R.T.F.P......please.

[Horst Schwul]

RANT := ON

Please, when visiting a new aerodrome, can you make sure that you read the Pooleys/AFE/CAA (or whatever flight guide it is you use) VERY CAREFULLY.

On numerous occaisions (and the frequency seems to be increasing) aircraft have flown either striaght into noise abatement areas or flown into CAS or don't fly the correct circuit procedures, altitudes or joins and I can only assume it's because they haven't read the plate. If it states that you should remain west of the M1 or whatever, then that is usually because east of the road is a hotbed for complaints - or controlled airspace.

Residents don't care whether the aircraft is home based or not - all they care about is it's making a noise. When you leave it is the home based clubs have to pick up the complaints.

ATC don't care either....all they know is they have an infringement to deal with.

The local traffic is also put at risk by traffic using inappropriate joins.

Some airfields insist on PPR by phone before arriving. That is usually for a very good reason - because arriving / departing is not as easy as you might think.

If you haven't read your home plate for a while then it may be worthwhile re-reading it just to refresh your memory for your home circuits - there are a few locals who seem to think that the rules are for others.

Noise abatement areas don't go away just because you have a fast aircraft.

RANT := OFF

[FantomZorbin]

Well said. Surely 'Good Airmanship' dictates ... etc!

[flybymike]

If you don't mind me saying so, you have made your (perfectly fair) point in a rather patronising schoolmasterish manner. Perhaps we should all go and stand in the corner now.

[ExSp33db1rd]

A foreign ( literally, different country ) pilot flying a Mooney aircraft read the aerodrome instructions for my home airfield, left hand circuits, but then did a right hand circuit and nearly collected a Turbulent - me - letting down on the 'dead' side. Why ?

The pilot heard one of our 'locals' saving time by joining straight in from a right base, and thought we must have changed the circuit direction.

Reading the manual isn't always infallible - eyes and ears open pls. You canna be tooo carrrreful.

[Spitoon]

Maybe that's why Rule 12 is there.....

[FREDAcheck]

No sorry, this is all silliness. As Douglas Bader said: rules are to be obeyed by fools and for the guidance of wise men. And I'm captain, so I take the decisions, and I know what's best. PPR is only for students.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm joking.

Worst experiences I had of "wise men" not taking any notice of rules were PFA Rallies. There was usually a restricted area around it, and a mandatory AIC which you had to follow on approach. When the rally was at Kemble, that included a base leg which avoided overflying Kemble. But sometimes it was hard to get onto final for the stream of "wise men" on long final over Kemble (who had also missed the approach path, holding area etc). On one occasion I spoke to a few pilots when we were booking in. Yes, they'd seen the AIC, but it was too complicated so they hadn't read it.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

but it was too complicated so they hadn't read it
Valid point, actually.

From time to time I have to say to someone "I've done the job, but I didn't do it by following your procedures because the documentation was too complicated for me to understand and life is too short. Do try to come up with something more sensible next time, there's a good chap".

(FTAOD: I've never done this whilst flying.)

[Rod1]

I do not know where you are based, but take a good look at your instructions. If you were a visiting pilot from 200nm away, who does not have an encyclopaedic knowledge of every unmarked building and hill, could you follow them? On many occasions I have tried hard to follow some incomprehensible instructions, which did not seem to match the visible ground features. On landing, I have asked where the “brick works” was (or whatever) only to be told it was demolished two years ago and in any case nobody follows that crap it is too complicated (from an based instructer)! I have had similar conversations on more than one occasion.:ugh:

Rod1

[FREDAcheck]

I completely agree that aviation documentation is often needlessly complicated, unintelligible or just plain badly written. And maybe out of date. That's not an excuse for not trying to make sense of it, or asking by phone before hand, or on the radio if you can't find a VRP, or ignoring it because "you know better".

[Molesworth 1]

I live in North London and have noisy helicopters overhead every hour of the day and night, never mind emergency vehicle sirens screaming down the road.

One does one's best to avoid flying over villages when arriving at a new aerodrome, but really - is there any legal force behind these noise abatement procedures, and why should these folks have protection which people living in urban areas do not? There is no ban on noise lorries, buses, motor bikes, tractors, combine harvesters, bulldozers, army tanks (the list goes on...) passing through these villages.

Keeping a good lookout and going around the circuit the right direction should be the priority - following complicated circuit procedures is secondary. Every time I visit my home aerodrome I find there is something more I am supposed to know. Being 700 feet agl passing over certain powerlines is the latest. Wouldn't it just be ok if I just use my own judgement to avoid them?

[flybymike]

Very much agree with Molesworth. GA is becoming paranoid about justifying its own existence.

[goatface]

Perhaps some airfields rules and reg's are a bit complicated, but all you have to do is to ask for clarification beforehand.
Some of the selfish posts by the "it doesn't apply to me club" here are exactly the sort of thing which give NIMBYs perfect ammunition and leads local councils to restrict operations at many aerodromes, which, in turn, leads to the same posters squealing like stuck pigs.

You can't have it both ways.

[Peter Lewis]

I've never understood the point of PPR. The Americans manage perfectly well without it.

[FREDAcheck]

If you visit an airfield, in general you do so with the permission (explicit or implied) of the owner. Now, you could say that you don't need to bother with their rules - you just apply your view of good airmanship. And presumably the owner could say to you that you're not welcome unless you do bother with the rules.

[FREDAcheck]

One does one's best to avoid flying over villages when arriving at a new aerodrome, but really - is there any legal force behind these noise abatement procedures, Quite possibly a legal obligation on the airfield operator. That won't be binding on you, but if you don't comply then the operator could decide to ban you in order to fulfil their obligations.
There is no ban on noise lorries, buses, motor bikes, tractors, combine harvesters, bulldozers, army tanks (the list goes on...) passing through these villages.Actually, there often is such a ban. This evening I drove through two villages with bans on heavy vehicles.
Keeping a good lookout and going around the circuit the right direction should be the priority - following complicated circuit procedures is secondary. So you just follow the circuit direction, never mind the location of the circuit? Bet that makes you popular!
Every time I visit my home aerodrome I find there is something more I am supposed to know. Being 700 feet agl passing over certain powerlines is the latest. Wouldn't it just be ok if I just use my own judgement to avoid them?Bet that makes you even more popular.

I think there's a balance to be struck here. Airmanship comes first, of course. But it's quite reasonable to minimise interference with others, and to say that just because you live in a noisy area, then others have to put up with noise is a bit selfish. Sometimes local procedures are a bit complicated, and I've certainly not always followed them at airfields I'm not familiar with. But I do try. Why is that a problem? I really don't get this attitude of "I've got a perfect right to annoy the heck out of other people, and I'm going to". Live and let live.

[DavidHoul52]

Sadly selfishness rules in this country. Laws never mind simple consideration doesn't figure in the behaviour of most it seems. Loud talking on mobiles on public transport, buzzing earphones on the tube, cyclists riding on pavements etc etc. Thankfully this is not the general attitude in GA. Let's keep it that way!

[Molesworth 1]

FredaCheck

Not my attitude at all! Good neighbourliness gets my vote indeed.

I'm just pointing out firstly, that small airfields have more than their fair share of criticism in regards to noise, when generally noise issues are just ignored (I don't recall ever seeing a ban on heavy vehicles in any UK village high street) and secondly that in most cases circuit procedures are not far removed from a standard pattern applied with a bit of common sense. Deviations from the standard, such as no overhead join or a lower than usual circuit height are to be noted of course.

[FREDAcheck]

Molesworth,

Noted, and sorry to have misunderstood you. I quite agree that small airfields are often unreasonably criticised, often by NIMBY-ist locals that moved in long after the airfield started operating. Nonetheless, I do what I can to follow locally agreed noise minimisation procedures.

[Duchess_Driver]

Yep, agree with the OP.

Despite a clear paragraph in Pooleys for our airfield to say 'Remain east of the dual carraigeway ' or ' Fly over the lakes to avoid overflying the HOSPITAL' some eidjet still couldn't manage that today.

With regards to "too complicated...." well, if you can't understand it then phone first. It isn't hard. :ugh:

DD

[Gingerbread Man]

On a similar subject, I was gobsmacked by the lack of understanding of CAP413 by a pilot visiting an international airport today. I can appreciate that some people will fly from farm strips and therefore have little experience of more complex aerodromes, but surely it can't escape you that certain items have to read back, and that you can't take off without a clearance!

A pilot with little or no experience of different operations or receiving an air traffic service is obviously forgivable, but could at least help his/herself by familiarising themselves with the AIP. This could not be said of the person who scared me today.

Cheers,

Ginger ;)

ETA: It now appears that this was a non-english speaking pilot with a non-pilot R/T operator :eek: . Airfield layouts pale in comparison to that nightmare.

[ATCO Fred]

I've never understood the point of PPR. The Americans manage perfectly well without it.
7th June 2009 20:13


Because:....

We may not have parking / fuel / etc available!

We may not be a designated point of entry and customs wont let you land.

You may have called with a "hello this is me" and only when I've written out your details on the transit strip do you then tell me at the end of your transmission that you are inbound! I then have to write out another (so Tower has all the right details). IF I am busy with traffic I WAS expecting, this is a low priority task so you may find yourself orbiting until such a time as it is done and TWR has the appropriate safety aide-memoir (strip). Your call really - PPPPPP and all that.

Had a guy call with 3nm to run - non PPR last week - :ouch: I hope he enjoyed the wait:=

However - biscuits normally iron out the problems:ok:

[Peter Lewis]

Fred, I know this is an old thread but I hadn't spotted your reply before now. I'm afraid this attitude, complete with finger-wagging emoticon, typifies everything that is wrong with GA in the UK, and which would never be tolerated in the States where ATC and the aviation infrastructure in general exists to serve pilots, not the other way around. Why exactly are you so pleased about having delayed someone's landing?

US airfields cope perfectly well with unannounced arrivals, from all directions, whether they want fuel or not (their look out). Why can't it work here?

[JW411]

I went solo in a glider in 1957. I did my PPL on Tiger Moths in 1958. I retired three years ago at the age of 65 having spent 46 years flying professionally and I have been flying light aircraft ever since.

Perhaps I am very old-fashioned but I always, always WITHOUT FAIL call my proposed destination by telephone (whether PPR is required or not) and ask if they are receiving visitors, and if so, is there anything that I need to know that is not listed in my Pooleys. It doesn't matter if I have already been there 50 times.

I always used to teach my students "The Principle of The 6Ps" - "Prior Planning Prevents P*ss Poor Performance".

How much does a quick phone call cost you compared to the imperial horlicks that you can make of yourself if you arrive unprepared and screw it up?

[Peter Lewis]

I agree proper preparation is essential, indeed it's a legal requirement. But there are plenty of ways of ensuring you are properly briefed on the essentials without having to contact the airfield directly. It's the concept of needing permission to visit an airfield that I find baffling. The onus for proper preparation is on the pilot, and if it turns out that the airfield is closed that day, or there is no fuel, well that's our own look out isn't it? GA in this country is all about enforcement and the requesting and granting of permission rather than pilot responsibility. As I said earlier, it works well in the US and I've yet to see anything this country does better than the Americans when it comes to GA.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I agree proper preparation is essential, indeed it's a legal requirement. But there are plenty of ways of ensuring you are properly briefed on the essentials without having to contact the airfield directly. It's the concept of needing permission to visit an airfield that I find baffling. The onus for proper preparation is on the pilot, and if it turns out that the airfield is closed that day, or there is no fuel, well that's our own look out isn't it? GA in this country is all about enforcement and the requesting and granting of permission rather than pilot responsibility. As I said earlier, it works well in the US and I've yet to see anything this country does better than the Americans when it comes to GA.

Okay, here's one.

I fly from a strip which is on the site of a wartime airfield. We're non radio, PPR only. On one day per year, we DO NOT FLY, because there is a service of remembrance there for many who died from there in a particular WW2 operation.

You don't phone, you don't know - you cause unnecessary offence by landing in the middle of the service. Not on.

(I have actually been on the strip there on a flying day to see a microlight land, pilot get out, pee in full sight of everybody by the side of the runway, then get back in and fly off without any courtesies at-all. That wasn't on either.)

It is reasonable to ask a landowner / airfield operator for permission to land on their runway if they want you to - it's not public land. This is about pilot responsibility.

Anyhow, there are certainly PPR only airfields in the US, many of them - a lot of the residential airparks for example. So far as I know, the locals respect this, as should we here.

And in both countries, PPR is for a minority, not majority of airfields - if the requirement offends you, fly somewhere else!

G

[1800ed]

Why do people take such offence to some airfields requiring PPR?

I'm a relatively new pilot, I'm not meaning to stir...

[Sir George Cayley]

Last time I flew to Shoreham, I called by phone for PPR and a charming young chap said "No need we're not PPR" and blow me he was right.

Called up 10 out and was handled amongst a few others effortlesly. For a moment I thought I was back in Florida.

Sir George Cayley

[ATCO Fred]

Peter

Those that know me will testify that 99.99% of the time I will bend over backwards to provide the best service available - I'm often on the other end.

BUT....in the scenario stated it was the (sometimes seen) it's only me in the sky attitude of said individual (late call and non adherence to airport procedures and more) which created a scenario that was pretty much a fait accomplis to safety being compromised. Yes, I could have let him wing it into the busy circuit but I work as a team with my TWR controller and I would not do that to him/her.

As to this I'm afraid this attitude, complete with finger-wagging emoticon, typifies everything that is wrong with GA in the UK I rather see it as this - ensuring safety within the aerodrome is maintained at all times EVEN when individuals attempt to 'short-cut' the system/regulations which may be of benefit to themselves but inconvenience to others. And if that means they get a := then so be it....a bit of tough love is good for the soul every once in a while!

PPR/ High Viz and a plethora of other issues cited as a minor annoyance to GA.......I just don't bloody get it. There is so much effort put in to whinging or non compliance when in reality it's easier/less stress to just obey the RULES.

[Noah Zark.]

I've never understood the point of PPR. The Americans manage perfectly well without it.

PPR's are sometimes very helpful to a pilot going into a small airfield for the first time, 'frinstance EGNF, which is PPR. Americans tend not to have small fields, which is how they manage perfectly well without it. :ok:

[fernytickles]

Americans tend not to have small fields, which is how they manage perfectly well without it.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? :confused: Have you ever flown here? What constitutes a small field? GA thrives because of small airports here. Where did you get pull that comment from?

[Rod1]

Phoning ahead is a very very good idea. It is amazing how often you will find out a key bit of information which changes your plan. It is always good to ask if there are any special procedures in place and are the details in the guide right. On one occasion I arrived at a northern airfield walked into the café to be greeted by a torrent of abuse from the CFI for not following the new noise abatement procedure. Pointing out that I had checked the details on the phone two hours previously and been told they were correct, got me an apology and a “free” lunch! The procedures had been changed for some weeks but the receptionist on duty had been on holiday and did not know, nothing in NOTAMS, so no way of finding out.

Rod1

[Noah Zark.]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? Have you ever flown here? What constitutes a small field? GA thrives because of small airports here. Where did you get pull that comment from?
ferneytickles
Unfortunately, no, I haven't flown there. But what constitutes a small (or potentially hazardous field, to the uninitiated) might be the likes of the one I quoted, EGNF, certainly one of the shortest (if not the shortest) licensed airfields in the U.K. complete with a gradient.
In essence, the point I was making is that PPR is sometimes essential. The tone of your reply seems to suggest that I have caused you some indignation. If this is so , I apologise.

[VictorGolf]

I'm in the "phone for PPR" group but mainly to find out if the coffee machine is working. However an airfield I visit fairly often (that is A/G) always suggests a standard overhead join with which I am happy to comply. However it's surounded by noise sensitive vilages. Surely a good lookout and listening in to the radio traffic to gain a sense of what's going on could make a base-leg or long final "join" a safe alternative. Coupled with the fact that there would be a circuit's worth less noise for the noise sensitive villages?

[jez d]

JW411 is spot on. Nothing beats preparation. Or good old fashioned common courtesy for that matter.

In addition to calling an airfield to book in and check on any pertinent information such as lastest noise abatement procedures/ runway state/ weather/ unusual activities such as aerobatic training in the overhead etc, I highy recommend a visit to Google Earth for the printing of invaluable visual aids.

Regards, jez

[david viewing]

I think that a point that's being skimmed over here is the real difficulty that pilots can have complying with published noise abatement proceedures. Many of the noise abatement maps published in flight guides, and on airfields' web sites, lack a distance scale - a stupendous omission!

For instance, a lovely, accomodating, friendly and noise sensitive airfield near the A303 still publishes a noise abatement chart on it's website that not only lacks a scale, but is so compressed as an image that when printed the text is unreadable!

Another case used to be a very welcoming airport in the Welsh borders, where the published unscaled chart involved turning downwind 'avoiding a white house' which was tricky for a stranger who on arrival saw that the entire neighborhood was made up of white houses! This particular airfield now has very detailed 1/2 mil overlays and aerial photos on it's web site, although flight guides probably still have the 'white house' chart.

The problem with a purely visual system is that you avoid one village, school, etc., only to find another straight ahead, and so on, because you missed the intended turning point. And it's not just a UK problem - I was at Big Bear (California) the other day concientously avoiding the schools etc. that dot the local chart when blow me! There's another one looming up, avoided OK, but closer than intended because there are no scales on their chart either.

Given that the charts published in flight guides have to be simplified, I suggest that what's needed on these local charts is a series of range rings. Most pilots will have a GPS to hand and knowing the distance to a complaining village would make it far easier to turn inside or outside of it without having to guess which of many similar looking villages they are referring to. Simple to do and might make a real contribution, rather than just slagging off people who get it wrong. How about it, chaps?

[fernytickles]

Noah Z,

Well, best you pack your bags and come over here for some fun flying :ok: You'll find a plethora of small and challenging airports even here in the relatively flat Midwest. For some real nail biters tho', try Utah, Idaho and Wyoming or anywhere in the region of the Rockies - no shortage of fun to be had there, all at high altitude.

[Malcom]

Just good manners and airmanship, isnt it?

Ah - I see the problem.

[jxk]

Sorry, but today we have sheep on the field - permission denied! And, we will never have any ATC. Hence PPR - simples!

[Sir Niall Dementia]

I agree with JW411.

I fly corporate helis and aeroplanes and would never go anywhere without PPR, either in my working guise or in my lovely little weekend puddle jumper.

At my home base this week we had a bright spark call up at ten miles straight in with no PPR and obviously no reading of Pooleys or whatever. There were six in the circuit, three holding for approaches and one poor sod (me) just establishing on the ILS. Whoever you were I hope you were awfully polite to the ground ops staff and ATC because you made their lives quite difficult for a while and made the GA community look pretty poor.

When the flight guides and the AIP say PPR then it is beholden on you to obtain it. Just pitching up shows you to be ignorant of basic planning and demonstrates poor airmanship.

The gent at my home base caused at TCAS RA which luckily got sorted very quickly by the lady approach ATC, otherwise I would have been on for a go round and a further approach which at £ 26.43 per minute would have annoyed me a great deal, and my boss even more.

Many of the larger regional airports are looking for excuses to rid themselves of GA. Poor planning and airmanship just adds grist to their mill.

[MLS-12D]

PPR/ High Viz and a plethora of other issues cited as a minor annoyance to GA.......I just don't bloody get it. There is so much effort put in to whinging or non compliance when in reality it's easier/less stress to just obey the RULES.Jawohl, mein Fuhrer!

[Noah Zark.]

ferneytickles,

Well, best you pack your bags and come over here for some fun flying
All I need right now is a big helping hand from the Lottery, and I'll give it a go! :)

[fernytickles]

Alternatively, come to AirVenture and you can do lots of armchair mountain flying :ok:

[ATCO Fred]

Quote:
PPR/ High Viz and a plethora of other issues cited as a minor annoyance to GA.......I just don't bloody get it. There is so much effort put in to whinging or non compliance when in reality it's easier/less stress to just obey the RULES.

Jawohl, mein Fuhrer!

MLS 12D........Cooler 6 days!!:E:E

[Peter Lewis]

But many of you here are conflating failure to obtain permission with a host of other poor planning and airmanship issues. My point is not that anyone should be able to turn up out of the blue without having done any preparation and without regard for others. I'm saying that a system which requires one to obtain permission in advance just to visit is unnecessarily restrictive (sheep grazing strips excepted!) Of course you consult NOTAMs, weather and other resources to plan your arrival.

I come back to this: if other countries with even busier infrastructures don't bother with PPR, why has it taken such hold over here, and with such apparent enthusiasm?

[Genghis the Engineer]

But many of you here are conflating failure to obtain permission with a host of other poor planning and airmanship issues. My point is not that anyone should be able to turn up out of the blue without having done any preparation and without regard for others. I'm saying that a system which requires one to obtain permission in advance just to visit is unnecessarily restrictive (sheep grazing strips excepted!) Of course you consult NOTAMs, weather and other resources to plan your arrival.

What is unnecessarily restrictive about a requirement to phone and chat for 2 minutes about local conditions. We all own mobiles these days, and if we don't there's a landline somewhere. I can only once ever recall being declined PPR (they had an airshow on, which was fair enough), but have routinely been given useful advice.

I come back to this: if other countries with even busier infrastructures don't bother with PPR, why has it taken such hold over here, and with such apparent enthusiasm?

(1) They do - as I said, many US airparks for example do not permit landing without permission. I doubt that the proportion is much different betwee UK and US if you add up all runways.

(2) Anyhow, the UK is a small crowded island with tortuous planning laws. Many airfields are careful to not upset their neighbours, and insisting on a telephone briefing for visiting pilots is a reasonably painless way of minimising upset.

G

[bookworm]

(1) They do - as I said, many US airparks for example do not permit landing without permission. I doubt that the proportion is much different betwee UK and US if you add up all runways.

I would expect the proportion to be vastly different.

It's worth drawing a distinction between smaller airfields and larger airports. To extend the analogy above, if I were wanting to go somewhere and park on an acquaintance's drive, I'd call them to ask for permission. But do I need to call Waitrose and ask for permission if I want to go and park in their car park to shop there?

I can quite understand small, private strips, sometimes with planning restrictions, with no AIP entry, requiring PPR. But... Cranfield? Manston? Bournemouth? Duxford? All of these are quite capable of publishing any procedures and notifying changes via NOTAM. Why the need to make use of these airports so inflexible?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I would expect the proportion to be vastly different.

It's worth drawing a distinction between smaller airfields and larger airports. To extend the analogy above, if I were wanting to go somewhere and park on an acquaintance's drive, I'd call them to ask for permission. But do I need to call Waitrose and ask for permission if I want to go and park in their car park to shop there?

I can quite understand small, private strips, sometimes with planning restrictions, with no AIP entry, requiring PPR. But... Cranfield? Manston? Bournemouth? Duxford? All of these are quite capable of publishing any procedures and notifying changes via NOTAM. Why the need to make use of these airports so inflexible?

I still don't see the problem with being asked to make a quick phone call.

But, taking two of those airfields you've listed. Duxford routinely has displays / display practice / public events going on. Published data may not be absolutely up to date, so I can see some sense in it. Cranfield routinely has operations disrupted by the BAe-146-301 Atmospheric Research Aircraft based there, the timing of which can change multiple times through the day - plus can be used for other disruptive research activities on the runway. So, I can see good reasons for it.

Bournemouth - no, I agree, there seems little sense in the requirement there, maybe a local can offer an opinion. Manston I've never been to so have no opinion.

G

[IO540]

PPR is a disease spreading everywhere.

Not just the UK (where a phone call is not hard) but abroad where they often don't take English calls and that is even at major international airports.

Most PPR is pointless.

The other week I cancelled a flight to one such airport because they refused under their 24HR PPR, on the grounds that they had 60 bizjets turning up. In the end, the apron was reported virtually empty.

Jobs for little men, 95% of the time.

[bjornhall]

What is unnecessarily restrictive about a requirement to phone and chat for 2 minutes about local conditions.

But that's not PPR, that's PN, right?

IMV, PN is probably a good idea; PPR is hardly ever warranted.

[IO540]

The problem with PNR (prior notice required) is that unless you obtain a positive acknowledgement, you can't prove they received the "notice" and if the person at the said airport is the d1ckhead which so many airports (notably certain ones somewhat south of the UK) are staffed with, they could just turn you away when you are on final. I've had that happen. You might have sent several faxes but if....

So PNR is de facto same as PPR.

This is why PNR/PPR is such a problem in aviation.

It's OK for the "advanced Goodwood to Bembridge UK PPL over-water journey" because it really is just a phone call to Bembridge who will not cause any trouble whatsoever.

But extend the principle to airports where they can't (or more likely won't) speak English despite being international/Customs, or the published numbers are duff, and you can see the problem.

With the application of time and money you can make flying pretty smooth. You can get yourself a nice plane ("just money"), get yourself an IR ("just more time and more money"), but no matter what you do you are still up against the 4ft tall d1ckhead bloke who wants to feel important, and nothing makes him feel more important than turning away somebody who is 30 seconds away from landing after flying there 500 miles. Or perhaps he just doesn't like N-XXXX because he doesn't approve of American foreign policy :)

And there is no real solution to this.

Airlines etc work this by having staff who make the right phone calls, send the right AFTN messages, and generally have good contacts (including people in the "3rd world" country's aviation ministry) to make sure things happen and the fuel turns up etc.

Lower down the scale, one solution is to always use the local handling agent. His generous fee sometimes lubricates the airport manager so again things happen (whatever the notam says).

GA pilots tend to be stingy and understandably cannot see why they should pay £200 handling (which they don't need) when they can land there for £20. This is where the fun start :)

I am currently trying AFPEx and its ability to send AFTN messages, for this purpose. It seems to work OK.

But the other week I was going to take my girlfriend for a day to N France, and most of the several possible airports were Customs-PNR, and none of them answered the phone. I could not be bothered to go there.

[flybymike]

You can add Blackpool to Booky's list of airfields which do, but should not require PPR....

[alphaalpha]

Bookwork wrote:
"I can quite understand small, private strips, sometimes with planning restrictions, with no AIP entry, requiring PPR. But... Cranfield? Manston? Bournemouth? Duxford? All of these are quite capable of publishing any procedures and notifying changes via NOTAM. Why the need to make use of these airports so inflexible?" (sorry, couldn't make 'quotes' work

Speaking for Duxford, there are two reasons why we ask for PPR by phone in advance.

One is as Ghengis said, due to the amount of warbird and display/practice display flying we have. I took phone calls on the Friday before Legends from students who wanted to call in or overfly. This day is probably the busiest or most complex of the year. The phone call allowed us to gently suggest that, whilst he/she would be welcome, another day would be better.

The second reason is that prior to introducing PPR, we had many noise complaints -- hundreds, due to overflight of the local villages, especially Duxford village. Last year, we had a handful, as the noise issue is part of the phone briefing.

Phone PPR works well for Duxford. We do accept casual traffic when not busy, at the FISO's discretion. However, this is always followed by a verbal expanation of why we want PPR when the visitor comes up to the tower.

Yes, procedures are published in the AIP. If you want to know how many pilots read and understand them, come and listen to some of my PPR phone conversations! :)

My personal view: PPR works for Duxford for specific reasons, but I don't think it is neessary everywhere.

Alan.