What's Wrong With Kemble Then?

[ANDY CUBIN]

Fellow Flyers,

As a resident of Kemble and out of personal curiosity I have noticed a distinct downturn in the numbers of visiting aircraft to the place - even on a sunny weekend afternoon.

Rather than ask "I wonder why?", because I have a fair idea anyway, why not air your views here - pretty sure the management will get to see this - know what I mean?!

ANDY CUBIN

[sharpshot]

Let me guess.........something to do with Runway & Nav charges.
Seem to recall they were recently increased.

I do like coming to Kemble and sitting in the sunshine outside the AV8 can be oh so pleasant. I am looking forward to June 20th although have no idea what charges will be meeted out.

My view is that if you don't like the charges, go somewhere else.
I was in Belgium on Sunday and when I looked at the fuel bill and nav charges on Monday I was a bit irked, but will no doubt go back....sometime. 10 Euros per pax and tax on the fuel even though it was being exported.

Airfields operators are far too narrow minded in there decision making when it comes to charging. Light singles and twins are hardly going to impinge upon the well being of a runway surface that takes positioning 747's, so every G.A. movement has to be a bonus when you are employing the good guys up in the Twr and the RFF chaps. I guess Kemble will have to look at their revenue and see if they have set their rates at a realistic level.

[Johnm]

I would have thought that Kemble was nowhere near capacity usage from my recent visits. The hike in fees while not outrageous is irksome and doesn't bear comparison with equivalent arrangements across the channel.

It would seem more sensible to keep landing fees low and get more traffic, since in GA terms traffic breeds traffic, because we PPLs are a sociable lot.

This ought to be both GA friendly and economically sound.

I hope the new airport management try it out for comparison with the current arrangements since the answer will then be clear and unarguable in the numbers.

[cblinton@blueyonder.]

I dont have a problem with the fees, landed there on Saturday and was charged £14 with the option of paying £7 with a fuel uplift.

Most places are around the £10 - £20 landing fee with far less than Kemble has to offer!!
:confused:

[High Wing Drifter]

Well it was £8. However, it never ceases to amaze me how these places manage to stay afloat with such miniscule landing fees. Given the cost of land'n'labour in this coutry £14 sounds like good value. Especially somewhere as nice as Kemble.

[Flyboy-F33]

Quite a number of owners and pilots were regular visitors from Blackbushe, but I know that many of them are not going so often sinse the recent price rises.

The manager of Kemble asked for feedback on prices...He has been getting it, but the prices dont seem to have changed.

Pilots are indeed a fickle bunch..... they will fly maybe an extra 20 mins to save £5 in landing fees....It doesnt stack up, but thats just the way it is.

Fly....

[S-Works]

Kemble is a great location and has great facilities but as others have said, it is the hike in landing fees that have put most people off. A rise from £8 to £10 might have been easier to swallow bit to £14 was a hell of a jump.

In the global scheme of things it is not a lot of money but to a lot of pilots it is and they vote with there feet.

Even the management needed to raise the fees then perhaps doing it over a bit longe term in smaller chunks might work better.


As flyboy says pilots are indeed a fickle bunch!

[bcfc]

Andy

As a fairly regular visitor (4-5 times a year), its just circumstance that means I haven't visited in a couple of months. However, I hope to soon and maybe this thread is the required prod to pop over - if only to use the bogs at AV8 :cool:

At £8, I though Kemble cheap as chips - so I've no problem with £14. I need to visit the Borders later this summer and the only strip is a rough bit of asphalt with no facilities and the chance my spam-can will get nuzzled by a cow. For this I'll pay £10 (and will do so willingly because of the convienience & I always have the option not to)

-bcfc

[Southern Cross]

Compared with £12 for Booker and £10 for White Waltham, £14 isn't too bad and if they discount to £7 if you take fuel, well then I can't really say that they are out of step. No discount at Booker for taking on fuel...:{

[sickBocks]

Nothing wrong with Kemble - it was awfully busy the other day. Lots of pilots having a chat about why it had 'AD' painted on the runway. See they've got rid of that Britannia now. :-)

sB

[Charlie Zulu]

I haven't flown into Kemble for a while because the Beagle Pup is currently in bits in Devonair's Hangar at Kemble... !!!! :{

Should be flying out of Kemble in a few weeks time when we get the aeroplane back.

Then yes we will be regular visitors for our 50 hrs and proper social visits. The flying club at my home base tends to use Kemble as a fly-out destination once in a while.

£14 is pretty cheap for landing fees still.... compared to another place not a million miles from Kemble...

Best wishes,

Charlie Zulu.

[vanhigher]

when I landed there recently I'm sure it was £11.00 per tonne or part thereof.
I was in a PA31 which worked out at £44.00 - not cheap !!

nobody mentioned a discount for fuel uplift

[GK430]

Where's the Britannia gone:confused:

[sickBocks]

The Brit hasn't really gone... was just commenting on Kemble's proximity to Aston Down.

[Masser]

Heard a rumour that Air Atlantique may be moving its operations to Kemble, lock, stock....anyone heard anything on this??

[matspart3]

Does this downturn co-incide with Gloucester's recent upsurge in visitors, following their new landing fee policy?

Gloucester now only charge £10 inc. for PPL training flights, PFA Permit aircraft and anything under 750Kg. Other singles pay £10 + VAT when they buy AVGAS, twins buying 200ltrs or more only pay £15. Full details are here

http://www.gloucestershireairport.co.uk/docs/charges2004.DOC

With more hard runways, navaids, ATC, Radar etc. surely it's better value for money?

[sharpshot]

MATSPART3
And a great service you and 360 Backtrack and your collegues give us as well.

By the way, ever thought of introducing automatic freq change during the busy periods for a/c departing the circuit, Twr - App?

Question: Flying a homebased a/c. I bought fuel prior to dep, returned 10 hours later and bought more fuel and paid full runway charge. I am not the owner and it is not a club a/c - am I entitled to a reduction in the runway charge?

I still like popping over to Kemble though:ok:

[Flyin'Dutch']

With the fuel uplift the landing fees at Kemble are still doable and even cheap.

However if you are not able to take up the required amount or don't want fuel I think they are on the steep side.

£18 for the Lance and £14 for the Maule is no bargain.

When these prices were first announced youcould ring the manager and have a moan, did that but seems to have had little effect.

AV8 is a great facility for the GA world and worth its weight in gold.

FD

[Hansard]

I'm happy with a £14 landing fee at Kemble - decent runway, decent food and facilities. Paid the same last time I was at Duxford (a few months ago), again no complaints. My two local fields (smaller, fewer facilities) are £10 and £12

How else do airfields pay their business rates, staff, etc. if we're not willing to pay a reasonable amount for their use?

[flyingfemme]

Gloucester now only charge £10 inc. for PPL training flights, PFA Permit aircraft and anything under 750Kg. Other singles pay £10 + VAT when they buy AVGAS, twins buying 200ltrs or more only pay £15.

Not quite.....watch the weight limits. Singles over 1.5MT and twins over 2.5MT get no discount - no matter how much fuel you buy. Can get VERY expensive at £16.50 per MT + VAT.

[matspart3]

We're on the case with the weight limits...a 'problem' with one of our regular customers was highlighted to me earlier today.

...and the silly parking rate will be tweaked too! Watch this space.

[Tonka Toy]

Chinese whispers are rife. There was a rumour that the classics were going to little rissington a while ago. I don't really think that Kemble is really equipped for the likes of atlantique. Can you imagine the strop created by an oh my god o'clock callout! besides, believe they are concentrating on passenger work from now on, -hence they've just sacked all their cabin crew!?

Might visit more often myself if the red baron jagdstaffel aircraft were cheaper! £180 smackers an hour for a dog. Obviously the guys at the RAFVR recurrency training unit are not getting paid enough at B'med eh Andy!

[ANDY CUBIN]

As it happens, I make 5/8ths of f@@@-all at UH!

The Bulldog rate is calculated such that the business ends up in profit, such that it may continue as a going concern.

None of the instructors are in it to get rich - rather some fun flying for ex-mil dudes who enjoy stick and rudder flying and all feel they have something to give back to the flying community.

The Dog is thirstier than a PA28, has a nice big window as well as a warm cuddly QFI next to you! He (or she) then guides you through your aerobatics, spinning, upset recoveries, advanced manoeuvres, formation or VP conversion, or indeed anything else that you may wish to contemplate.

I agree - you can always go to your local flying club and spend £130/hour, and if this is the limit of depth of pocket, I urge you to do so. Any flying is fun - at UH we just have more of it.

I started the thread because I have noticed a drop off in business both at the airfield and at AV8 - especially on beautiful sunny days. I am there pretty much every day when I am not at work and I am not the only local resident to have remarked upon it.

Nevertheless, my concerns are eased, as the majority of posters seem to be happy with the sitch.

Please come to the airshow on June 20th - it promises to be a belter of a day - I get to fly thrice.

Good banter tho Tonka

[FNG]

The Kemble landing fees don't sound that drastic if the facilities have improved as much as is rumoured. The Bulldog rate sounds somewhat higher than average, as it's more than the going rate for Cap 10 dual in southern England (Sherburn does that for 50p in the old money, but that's in the frozen north), and Dogs can be rented for under £100 an hour solo if you know where to go, but perhaps the reality is that most places charge too little and, if instructors get slightly better paid and aviation businesses can make some profit, why not?

[Wycombe]

...now I'll admit to being a bit vertically challenged, but why are the urinals so high in the Gents at AV8!!!!

Yes, rates have gone up, but with what a lot of us pay to fly in the UK, an extra fiver isn't really a big deal (we could easily spend twice that having to go around and fly an extra circuit!).

Not-withstanding having to stand on tip-toes in the Gents, had a very pleasant visit a couple of months back, and a scrummy lunch on the AV8 decking.

No Hunters flying that day though :(

[ozplane]

I'm surprised more airfields don't offer "associate membership" like they do at Old Buckenham. The landing fee is around £12 for a single which isn't too bad as the facilities are very good and the refurbished cafe is excellent. However for £20 you can join as an associate and have as many landings as you like in a calendar year. Only 2 landings and you're ahead of the game. As this is my favourite "£100 coffee" flight it works well for me and judging by the other posters in this thread Kemble gets a lot of return visitors as well so it could work there as well.

[Flyin'Dutch']

O,

When I spoke to the manager at Kemble to moan about the price hike, I did suggest something along those lines (and more substantial than £20)

He was going to look into that.

FD

[greeners]

Tonka, FNG

Like the "red baron jagdstaffel aircraft " comment very much indeed!

Would only point out that UH do include very thorough multi-media briefs on all trips to ensure that the value of the precious time on the air is maximised, as well as the loan of good 'chutes, kit and full ANR comms.

Also, unlike the ex-RAF Bulldogs around which are right at the end of their fatigue lives, the UH a/c are in great condition only half-way through their useful lives, and have fully refubished interiors and new avionics - very tasty indeed! :ok:

[Tonka Toy]

Well Andy thats 5/8ths of f@@@-all more than I do! Whose the girlie instructor then! -can't believe shes warmer than you chaps! Went to Kemble and saw your thrice and sharp it looked to! Greeners I fully understand where the £70 odd extra comes from and value it is I am sure. Its probably my lack of improving salary that makes me think twice. I shall just ask for a pay rise and save up, then come and have a look see. Is high rotational spinning on the agenda? look after yourselves!

[bingoboy]

Re landing fees. Given that aviators can and usually are quite put out to pay these and that they never really make a big contribution to an airfields income ( GA I'm talking) it seems to me that if airfields budgetted to make their money out of a/c hangared/based there, they could all charge nil landing fees to visitors which might encourage more aviation and more visitors to buy fuel, lunch and whatever else is on offer.

[S-Works]

what a stunning idea, make the based flyers pay for everyone elses use of an airfield.

When I become prime minister I shall add that to my agenda along with making top earners pay 99% income tax.....;)

:yuk:

[cblinton@blueyonder.]

Come on bingoboy:confused:

why stop there? they could pay for visitors lunch, fuel,hotel, taxi and evening meal.:uhoh:
:yuk:

[Dan Winterland]

At one airfield in which I was involved with the running of, we scrapped landings fees, lowered the cost of the fuel and bought a good coffee machine. We made more money! Aircraft owners are strange economists. If they can see a way of saving a couple of quid - they will do, depite having spent many times more on getting to your airfield. They are also natural moaners. "Do you know what I paid at Kemble last week!" overheard in the club bar will put off any prospective customers.

PS. You should have seen what we charged for the coffee!

[bingoboy]

I assume that most GA airfields really only exist for their home based aircraft and that shrewd economics would suggest that the fixed users pay the fixed costs ie through Hangarage and parking.

What tempts visitors - is it the desire to subsidise the home based users or the great coffee, meals, fuel ?

Wonder how Tesco's would get on if they charged an entrance fee ?

[S-Works]

If you made the based aircraft pay for all of the services then why should they want to tempt visitors?

After all if the locals are funding the place then they should have the right to keep it to themselves!!!

I know if I was fully funding my own airfield then I would not want any free loading oiks landling on my nice shiny airfield! In fact as I operate for a lot of the time from a farm strip this could be the case, bit the owner is happy to accept visitors and jsut asks they make a contribution to our grass cutting.

You have a very strange idea of economics bing boy.:p

[Dan Winterland]

Just noticed that Oxford has reduced it's weekend landing fee to a fiver, or free if you uplift 40L of gas.

That could explain some of the stay aways!

[Timothy]

I used to be a regular at Kemble for lunch, but when they put up the twin landing fee to an unreasonable level I stopped going.

I spoke to the airfield manager who was terribly reasonable, said they didn't want to put me off coming, would revisit the landing fees for twins and call me back.

That was months ago and needless to say he hasn't.

Which is fine, of course, because I rarely need to go there, it was just a nice place for a day out and lunch, and now I go to Old Buck, where I have bought an annual landing card for £20 and can go and have lunch as often as I like.

[Mike Cross]

Perhaps the answer lies somewhere between bingoboy & bose-x.

Keep the visitor landing fees at a level where the amount of traffic is at a maximum consistent with not attracting so many visitors that it adversely affects the home-based users.

That way the home-based users benefit from the visitors increasing the turnover on based facilities like fuel, food, maintenance etc.

If you reduce the number of visitors by increasing landing fees you not only risk hitting your income from landing fees, you also reduce the turnover of the based businesses, and ultimately the rent they are willing to pay you and the level of on-airfield services for the based pilots.

Mike