drauk
I know the analogy doesn't hold up to too much scrutiny
No kidding!
Here's a thought.
Stop thinking about yourself and your £50K sports car or £400K de-iced pressurized multi, and think about the pilot who flies, say, 20 hours a year (because it's all he can afford) who has this diversion problem.
Same answer?
I don't think anyone is saying (not me for sure) they wouldn't pay £200 to land and be/feel safe.
What people are saying is that they shouldn't
have to.
Big difference.
The refusal to participate by Belfast-Intl., Biggin-Hill, Birmingham, Blackpool, Cardiff, Carlisle, Dundee, Exeter, Filton, Gloucestershire, Halfpenny-Green, Humberside, Isle-of-Man, Leeds/Bradford, London-Luton, Manchester, Norwich, Teesside. is just bloody-mindedness.
They must be
so busy/important/(insert suitable adjective here)
Nothing to do with economics.
mrcross
"...but aren't we all missing the point?" "We need to educate ourselves to recognise an emergency ..."
189 airfields don't agree with you, neither do the CAA or AOPA-UK.
We're talking about "precautionary landings", not 7700/emergencies...
What if it isn't
"an emergency", what if it is just a "funny noise", an "ooh, can I smell fuel... Naaah", or a "buggar, that burger I had is
really making me feel nauseous - I don't feel so good - it'll pass"
None of those are emergencies.
How clever of 189 airfields to let me land FOC and make sure everything's hunky-dory, A-OK. No risk or expense to them.
PS, don't you represent AOPA?
