Outrageous Charge

[rutan around]

Outrageous Charge
The combined experience of ppruners is vast. Perhaps one or more of the readers of this site may be able to help with this problem. One Sunday last year I visited the lovely YKOW on the west coast of Cape York Peninsula flying a 6 seat aircraft with 2 POB. The town is thoughtfully located so that it has no access by boat, and for 6 months or more of the year no road access. During the wet season flying is the only option for visiting or leaving the town. It has a bitumen strip built with Federal Government funds (your taxes). The community manages the airport. In due course after my visit I received an account - $52.50 landing fee PLUS $50.00 to open the gate (it is padlocked, not coded) PLUS $10.25 GST, totalling $112.75. It makes YAYE and YTNK look positively magnanimous with their charges.
Why the gate opening fee? Because not only do they lock the terrorists out, they lock the legitimate users in, using a padlock and chain.
My question is: Can they legally do this:- prevent a user from leaving the airport? If so what can be done to stop this nonsense? Is there any authority that has any powers to force a council to install a coded lock, so that legitimate users can immediately leave the airport on arrival, for an urgent pit stop or an emergency or for any other reason? I don’t know which (if any) of the following may be able to help: ACCC, CASA, DOTARS, Workplace Health and Safety, Chopper Reid. Perhaps a ppruner has dealt with a similar problem and has some advice. I contacted the council but the CEO said she acted on the advice of the airport caretaker, who presumably has a nice little earner going with this. $57.75 to land is bad enough. A gate opening fee of $55.00 is insult added to injury.
Cheers, RA

[Blueyonda]

It so happens the aerodrome operator is Kowanyama Aboriginal Shire Council. It is also a security controlled airport. I don't think anyone could do anything about this. Too sensitive.

DO you know if they have an RPT service going into this place because what annoys me is security controlled aerodromes that do not have an RPT service and have not for some time.

[aileron_69]

Dash8 goes in there a few times a week. Just carry a set of Bolt cutters in your plane, that way they can put your $55.75 landing fee towards a new lock. If they have to replace it enough times they might have the foresight to put in a code lock. :E

[Blueyonda]

I would draw your attention to subsection (1) (h) and (2). If you do cut the padlock, and, claim a protest, and, nobody enters the airport through the gate containing the lock you have disabled and does any of the points noted in (1)(a) to (h) then I think you would have reasonable grounds to do so.



Division 5—Unlawful interference with aviation
10 Meaning of unlawful interference with aviation
(1) Any of the following done, or attempted to be done, without lawful
authority is an unlawful interference with aviation: (a) taking control of an aircraft by force, or threat of force, or any other form of intimidation or by any trick or false pretence;
(b) destroying an aircraft that is in service;
(c) causing damage to an aircraft that is in service that puts the safety of the aircraft, or any person on board or outside theaircraft, at risk;
(d) doing anything on board an aircraft that is in service that putsthe safety of the aircraft, or any person on board or outsidethe aircraft, at risk;
(e) placing, or causing to be placed, on board an aircraft that is inservice anything that puts the safety of the aircraft, or any person on board or outside the aircraft, at risk;
(f) putting the safety of aircraft at risk by interfering with, damaging or destroying air navigation facilities;
(g) putting the safety of an aircraft at risk by communicating false or misleading information;
(h) committing an act at an airport, or causing any interference or damage, that puts the safe operation of the airport, or the safety of any person at the airport, at risk.
(2) However, unlawful interference with aviation does not include
lawful advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action that does not
result in, or contribute to, an action of a kind mentioned in
paragraphs (1)(a) to (h). Next time, get dropped off then claim false imprisonment if they don't let you out :}

[The Green Goblin]

I would send a cheque for the landing charge and a nicely worded letter stating the landing charge is for use of the facilities.

If they wish to charge a gate unlocking fee, it can be bundled into the landing fee. You will not be paying for someone to give you access to your own aeroplane on federal property.

I'd suspect this little scam will stop and the airport worker will no longer be pocketing his little bonus.

[Frank Arouet]

Two minute Araldite comes to mind. Doesn't solve your problem, but makes a fashion statement.:)

I'd pay the landing charge, but deduct the gate fee saying it is unconstitutional. Free trade was guaranteed in the constitution to prevent toll gates and the likes on the River Murray. I doubt any amendments have repealed that guarantee.

They'll probably have a constitutional challenge in The High Court within 24 hours though.

[Bounceferret]

Nagambie
$55 landing charge (your not told of this fluctuating fee until you land)
Group of 10 went up for a dive, took a baron and a bonanza. $5000 worth of business wasn't enough for them... clearly
Slapped us with $55 each plane, and the owner/manager/d!ick arugued the charge until the cows came home, was going to lock the wheels until we paid.

what's this insatiable urge to charge everyone for anything... charge charge charge, money money money

rant over

[Al Fentanyl]

Tell the w@anker to go ahead and clamp it, then under the already mentioned Federal law (e) placing, or causing to be placed, on board an aircraft that is inservice anything that puts the safety of the aircraft, or any person on board or outside the aircraft, at risk; use the previously recomended boltcutters to cut said lock off. Pretty sure he'll run outa locks before you tire of cutting them off.:E

[Jamair]

Re the YKOW fees, if the fees are detailed in ERSA, that is that. If not, pay the landing fee and tell 'em to jam the other where the sun don't shine. FWIW, last time I was there the pedestrian gate to the left side of the terminal was not padlocked.... but that was 2 years ago. You could also walk through the shed door.

Slightly off topic, but the worst fee issue I have run into was during a trans-Oz trip. On a Saturday arvo, the Geralton (?spl) WA refueller had a queue of aircraft waiting, I was number 3 or 4. He fuelled the a/c for me, then charged a call-out fee on top. Despite already being there, he charged each aircraft a $50 call-out fee. Cash only.:mad:

[Brian Abraham]

Free enterprise at its best, charge what the market will bare. Bankers tactics are dribbling down the food chain.

[Frank Arouet]

Broken Hill was bad for multiple call out fees and sour service some years back. Left a lasting impression with me and haven't been back since. Lost business to the town is a lost brain fart to some of these guys.

[startingout]

Try ceduna, town is what? 2km away... If you ever decide to venture there with a turbine they will charge you $150 for the privilege to unlock the boswer and watch you top your plane up with some expensive fuel. Good Onya! :ok:

[rutan around]

Blueyonder, YKOW Aboriginal Council should recognise that most aircraft visiting Kowanyama are commercial and that they simply add the landing fee and gate opening fee on to their fare cost plus a healthy margin to cover the time waiting for the gate opener. This has numerous undesirable effects. It increases the price of food and other goods flown in. It decreases the services available such as medical and educational. There’s only so much money in the funding bucket and it gets whittled away at $100.00+ per landing. It discourages people working there because it’s too expensive to get to Cairns for a bit of R&R. In short they are only hurting their own people as they are the ones who eventually pay.
Green Goblin: I have paid the landing fee but not the unlock fee. Perhaps I should sent Av Data a letter asking if it’s in their charter to collect gate fees. After all they do not collect call-out fees for fuel.
Jamair: The side gate and main gate were both padlocked. The low-life that ran the airport must have needed more money to buy more cigarettes for the local girls for who knows what reason.
Brian Abraham: This is what happens when government hands out monopolies with no checks and balances. Imagine what would happen if councils were given monopoly ownership of roads. Based on airport charges you would be charged $100 per kilometre. Our governments are so clever.
Cheers, RA

[skipper1981]

Broken Hill now has a self serve bowser for Avgas.Takescards.

[YPJT]

$100 - $150 seems to be a standard callout fee for A/H fuel. In a way I sympathise with the refuellers for this. Usually they are one man shows who are on call 24 / 7 with little or no time off. Self serve options are certainly the way to go though.

[Frank Arouet]

I don't think anybody is going crook at call out fees being a fact of life. The problem arises when there are 3 aircraft on the airport and the fuel bloke charges 3 call out fees and wants to punch your lights out for disputing the practice. As I said, I don't need to get into a brawl every time I need fuel and the matter left such a bad taste in my mouth I haven't been back since. I admit it was a while ago and things may have changed.

But I'll never know will I?

[havick]

Frank - My personal favourite is pre-arranging an A/H refuel as per the ERSA. Turning up for fuel and then said refueler demand more than twice the ERSA stipulated A/H callout fee.

Said refueler then tries to refuse to give you a reciept on the fuel docket for said doubled callout fee.. Small argument ensues because without a reciept, the pilot will not be reimbursed by company.

Shows what the world is coming to WRT customer service these days. I fully understand that most refuellers are on call essentially 24/7, but bailing up pilots for cash that is more than double what is stated in the ERSA is a bit much.

Funnily enough we now operate a large turbine chopper not far from there, and I now go out of my way to not stop in there for fuel. They're now missing out on thousands of litres of JET being bought from them out of principle.

[Howard Hughes]

Self serve options are certainly the way to go though.
Nooooo, not for JET A-1!;)

[mustman]

Last time I went into Halls Creek I am pretty sure it had both Avgas and Turbine self serve.

[YPJT]

Frank,
The problem arises when there are 3 aircraft on the airport and the fuel bloke charges 3 call out fees and wants to punch your lights out for disputing the practiceYup that is just being a greedy swine.

I'm pretty sure Newman has Jet-A1 self serve. Not sure if underwing though. I think that has to be pumped by a qualified refueler.

Havic, never take what ERSA has for gospel. Amendments can take six months from the time of the change to reach publication stage. Fine if it's an operational matter as it can be put out as a permanent NOTAM. Fuel though will generally not be touched by the AsA NOTAM system.

[Checkboard]

Re-fuelers - *tip* Don't call it a "call out fee", call it an "after hours service fee".

This will prevent the second and subsequent pilots in the queue wanting to punch your lights out after refusing to pay. ;)

[startingout]

YPJT, I might be mistaken always confuse aerodromes but I belive newman has underwing bowser in a different location to overwing. Once landed there and pulled up and shutdown to what I thought was overwing.. needless to say with the outside temps my oils were to hot to start up again so sat on the ground for 30mins to make them cool down before i could go anywhere :S

[pcx]

Over the last few years I have seen a number of posts regarding the practice of refuellers charging each aircraft a call out fee even when there are 2 or 3 aircraft lined up at the same time. On the surface of it I can see how this can be seen to be greed on the part of the refueller.

It has been many years since I have covered call out for refuelling at a country aerodrome.

What seems not to be understood is that one of possibly two situations exist.

The refuelling agent is paying some one to be on call for the out of hours period. In this case he or she is trying to provide a service to us pilots and he needs to recover the costs involved. The recovery of the cost to the refueller is most probably averaged out over an expected number of call outs over a set period of time. If they all come at the same time, the cost to the refueller to provide the service doed not decrease because he still has to cover the remaining out of hours period.

Alternatively the refueller is making him or herself available for the out of hours cover and the only remuneration received is the call out fee. This person basically is on standby and can not do all of the normal things that they might otherwise do. ie have a beer etc. How many of us would be prepared to give up our out weekends for an uncertain remuneration.

Then there is the prodlem of the pilot who absolutely positively must have fuel at a set time and who is going to be in a desperate hurry so could you be at the airport ready to refuel at "x" time. Then does not turn up at all or 3 hours late.

Most refuellers are simply trying to provide a service and receive a reasonable payment for it.

Obviously the call out fee needs to be reasonable for it to all work out to every ones benefit.

The alternative is for fuel to only be available during normal business hours and we all know that that does not work for our industry, be it for a private or commercial flight.

Give the refueller a break and provided the call out fee is reasonable, smile, pay up, say thank you and be on your way hopefully having received satisfactory service.

I do not know what the margin on a liter of fuel is today, but back when I was refuelling it sure as hell did not cover the cost of providing out of hours service.

[sms777]

I totally agree with pcx(obviously an experienced refueller).
A bit of courtesy go a long way in aviation. Not to mention airmanship. If you call in advance in a nice and professional manner advicing ETA I am sure service will be provided professionally. It has not let me down in my 30 years or so flying private or commercial.
I had my experience with a well known BH refueller once around 1998 when i called him at 1900 local time advising him that I will be passing trough on the way to AS landing BH around 2300 local. His response was" Not a chance in hell" since it was his daughters birthday that night and he would not give a damn. Than I said the magic word "PLEASE". That changed his tone to: Buzz the town at 500 feet so I can hear you".(There was no need to break rules since I was flying a QUEENAIR) He was there waiting for me when I landed.
No call out fee, friendly service because I have treated him like a professional which he deserved.
The moral to my story.....
Respect our refuellers.....They keep us in the air.

[rutan around]

We seem to have become bogged down in call-out fees for refuelling. My original post asked if it is legal to stop airport users from leaving the airport by locking the gate preventing movement both ways. Whilst seeking legal opinion here's another question - is there any legal limit to landing charges? Or should we soon look forward to a $1,500 landing fee at Woop Woop for our 2 seat mark 1 bug smasher? Anyone out there with legal expertise in these areas?

[YPJT]

As far as I know, there are no specific guidelines on what airports can charge for or how much. Having said that, most seem to benchmark themselves against each other in the same region depending upon what type of services and facilities are available.

As for your mates at YKOW, they probably have not sought or been given any advice on how to achieive the required level of security in accordance with their TSP. Hence, they think the gate has to be padlocked at all times and it has to be one of them that opens it.

As for stopping your aircraft from departing? I recall threads here a long time ago talking about aircraft that had vehicles, tractors, piles of sand etc put in front of an aircraft because of non- payment of landing / parking charges. I would doubt that action could be interpreted as endangering an aircraft.

[rutan around]

YPJT, I'm not talking about departing. I'm talking about arriving. I'm talking about parking the a/c and then what.............. I didn't land at YKOW just to smell the flowers INSIDE the perimeter fence. Locking PX and crew INSIDE the airport is simply B.S The whole idea of security fences (don't get me started) was to keep undesirables out NOT legitimate users in. Makes as much sense as 22 month ASIC cards.

[YPJT]

I'm sorry if you don't like the answers you currently have. You might be better served addressing your concerns formally to the registered operator of the aerodrome.

[Frank Arouet]

I think the questions should be asked about why a GST is applied to "this service" which could be more accurately described as extortion.

If you charge a landing fee, one would logically assume that gives you the right to carry out whatever business you landed there to conduct.

It doesn't appear that fuel is even mentioned or needed.

And why would you entertain the notion of it being a good idea to address your concerns to the extortionist?

Isn't that a bit like reasoning with a bank robber instead of calling the police?

BTW. The airport was most probably paid for with taxpayers money and the "operator" who probably never put a cent into it, now sees fit to charge that same taxpayer again to use it, plus levy another fee and then add another tax.

rutan around is obviously at fault here, should have read the fine print.

Strewth!:ugh:

[YPJT]

For the record, I agree that the charge is exhorbitant and probably should not be made in the first place. My experience though has usually been that a desired result can be far better achieved by going to the source of the problem, or at least someone who can deal with it rather than having a sook on PPRUNE.

[Frank Arouet]

I've amended the post YPJT.:oh:

I'm still smarting over the call to be kind to our fuel agents. I never imagined they were in it for philanthropic reasons. Always thought they were in it to make a quid. Just goes to show how out of touch one can be. Must remember I'm only the customer.

If I have need to fly to YKOW, I'll take a bottle of fine red for the gatekeeper in gratitude of him doing such a fine job.

That would be OK wouldn't it?:)

[YPJT]

Frank,
you and I have locked horns on previous occasions, but that's ok, all part of the rich tapestry of PPRuNe. :ok:

I tend to work both sides of the fence here both as a pilot and in aviation management. Some airport operators clearly don't have a clue when it comes to a reasonable charging regime or how to provide access during or after hours to their users. I would hazard a guess that the guys at KOW fall into this category. Someone from industry whether Australian Airports Association or other industry representative body needs to give them some advice. Maybe they just don't care either. They have their small regular band of operators who are able to pass the cost on to customers and anyone else can either suck it up or go somewhere else. Very sad state of affairs indeed if that is what is occurring.

[Frank Arouet]

The opening post said he contacted the CEO but she took advice from the caretaker. You would expect this sort of thing in Zimbabwe, not Australia. The whole show is just one more example of what happens when you give authority to arrogant individuals that are ignorant or incapable of comprehending basic low level governance or responsibility for community needs.

I'd point a bone at the lot of them.

[rutan around]

YJPT, Seeking information and expressing opinion can hardly be categorised as having a 'sook'. I was originally asking whether anyone knew who had jurisdiction here. I find it surprising that govt doesn't set charging limits at aerodromes that have been fully paid for by govt, fenced by govt, and are a monopoly with no chance of that situation changing. I find it even more surprising when that airport is the ONLY access to the town for much of the year. I am also surprised that Workplace Health and Safety don't take an interest. I can't walk on a plank 3 metres above the ground but one of my passengers could die of a heart attack clinging to a padlocked gate (dramatic drum-roll). Cutting or glueing the locks or pissing on the caretakers door (as suggested to me once) won't solve the problem.
Overcharging is part of the downward spiral of GA. As landing and fueling charges rise fewer planes use overcharging airports. Less traffic means less income, so charges per aircraft are raised further, again reducing traffic. We all know where this is going. With costs sky high and many places not viable to land many current and potential GA pilots are seeking less expensive interests.
Our capitalist society only works properly when there is competition. When competition doesn't exist or is impractical (eg airports) then govt must impose checks and balances, otherwise unscrupulous operators take advantage of the situation as we are seeing now. When I'm up YKOW way next I will seek a face-to-face meeting with the community CEO, but it would appear that the heavy ammunition I was seeking does not yet exist. Your advice re achieving the correct level of security in accordance with their TSP is good and will certainly be passed on to the CEO.
Cheers, RA

[Blueyonda]

I'm sure it is the Council who is responsible for the charges at the airport as well as installing security staff. I would phone the council and confirm the charges are correct (gate opening fee) and go from there. Council may not be aware of this?Then go to the municipal association equivalent in QLD and chat with them.

Is the airport surrounded by aboriginal land?

[zanthrus]

Simple,

Land where you want. Dont pay. What are they going to do about it?
They cant stop you landing or taking off. Cut the locks off the gate. Gee, officer I dunno who did that. It was like that when I first saw it.

[rutan around]

Blueyonda
Yes so even if you wanted to you can't buy land for an alternative airport. One of the current problems with airports on aboriginal land is that since CDEP was abolished CEO's have very little money so they grab as much as they can from their limited options. eg $100 + landing fees, $50 per pallet barge unloading fee, $300 for accommodation I wouldn't put my dog in (not all these happened at YKOW).
Cheers RA

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

ERSA states to contact the Ad operator for charges. Did you? Perhaps the gate is normally unlocked and you arrived outside those hours. Were you there on business or dropped in ie charter or private? Maybe they don't charge those on business involving the community. Maybe they've had their coded lock broken too many times, or found the gate left propped open too many times so that now a padlock and chain is the easiest way to secure the airport. Maybe someone has to make a dedicated trip out to the strip if you arrive unannounced? Maybe they feel they don't have to subsidise your hobby?

Simple,

Land where you want. Dont pay. What are they going to do about it?
They cant stop you landing or taking off. Cut the locks off the gate.

With an attitude like that, I bet you're welcomed everywhere.
There's lots of ways to stop you taking off again, trust me.

[Ovation]

The refuel man at Geraldton left a bad taste in my mouth when, after arranging by phone to be refueled while he was there for a RPT flight, he gouged me and 3 other aircraft for the "call-out fee".

And of course, it was cash only.:ugh:

[FokkerInYour12]

As a result of such gouging in Geraldton, I always use Shine. They are happy to sell you fuel and friendly too.

[Sqwark2000]

Could you not insist for a GST reciept?? That'd mean putting it through the books and paying their own GST, probably too hard for them and you might get a reduced rate for cash.

Anyway, taking the charges to the media, especially for a council owned/operatored, would hopefully bring some unwanted attention to the cashie being undertaken by contractors....

[rutan around]

Ovation: "The refuel man at Geraldton left a bad taste in my mouth". Just how far do you have to go to get fuel at Geraldton? I think I'll stick to YMEK.

Traffic Is Er Was: Your post puts out more maybes than a virgin on prom night. When you have you situational awareness problem sorted out and you venture further north than Southport, you will find things are not as simple as you seem to think they are. I suggest you phone, say, 10 communities, and log the man-hours it takes just to speak to people who might know the answer to whatever airport question you might have. Remember you have the luxury of sitting at home where the phone works and have days or weeks before your big adventure north. Many of us have more to do than to ring every airport manager to check whether the rules have changed since the previous 30 visits. Forgive me if I'm wrong but you sound like Daddy's given you lots of money to learn to fly and you work for the government so you are experienced at being stuffed around and perhaps even enjoy it.

If we look at all the points you and others raised then transposed them to road transport there would be a riot. Imagine I wanted to visit my daughter who's teaching at Beenleigh school. All the roads to Beenleigh are locked so I phone ahead to make sure they will unlock them at night and on holidays. I find they do but I have to pay $50 to unlock them and then another $50 so I can use them and then another $50 so I can leave at the end of my visit. I can however delay my departure till Monday during working hours and save $50. The chain man helpfully tells me that driving on his bit of road is free if I have a truck delivering books to the school but not if I'm just visiting either in my own car or in a taxi. He also informs me that I have to have photo ID and a full security check because a bus uses this road every second Tuesday. If I want fuel I have to pay $50 to pull off the road and use the garage's bitumen to get to the pump. I also have to pay 50c per litre surcharge because this is special fuel blessed by the RACQ. The chain man tells me that all this security has paid off because they haven't had one terrorist attack and only one major fuel contamination crisis since it was introduced. In fact it has been pretty near as good as the thousand years before it was introduced with the exception of a few isolated cases of chain vandalism. When I point out that in the previous 1000 years there were no chains to vandalise he looks a bit confused. Spare me from all this needless crap we have to put up with in the Aviation industry. If I'd know in 72 what was ahead I never would have become involved.

'They all laughed at me when I said I wanted to be a comedian. They're not laughing now.' - attributed to Barry Humphries.

Cheers, RA

[Jabawocky]

That was a good read....and you do have a point, and valid at that. Try printing it out with pretty pictures and sending it to the various ministers, see if you get a bite.

[Frank Arouet]

Traffic Is Er Was;

Maybe they feel they don't have to subsidise your hobby?

Possibly the thing that annoys me most with PPRune is those who fail to read and digest the entire thread and join in at the end with non textual criticism and bloody no idea. To that end your post is rather annoying.

perhaps if you had read from the start, you may realise this is not in relation to a "weekend warrior" out pursuing his hobby but someone who's business depends on his being there. Perhaps you failed to also note that business is dependent at some times of the year on that aerodrome to conduct that business. Perhaps you also failed to appreciate the added costs impact that persons business and competitiveness.

Perhaps you simply just have no idea?

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

My comment was made after reading the entire post to date. There was no indication from the OP that he was there on business. If he was there on business then he should have found out the charges beforehand so that he can cover his costs. If he couldn't be bothered thats his problem so shut up and pay up. As for off-topic, 80% of the thread is devoted to off topic complaints of refueller call-out charges. I at least was responding to the OP. If he doesn't like my reply so be it.
RA, I've been in aviation for 30 years, nearly half was in Arnhem Land, so I'm pretty much over my "big adventure up north". Your analogy to road transport is pointless as they are not using private assets. Try driving on the road beside the rail line over in the Kimberly and see how welcome you are.
If there is a fee to use something, find out what it is and then it is your choice whether you use it or not. If you don't find out, then don't bitch about it afterwards. I agree. $50 to open a gate seems excessive, but I don't know what they are covering in that charge. Maybe they are losing money if they are paying someone a 4-hour callout to go and do it. Maybe you are actually getting it cheap and they are absorbing the rest? Maybe the gate is locked because they want to know who is entering their community and why? This happened in some communities I knew of. It's private land more or less, so they can pretty much charge (and do) what they like.

[Frank Arouet]

I've been in aviation for 30 years, nearly half was in Arnhem Land

And in that 30 years how much of your own, (personal or business), cash did you pay out without questioning the invoice?

[spirax]

It is my view that landing charges are discriminatory unless there is a specific charge for using roads in the same locality! :mad:

The local aerodrome runway is the most important strip of road in town, it is sad that councils don't appreciate that ! :ugh: A single aircraft can bring thousands of dollars worth of business to a town, but a small landing charge will often deter that business.

A recent push to have charges waived to aircraft less than 2000kgs at some airports should be applauded. :D:D As said above, the various charges these days are killing GA. :mad: The sooner aerodrome operators/Councils (and others) realise this the better we all will be.:confused:

[Frank Arouet]

It's been my experience that many Councilors set on charging landing fees are townsfolk with town businesses. I wonder how many of them would think it's a good idea to put parking meters in front of their shops, or a toll booth at the town boundary, or levy the bus service bringing passengers.

[galdian]

Where these refuellers fall down is they have forgotten the concept of "win/win".

I don't think any pilots going through the outback fail to understand these are single operators on call 24/7 so call out fees on weekends/public holidays not unfair.

The win/win would have been to charge each $30.00 or so - pilots save a bit on what they are going to be forced to pay (or no fuel) and the refueller gets a little extra in his pocket, all should be happy and the refueller get repeat business.

Simple really!

[Arrrj]

HH,

Could you please elaborate on why self serve Jet fuel is a bad idea ? I am about to upgrade from my piston machine to a turbine, and whilst a lot of the time I will be fuelled in an airport with a truck, in the country that's not an option. I would appreciate your response.

Arrrj :ok:

[rutan around]

Traffic Is Er Was
I think my comparison between air and road transport is highly relevant. It highlights the nonsense we in aviation come to accept as normal. I strongly dispute your statement: "YOUR ANALOGY TO ROAD TRANSPORT IS POINTLESS AS THEY ARE NOT USING PRIVATE ASSETS". This is far from true. Everything in these communities - the houses, roads, shop, airport, police, health workers, teachers, store managers, and council staff are all funded by government, ie the ever suffering taxpayer. You of all people with 15 years experience in Arnhem Land should know this and would also know that almost none of these places have any commercial basis for existing.

In mainstream when you purchase your house and land the cost of the road water and sewerage are part of the purchase price. The upkeep comes from your rates. If you visit another town you don't pay for the privilege of using their streets just as visitors to your own town don't pay to use yours.

Why the bloody hell don't we have the same system in aviation? The messy inconsistent expensive way that charges are levied and collected in aviation is nothing short of lunacy.They certainly play a significant role in the decline of GA. A Jabiru flying YBCS- YKOW would pay more in landing fees than it would for Avgas used. In my business, when a large capital expenditure is contemplated we do a very careful cost-benefit analysis. Was this ever done when ASIC cards and airport security was proposed for isolated small airports? Of course not - it wasn't their money.

Back to YKOW, they are NOT using private assets. They have a hide charging for something they did not pay for in the first place. My argument is not about whether or not I should have checked for hidden costs. My argument is that the charges should not have been there in the first place. It should make no difference whether the visit was for business or pleasure. If you use that argument then all road vehicles not on business should be charged to travel on roads.How long would a government that tried that stunt last? Aviation is just another mode of transport. Why is it treated differently ?

Regarding their (the white kommandants) wanting to know who comes and goes, it would appear their biggest fear is having a spotlight shone on their nasty little concentration camps. eg What happened to the money provided to build a flood-proof road to the barge landing, which would have provided year-round affordable food? There's no road, no money, and no prosecution. Why? There's lots of other things a bright light would uncover but the attitude seems to be pay up and shut up. Its only another few million of taxpayers money wasted.

Yours in despair, RA

[ace4bar's girlfriend]

Lombadina strip north of Broome.

Just had notification of a rise in the landing fee.

It's just gone up to.............

Wait for it ................

$62.50 per tonne based on your MTOW!!!!!

A landing there will cost us $296.25 + GST.
If we don't give prior notice there is a $40.00 PENALTY quote unquote.

To those who know me, I don't fly there for the fishing!!!

When I questioned the fee, the Community CEO stated that the fee's are a main source of income for the community, and further implied that govt. departments have budgets, and thats what they are there for.

Needless to say, until this matter is sorted I'll be landing at One Arm Point, 23km up the road, operated by a different community.

[Frank Arouet]

the fee's are a main source of income for the communityWell there's obviously no money in digging Yams and all those mineral royalty's aren't worth a tinkers damn.The bloody Chinese screw us, Julya is going to tax dem minerals, the dollar is hurtin exports, you have to work for the dole and does kids only bring a grand each a fortnight. Oh, and the Missus won't bloody work.

Thank God for the accountant. Thank God for the gummit.

Makes a good man turn to the bloody grog it does. But have you seen the price of a cartoon these days?:eek:

On a marginally and only slight side issue, regarding the ownership of these assets, has anyone paid the investors who funded these airport projects in the first place.

[Frank Arouet]

All your worries are over according to The CASA Briefing. One supposes all the "outrageous charges" will now be waived.

What's that Sooty????


Extra funds for remote airstrips

This year's Federal Budget allocated an extra $28 million to improve the safety of airstrips in remote communities. The money will be spent over the next two years. Federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese said these airstrips are often the life-blood of remote Australian communities. "They provide residents with regular air access to emergency services, essential supplies and access to regional centres," Mr Albanese said. The funding is part of the Gillard Government's commitment to remote and regional aviation, as outlined in the national Aviation White Paper. Over the two years $22 million will be provided for aviation safety upgrades on a co-funding basis; and to provide for a higher proportion of funding for works at identified remote Indigenous communities. Another $4 million will be provided to designated airstrips at Indigenous communities that receive essential flights subsidised under the Australian Government's Remote Air Services Subsidy Scheme. Applications for funding of aerodrome safety upgrades at eligible remote communities will open in June 2011 or early 2011-12. "This vital funding continues our commitment to the safety and reliability of remote air services through which $20 million in Australian Government funding was approved for 151 projects over the last four years," Mr Albanese said.

[rutan around]

Good news - Bad news. First the good news is that YKOW is prepared to change it's $55 gate opening fee. The bad news is it's now $82.50 Roads are still closed . $1.5 has just been spent on helicopters ferrying in fuel for the power station due to someones stuffup. Don't worry it's only Govmint money. Anyway it would only have been wasted if it had been spent on building the road to the barge. Excuse me I have to go now and phone the Main Roads Dept and the local garage to see if there are any new user fees before I go and get my paper.
RA

[InDaBack]

I have spent the past 6 years working in communities.

The council does not have a rate payer base as a normal council. Housing is government paid/built with minimal rental/if any income.
There are not rates coming in as per normal councils.
The council receive funding from the govt for run the shire.
To top this up, the council tend to pillage other govt departments with over priced rates for govt owned buildings and of course any other civil company.
Add to that the publics perception that pilots and companies earn millions of dollars per year and you are going to get stung.
Its not about what service you can provide, its about whether they perceive that you can pay you bill, and then charge you accordingly.

[rutan around]

Well it's happened. The landing fee melanoma has metastasized. It started as a pain in the ar#e in only one place. ( Kowanyama ) Unfortunately it has now spread and the prognosis is a slow and painful death for general aviation. The only chance of survival is radical surgery. Cut these tumors out of aviation by cutting off their blood supply. I mean totally cut off. No Charter No private No medical No government No FIFO No mail No tourists. The d'heads that set these charges would soon learn whether they need aviation or not. It could be done without too much harm to the patient by conducting only one operation at a time starting at the worst site. But do we have the balls or organizational skills to make this happen? Sadly I think probably not. I received a reply from Mr Albanese which summarised said " So sad, too bad,try telling someone who cares."
Charges Aurukun---------------$80
Mornington Is.---------$72
Lombadina-------------$108
Tennant Ck-------------$43
Kowanyama-----------$110 plus $82 gate opening fee
These applied to a 1,723 kg aircraft. Some charges are flat rate,some per tonne

[Jabawocky]

Are there any ministers who own an aircraft? :E

When they start getting invoices for multiple visits to cowinyajama's it might get some attention.

I can see it now......rutan around sitting at the airport on the ground VHF in hand, long list of rego's in the other.....XXX turning base Full Stop. ABC straight in rwyXX full stop :}

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Aurukun, Mornington Is., Lombadina, Tennant Ck, Kowanyama!

All 5-star tourist destinations! Cheap at twice the price.

Dr :8

[Frank Arouet]

Early onset of Dutch Disease perhaps.

Dutch disease (http://moneyterms.co.uk/dutch-disease/)