwing built around the commie motor. I'll provide more details when I get them.
 
From the numerous threads on here it seems that airlinepilotcentral.com is pretty accurate with the pay sooo... if you can afford to go 10 weeks or so without pay during training and work on $16/hr (before taxes) with a regional schedule and lifestyle in Denver (which is not a cheap city) then continue to research and decide if it is for you.

If you can't afford that (like most of us) then it doesn't really matter I guess.
 
HVYMETALDRVR said:
From the numerous threads on here it seems that airlinepilotcentral.com is pretty accurate with the pay sooo... if you can afford to go 10 weeks or so without pay during training and work on $16/hr (before taxes) with a regional schedule and lifestyle in Denver (which is not a cheap city) then continue to research and decide if it is for you.

If you can't afford that (like most of us) then it doesn't really matter I guess.
Click to expand...

Forget about the bottom-feeding regional. Which engine for the Great Lakes? I'm sick of people hijacking threads that I've successfully hijacked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top