Landing Fees - Value for Money ?.

[Leezyjet]

Just wondered what the thoughts of other were on the seemingly expensive fees charged by some airfields in the UK.

Flew to Cambridge the other week as a pax with a friend, and I offered as one normally does to pay the landing fee. I almost fell over when the chap told me the price - £22 !!!. We were in a Warrior and only stayed around 40 mins - we didn't even get a cup of tea or a biscuit either !.

Went to another small g/a airfield in the middle of no-where and got charged £15 for a 152, but got a "free" drink and a few biscuits this time.

Yet I have been to other fields here in the UK who only charge £5.

So just why are some fields in the UK so expensive ?.

:confused:

[bookworm]

Flew to Cambridge the other week as ... I almost fell over when the chap told me the price - £22 !!!.
...
So just why are some fields in the UK so expensive ?.

Not sure it's fair to pick out Cambridge. How many fields with 2000 m of tarmac and an ILS charge less than £22?

Also bear in mind that Cambridge airport occupies land that's probably worth £500 million. At 5% pa service of capital, that means the cost of the land alone is about £50 per minute. How long did you occupy the runway for?

By comparison with France, or the US, UK airports are certainly expensive. But they don't benefit from the subsidies that exist in other countries.

[soay]

£41.38 for a SEP into Bristol today, and that was with discount for maintenance!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

£500m? - you must be joking! - lots more than that.

Which is why houses are going to be built there.

[Piper.Classique]

LFDW no charge
parking outside no charge for short stay
fuel 100LL €1.90 a litre
free coffee
two bunks in clubhouse if you are stuck out
runway lighting by arrangement
why live in UK?

[bjornhall]

So just why are some fields in the UK so expensive ?.

Because whenever this question is brought up, sufficiently many always start bleating about how this is quite reasonable, all in order, and precisely as it should be in this the best of all possible worlds.

Whereas outside the UK, if someone tried to charge the absolutely outrageous fees you pay, there'd be a riot.

[Hen Ddraig]

Because in the UK airports are almost all owned by companies who are required to show a return on investment. i.e. make a profit.
In France, USA and Canada airfields are largely owned by local municipalities, they are seen as an essential social and economic benefit to the area and are heavily subsidised for those reasons.

Hen Ddraig

Time to spare, go by air

[cambioso]

Have been in and out of Stav 4 times in the last week, (Father in hospital in Cheltenham).
WHAT A PLEASURE!!
Good helpfull ATC, super facilities, parking outside the terminal, taxi arranged and waiting every time, coffee in the terminal, the Aviator Restaurant just outside AND....landing fee £7.50p for my Midget Mustang, They are very keen to have us there (SO unusual these days!) and it shows!
Think about it next time you want a coffee somewhere.
Jez

[mike172]

malc4d,

No, but as I understand it, Marshall's have no choice really. Seems a bit stupid to me to build housing on an airport when there is plenty of land close to Cambridge that could be used.

I didn't realise that the landing fee at Cambridge was that high. I fly from there with Cambridge Aero Club so I don't pay for landings. Looking back on it now, I must have saved a fortune! I imagine the other flying clubs at Cambridge have to pay landing fees which would add a considerable amount to the PPL course for example.

[Leezyjet]

Not sure it's fair to pick out Cambridge

Well that is the most expensive I've been to so far.

How many fields with 2000 m of tarmac and an ILS

Most SEP's that I know of don't require 2000m of tarmac or an ILS !!.

For an SEP I'd expect to pay around £15 for a nice big long bit of tarmac that is well kept and up to £10 for a small grass strip in the back of beyond. It's starting to make my hour building rather more expensive.

Have been in and out of Stav 4 times in the last week

Not sure I'll be visiting there soon, at least until the summer. Great airport, great facilities, and a great cafe but got a bit of a shock flying out of there a week or so ago with a friend due to wx that wasn't forecasted :eek:

landing fee £7.50p

We returned to the airfield due to the weather and they charged us 1/2 price landing fee due to a weather diversion and it was £6.50 in a 152.

Any other reasonably priced airfields that are worth a visit ?.

It's such a shame that people/companies feel the need to target aviators in this country by hiking up the price when anything to do with aviation is mentioned. We are not all rich pilots - well not yet anyway !!.

:E

[Pilotdom]

Leezyjet,

Did you not check the Landing fee before you went? If you didnt need the 2000m of runway and an ILS why did you bother going there? If you friend had been before, he should have known what the fee was. If neither of you did then its poor planning isnt it? My 2008 AFE guide gives the Landing fee for a SEP as £19.50, ok its gone up slightly but the info is there if you look or ask for it.

[Chilli Monster]

fuel 100LL €1.90 a litre.............why live in UK?

You've answered your own question. At current exchange rates that's about 12.5 cents per litre more than I'm paying in the UK.

[ShyTorque]

If you think Cambridge is expensive, go to the following link, look under STOP PRESS and take a look at the PDF file on landing and parking fees.

http://www.londonheliport.co.uk/

It's most definitely VFR only, no navaids at all.

[eharding]

What do they charge for a 4-ship radial-engine fixed-wing visual run-in & break? - we wouldn't stop, don't need handling, and can do most weekends and some week-days?

[Whirlygig]

Five years ago, as part of my qualifying cross-country, I landed at North Denes. Having already spent a tenner at Beccles on the landing fee, I only had £40 left on me. It wasn't enough! £49.50. For a Schweizer.

Cheers

Whirls

[bookworm]

£500m? - you must be joking! - lots more than that.

Well I was estimating 500 acres at about a million per acre. But you're probably a lot closer to this than I am, how much do you think it's worth?

[A and C]

If you are hour building use the free landings that you can get in the flying mags and phone around to find the airfields that offer discounts if you buy fuel. I would guess that with bit of planning you could get the average landing cost down to about £8.

[Rod1]

As someone said on another thread, you get what you pay for, but in most cases you pay for things you do not need, so go else ware. Your average SEP needs 500 m of flat grass and some ware to park. You can often get to land on such a facility for next to nothing. If you need 2000m, full ILS and ATC etc then it is obviously going to cost. In the 90’s there was very little competition, now there are micro strips / farm strips as well as the smaller licensed airfields which charge about £10 ish. If you want to experience an international airport, go over to France and get a good meal at the same time!

Rod1

[stocker]

I nipped across to Oban last week and planned on visiting Coll and Colonsay before heading back to Oban for fuel.
I bought a landing card allowing four landings for £20, good value I thought.
On the other hand I was quoted £108 for Aberdeen, this included overnight parking.
It all comes down to what you mind paying for and how much that landing means to you. For instance going into ABZ meant visiting family that I dont see very often so worth every penny whereas I wouldn`t nip in for a coffee at the local club for that price.......

[DaveW]

Take a look at the latest "Pilot" magazine, which carries a letter from someone commenting negatively about the landing fees at Norwich.

The Norwich airport manager's response is also published, and it is an impressive piece of dismissive arrogance; essentially "We don't want your sort here anyway". http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/smilies2/icon_rolleyes.gif

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Posted elsewhere, I found this in the remote regions of my logbook the other day;

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n131/Golf_Bravo_Zulu/EGNX_LF.jpg

I bet it's a bit more now, even allowing for inflation. It was a short stop, sufficient to remove some "water ballast" and refuel the aeroplane.

[niknak]

Dave W.

I haven't read the article, but the NWI landing fees have been significantly reduced, instead of the flat fee of ££££ its now around £8.80 per half tonne + VAT.

Which is why we probably didn't get a pay rise this year....:{

[IO540]

Norwich's bill for "yellow jacket staff" is probably around £1M, most of them clearly superfluous.

It has very few 'large' movements and plenty of opportunity for GA. Only a total mug manager would try to exclude GA traffic. Everything is a fixed cost (ATC, the yellow jackets, etc) and the more you can get towards paying those the better.

Also the security is way overdone. The terrorists are not going to target Norwich. You could blow up most of that part of the UK and few people would notice. The obvious targets are .... more obvious!

[Rod1]

Norwich appears to be an example of an arrogant regional airport which whacked up its fees, got shut of most GA and then found it had nothing to replace it. It has now reduced the fee to what appears to be a sensible level and had made noises that it wants us back. I have not read the Pilot article yet.

Rod1

[bjornhall]

If you need 2000m, full ILS and ATC etc then it is obviously going to cost.

There you have it... It's "obviously" going to cost, i.e., the customers accept that it will cost, i.e., it will cost.

You could just as well say: "Since you don't need all that stuff, you obviously shouldn't pay for it. But since it is impractical to build two dozen airfields right next to each other, with different runway lengths, IFR navaid levels, ATC services and differing landing fees, you get to use the full facilities for the cost of what you'd actually need."

That approach works perfectly well in other European countries, to everyone's benefit. It would work just as well in the UK.

[Rod1]

“But since it is impractical to build two dozen airfields right next to each other,”

Have you looked at the number of small airfields / strips in the area? OK, not 24, but it is a significant amount of choice. I agree that landing fees for VFR traffic at regional airfields should be about £10, but if it is not you do have a choice other than pay, pay, pay.

Rod1

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I say again: if I were to propose a large hike in council tax, or a large cut in other services, so as to be able to subsidise a municipal airport, then guess what ... I'd lose my seat, and not be in a position to implement such a policy.

It's called "democracy". It's the UK voters who don't want to subsidise what they see as a rich man's hobby. One can only assume that voters in other countries take a different view.

[niknak]

IO540

As you well know, security levels are dictated by the Government not the airports, if the airports failed to implement them they face closure and very heavy fines.
The representitives of G/A in the UK have miserably failed to get anything done, indeed if they did anything to get around this problem which affects all airport staff, not just you.
Additionally, you're clearly ignorant of what goes on at NWI and your post is based purely on gossip and conjecture.

Red 1.

Much the same goes for you, if you've got something to say, make it factual, not a rumour you heard in the pub, put up or shut up.

[Mike Cross]

As you well know, security levels are dictated by the Government not the airports
and there was me thinking it was Annex 9 and Annex 17 of the Chicago Convention and ICAO Doc 8973. Still you learn something new every day.

[lauchiemb]

All these charges that we pay seem pretty good value for money. For £22 you can land your aircraft on a huge runway with fantastic fire cover. Much safer than if you land on a farm strip and pay nothing or a fiver.

I can see why your man at Norwich airport might say that he does not need our business. What they want is a 737 packed with passengers who will have a meal, buy drinks and spend money in the shops. Compare that with a 152 with instructor and student who want a cheap cup of tea, free biscuits and sit in a portacabin chatting to similar minded people.

[Mike Cross]

The original question was "Value for money?"

That's a subjective judgement on the part of the customer. A round of golf with a top professional for a hundred quid might be seen as excellent value by someone keen on golf, but not by me.

If you're selling goods you need to offer them at a price which your customers see as value for money or they won't buy.

Stelios knows the answer. He doesn't charge everyone the same price, he markets his product and sets his prices so he gets good load factors. Some people will have paid a lot and some a little for exactly the same product. If the airports were somehow able to take a leaf out of his book they could up their revenue. They know when the scheduled traffic is due in and out so why not fill in the gaps? Cardiff manage it, they got me in 15 minutes before Concorde! Can't remember how much it was, around 13 or 14 quid? In my book that was good value for money.

[bjornhall]

I say again: if I were to propose a large hike in council tax, or a large cut in other services, so as to be able to subsidise a municipal airport, then guess what ... I'd lose my seat, and not be in a position to implement such a policy.

It's called "democracy". It's the UK voters who don't want to subsidise what they see as a rich man's hobby. One can only assume that voters in other countries take a different view.


1. I find it somewhat unlikely that an election would be decided on that particular issue only. You'd come under criticism from someone, sure, but politicians come under criticism for how they tie their shoe laces anyway, so...

2. While there might be exceptions in a big country far out west, I think it is rare to see an instrument airport with 2,000+ m of asphalt being built solely to cater for rich men in PA28s... ;) In countries where airports are subsidised, you'll see government money spent on airports with scheduled traffic that form part of the countries' national infrastructure; communities and regional administration spending money on smaller airports where they might want scheduled traffic or to cater for taxi and business travel, considered vital parts of the community's or region's infrastructure; and at most token sums to non-instrument (= non-commercial) airports with <1,000 m runways (i.e., the "rich men's toys" airfields...). The idea to build a mini-Heathrow using tax money for the sole purpose of handling light GA traffic would be equally bizarre to voters outside the UK! It's not done that way.

3. Subsidising is only one way to keep landing fees down for light GA, and not the most important or desirable one. The way to go, and how it is done elsewhere, is to better differentiate landing fees in such a way that small planes don't get to pay huge fees for services they don't need. With the current British system, light GA daring to set foot on a large regional airport subsidise the facilities that only larger aircraft need. And then I'm not talking about hard runways and fire support; I'm talking about 2,000 meters of runway and CAT 7 fire support for a PA28.

[Leezyjet]

PilotDom

As I said, I was only the passenger, I had not been checked out to fly in the UK at the time, I did that 2 days later, so left all the planning to the PIC and offered to pay when we got there - neither had been before and he got the airport info from the AIP website which IIRC doesn't show landing fees so the planning was actually fine thank you, and why not go there ?. It's close to where we fly out of and is a reasonable distance to go when one only has the a/c for 4 hours.

What is the actual status with landing fee's for SEP's at Norwich ?. I was tempted to go the other day but saw on the airport website that the minimum invoice fee is £40 so ended up going to another field in East Anglia instead.

A and C

We did that 2 weeks ago with the ones from this months pilot, visited Beverley and Full Sutton. But it's a long time to wait when hour building until the next issue comes out to get more vouchers.

Also with club rules we can only visit licensed airfields which narrows it down a bit.

Coventry was very reasonable when we visited in the 152, although the price does seem to jump up a fair bit if one goes in a 172 and that has all the kit that Cambridge has yet is a lot cheaper. The guy who we paid the fee to said that a 172 and the new generation of VLJ's are in the same price band which seems a bit bonkers to me.

:)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I find it somewhat unlikely that an election would be decided on that particular issue only.
I suspect I know more about the mechanics of winning elections than you do. In my ward our majority last year was twelve. I can absolutely assure you that we can do without being seen as defenders of rich men's hobbies, particularly by the pensioners living in council flats. It would only take seven people to vote the other way ...

better differentiate landing fees ...
Yes, indeed, airfields can take views on whether the want to charge particular classes of customers "gross cost plus profit margin" or "marginal cost with no profit margin" or something in between, and that's up to them. If the airfield is owned by a family firm they've got more freedom than if they've got outside shareholders to answer to under company law.

[bjornhall]

Well Gertrude, what you say mightsound convincing, if it wasn't for the fact that the rest of the world manages just fine without UK level landing fees... But if you're happy with paying tens of euros for a landing, good for you! :ok:

However, if you think it is necessary, a look outside your own country will rapidly prove you wrong.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

But if you're happy with paying tens of euros for a landing, good for you!
I don't think that I personally have ever paid more than £15 actually, with £10 being most common. (I don't pay per landing at Cambridge, it's included in the hire. And Norwich was lots cheaper when I did my QXC in 1988. Occasionally I give the airfield more than they're asking for, as they obviously need the money more than I do and I wouldn't like them to go bust and close down. Anyway, if you're spending £300 on a day out what's the big deal about a £20 landing charge??)

[Peter Lewis]

Bjornhall is quite right. How depressing to see people as ever defending the indefensible in rip-off Britain. Taxpayers don't subsidise GA in America. On the contrary, GA stimulates economic growth and creates jobs which benefit everyone. American airports and ATC are funded by taxation on fuel, whereas the (much higher) tax revenues on our fuel are wasted by our tax and spend government on God knows what.

[IO540]

Have you looked at the number of small airfields / strips in the area? OK, not 24, but it is a significant amount of choice. I agree that landing fees for VFR traffic at regional airfields should be about £10, but if it is not you do have a choice other than pay, pay, pay.Unfortunately most of them are way too short for many types. I suppose one could run a C182 from most 400m strips but not everybody wants a C182. Some people like to fly proper planes with proper mission capability :)

If planning was suitably modified to enable ~ 800m full-planning strips to be set up, that would be something else. Then you would need a mogas STC for the engine...

Additionally, you're clearly ignorant of what goes on at NWI and your post is based purely on gossip and conjecture. I've been running businesses for over 30 years and I know the basic principles, which never change. I go to Norwich and I see an army of staff, each one probably costing the airport some £40k total including employer's NIC (a fixed cost), 'security' offices (another fixed cost), loads of admin buildings (more fixed costs). Yet the 'security' argument is bogus because there is a bunch of flying schools / GA facilities that have easy access to airside, and anybody well connected will taxi / access via these. The fence is a joke - a child could climb over in seconds. It's all a pretence that something is being done. Then they confiscate your toothpaste on the way to the PA28 - it takes TWO security operatives to perform that complex task, and they enjoy every minute of it while looking really important, only to burst out in laughter the moment you start walking down the corridor.

From a mile away, you can see somebody has built up a nice empire there.

They forget the whole point of the place is to process planes and passengers. Instead they have emulated Gatwick/Heathrow, but they have maybe 1% of the traffic and 1% of the terrorist risk.

Whoever set up the ops at Norwich should be sent to some place like Cannes, to see how everything can be streamlined yet everything still gets x-rayed properly on the way out.

Do notice I am not moaning about pricing. However, at the price charged, the process should be very well organised.

[stocker]

I just got back from lunch with a flying friend and we were discussing the same topic as this thread.
His comments were short and not very sweet but generaly I have to agree with him. We have the oportunity to gather the information prior to our visit and if we are not happy with the cost then go somewhere else.
If you had your own Runway or Strip that required maintainance, manning, licencing etc then how much would you charge?

I really dont know how much would be fare but I`d be looking at covering costs and then some.....

If only I had that luxury..................

In addition to I0540`s last comments I remember not that long ago having arrived at Wick and sat having a toastie in full view of the security guards (both of them), my wife and I dusted the crumbs from our shirts and wandered back over to access the apron again but not before we had emptied our pockets, removed our shoes and answered several questions about our visit.

I didn`t mind the whole process but it did seem a bit much just for a wee toastie up North.

[warrior28]

Best value in IN uk ....cleethorpes International Airport !!
or North Coates ...
3 quid and a cuppa and a real welcome.... good pub not too far for
your thirsty pax

[mm_flynn]

If you had your own Runway or Strip that required maintenance, manning, licencing etc then how much would you charge?

I really don't know how much would be fare but I`d be looking at covering costs and then some.....

Most of the costs of running an airport are fixed vs. the service you have chosen to provide and don't depend on usage (within quite a large band). In addition, most UK airports operate way below capacity and hence every incremental customer is nearly pure contribution. Furthermore, they are a bit like shopping malls in that the airport generates a reason for business to exist and those businesses will pay rent (which should be higher if the airport attracts customers.) This side of the business doesn't seem very well exploited in the UK vs. other countries.

The financial logic of kicking GA out of a number of airports seems surprising. I pay knocking on £200/month to park on some plastic reinforced grass, I then pay landing fees (0 marginal cost), support the local maintenance operation (contributing to their ability to pay rent), etc. Why this isn't viewed as good incremental business by the intergalactic spaceports is beyond me.

On the otherhand, the local planners have capped EGLF at something like 25k movements a year. They can sell all 25k movements to heavy business jets so every PA-28 that they let in looses them the ability to handle a G4 - so the poor PA-28 guy is going to pay a fortune (actually is not allowed in). This is a little naive on the planners part as capping the number of flights without specifying the type of aircraft is going to encourage the airport to attract the largest (i.e. biggest environmental impact) aircraft possible. A more sensible policy for the planners might have been to say EGLF can have 15k movements up to 50 tonnes, 15k up to 4 tonnes and 30k less then 2 tonnes. That would have allowed all of the business jet benefit, and a lot of incremental profit (and the income tax, VAT and rates associated with it) on the small end off a fixed cost base (that exists for the big biz jet traffic), while only marginally increasing the envrionmental footprint.

[IO540]

We have the oportunity to gather the information prior to our visit and if we are not happy with the cost then go somewhere else.

That assumes that everybody flies just to have a cup of tea at the destination airport.

There are actually some people who fly to the destination because they have something to do in the vicinity, and there would be many more of them if there were GA airports where people need to go.

As mm_flynn points out, most of the costs are fixed so it's plain stupid to exclude extra business.

[Leezyjet]

Just been to Le Touquet today. 23 Euro's for a single, and 25 Euro's for the twin that also came with us.

That is totaly reasonable for the full atc facilities and parking for several hours whilst we went to town for some food.

The same twin landed at EGSG twice today and got robbed of £50 for the landing fee and was only there to pick up and drop off pax for around 30 mins each time !!!.

:{

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The same twin landed at EGSG twice today and got robbed of £50 for the landing fee and was only there to pick up and drop off pax for around 30 mins each time !!!.
So why not go to Bourn? Or did the passengers prefer paying the landing charge to spending an hour in the Citi 4?

[LH2]

Le Touquet today. 23 Euro's for a single

Thieving bastards... it's €6.- at most French airports :E

[bookworm]

So why not go to Bourn?

Cos it's a long way from Stapleford Tawney? ;)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Sorry, misread that as EGSC, on account of Cambridge being mentioned earlier.

[stocker]

I0540,

I did not mean to sound so assuming and I do realise that some people have business within the area of airfields, I too have on many ocasion used an aircraft to get to a meeting...... Imagine asuming I didn`t..

I agree with you and mm about turning business away, its just daft.

Is it not possible for airfields to appeal to the local authority or beyond to increase the movements of lighter business traffic.
When faced with planning problems with property in the past for eg; not being granted, we have appealed the the Scottish Office and had the planners overuled on several occasions.
A lot of planners are not well enough qualified in their field and quite often contradict each other on the same topic which makes it hard to ever get a straight answer.

Perhaps the answer may be that those running certain airfields just dont have the same enthusiam as we do....

[Piper.Classique]

So the avgas costs a little more

You've answered your own question. At current exchange rates that's about 12.5 cents per litre more than I'm paying in the UK.

Except that we pay €500 a year for the hangarage for the cub, I can hire a four seat tourer for €126 wet (180 horse DR400) The weather is a lot better, the wine is cheaper, I pay no landing fees at most airfields in the area, we have a nice house with land for the animals for less than the cost of a Birmingham semi, pay far less in tax and have a lot less controlled airspace.

Like I said, why live in UK?

[BroomstickPilot]

Hi Guys,

Over the years I have seen a succession of threads like this, entirely justifiably bemoaning the cost of landing/handling charges, and our exile from so many aerodromes that are now 'international airports' but of course nothing ever happens to change things as a result.

We merely concede that these aerodromes are private businesses and thus can charge whatever they think they can get away with. Planners are ignorant, naive wallies, but they are part of officialdom and 'you can't fight city hall': (actually you can, but that's a part of another story).

So we all go back to sleep again until the next charging scam, wheeze or imposition appears to wake us all up again. Then the whole merrygoround commences all over again and in the end we all wind up asleep once more.

Quite simply until we organise to take action by involving government, in the form of the Office of Fair Trading, or the EU which, I am told, favours the existence of a network of small aerodromes as part of the Community transport network, we shall achieve nothing and the endless repeat of these beefing threads will remain as they are - pointless.

How many of us belong to AOPA? I am sure this question will inspire the usual objections. You know the sort of thing. 'I will never join AOPA until they blah, blah, blah'. 'I will never join AOPA because they are a bunch of blah, blah, blah'. 'I am not a member of AOPA because I'm a blah, blah, blah specialist pilot and hence belong to the blah, blah, blah association instead'. 'I belong to American AOPA, their subs are cheaper'. 'I just can't be bothered'.

But with all its shortcomings, for sheer campaigning AOPA is just about all we've got in the way of a real campaigning organisation. No doubt there are other, no doubt very worthy, organisations but these are all smaller than AOPA and do not have campaigning as a prime activity.

'Sorry to be depressing, but the whole approach of fellow pilots to the landing fee/handling charge, 'don't you dare come to my international airport' milieu in which we all exist is only that - depressing.

'Sorry,

[betterfromabove]

I repeat something I posted elsewhere....

Why don't we - as a community - pull together & mobilise our energies to do something like the Strasser AOPA campaign ??

That campaign was to waive landing fees & those incidious "handling charges" in the case of a genuine emergency or distress.

So why not an extension of that campaign but focusing on reasonably-priced access (or even access at all....) to a fair distribution of airfields.

Yes, this is a safety issue. I wonder how many people might be tempting to "push on" because such-&-such airfield is GA-unfriendly?? How easy is it now to practice night flying or an instrument approach??

No, the CAA has no remit to interfere with landing fees per se or access to an ILS, but it does have a remit to safeguard safety standards....& that's where the aviation community as a whole comes in, from ATPL's down,

We all know there are numerous regional airports out there who are praying the lo-co's don't go bust anytime soon & yet have acres of spare grass/concrete on which they could easily fit a PA28/C172 or two...

From time to time, the EU does get it very right...where there's a strategy there's a will & as we all know a well-distributed, community-based, accessible network of airfields is an asset to the towns themselves & for the country.

It is indeed a matter of lobbying not griping....we didn't all get airborne by being negative. We have to show ourselves worthy of the right to fly sometimes...

BFA

[Rod1]

“But with all its shortcomings, for sheer campaigning AOPA is just about all we've got in the way of a real campaigning organisation. No doubt there are other, no doubt very worthy, organisations but these are all smaller than AOPA and do not have campaigning as a prime activity.”

I have nothing against AOPA, but let’s have a bit of balance. I have been a member of the LAA campaign team on several issues over the years. The LAA is already twice the size of AOPA UK and is VERY active on a wide range of issues. The vast majority of GA does not need 800m, it is quite happy on grass and there is an entire “alternative” set of grass landing strips (both LAA and BMAA dominated) lots of which do not charge landing fees, but ask for a donation.

IO is quite right, if you HAVE to fly in on business, and you are IFR and need 800m then you need a “big airport” (and put it on expenses), but most of us fly for fun, and we do not want to pay £20 of our own money for landing. Guess what, we do not have to.:ok:

Rod1

[XL319]

Welcome to "rip off Britain". Some places wanted to charge me 18-25 quid on one occasion and £50 on another for a 152. Plan your routes wisely is my advice...some places charge next to nothing

[BroomstickPilot]

Hi Guys,

Rod1's approach is precisely the kind of attitude I was referring to.

What we need is fair and reasonably priced access to ALL aerodromes, (with perhaps the exception of Heathrow, Gatwick and a small handful of very major regional airports,) not just the ones that he can get his little aeroplane into.

Whether we fly a Luscombe for fun or a Twin Commanche for business is irrelevant.

And Rod1 also seems to be forgetting that of even the aerodromes he does use, there are probably not many that somebody somewhere would not like to cover with houses. If you can't afford to use a large aerodrome, and then lose your little grass aerodrome nearby, then you end up with precisely NOTHING.

As it happens, I'm a member of LAA myself. It's a splendid organisation for what it does. But it is specialised, catering mainly for aeroplane builders and those operating permit types. We need to put our strength behind one organisation that will fight the landing charges, handling, access barred, etc issues right across the board and for EVERYBODY.

Broomstick.

[Nashers]

went to Bembridge airfield the other week. nice place to visit although all the pubs near by close realy early (dont worry- just wanted some lunch and not the liquid type). however as with many things this year, the landing fee has crept up. although it is still a good price, i remember just a few months ago flying into there and paying 5 pounds. now up to 7.50.

with the average price being about 10, i do believe that should realy be the highest it should go. ive heard of some airfields offering free landing if you buy a leg or lamb (apparently farmed on the airfield) and others offering free landing on buying gas. this is a good way to start dropping the cost and hopefully start seeing some more good ideas coming into play.

if your a pilot like me trying to do your hours building any cost saving will help. at the end of the day, it gets realy dull just flying around your local area or doing circuts. hour building sould be fun and hopefully the many airports around the UK will clock onto this and maybe help us out by giving us a student rate? this way we are making savings by flying into there but at the same time they are promoting more aircrafts flying in. it all boils down to the elasticity of demand.

in the time being, any one got any suggestions for places to visit in the bottom half of england? (manchester and below??)