Airservices Pricing Charges
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airservices Pricing Charges
Controlled airports might have a sudden drop-off in GA traffic now!!
Increase is an understatement.
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...gtermprice.htm
see Invitation to Consult and Terminal Navigation for new pricings.
Increase is an understatement.
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...gtermprice.htm
see Invitation to Consult and Terminal Navigation for new pricings.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is unbelievable, $86 per landed tonne in to Archerfield and $110 per landed tinne in to Parafield!!!!!
Obviously, its all those expensive cars that flying instructors have that has tipped the ACCC off that the GA industry can afford to go from $7.00 per tonne to $110 per tonne.
Thankfully I can't remember much about GA, but I think a Chiefton is a 3 tonne aircraft, so that's 330 dollars to go into Parafield.
GA traffic is well down this year but this may be the nail in the coffin. Add to that the extra cost of obtaining a security clearance and ASIC card to learn to fly, ($200 per year) I think that almost all schools will fold and those that don't will have to move OCTA to Tyabb, Caloundra and Gawler.
Notice to aircrew: nobody can retire and no one can change seats - no replacements available!
Obviously, its all those expensive cars that flying instructors have that has tipped the ACCC off that the GA industry can afford to go from $7.00 per tonne to $110 per tonne.
Thankfully I can't remember much about GA, but I think a Chiefton is a 3 tonne aircraft, so that's 330 dollars to go into Parafield.
GA traffic is well down this year but this may be the nail in the coffin. Add to that the extra cost of obtaining a security clearance and ASIC card to learn to fly, ($200 per year) I think that almost all schools will fold and those that don't will have to move OCTA to Tyabb, Caloundra and Gawler.
Notice to aircrew: nobody can retire and no one can change seats - no replacements available!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well we have to pay for the $150,000,000 wasted so far on NAS and to pay for the extra radar and extra controllers some how. You chuckle heads made your bed, now lie in it.
Yawn. I think that the actual increase is from $7.50 or what ever ir is to $8.60ish. Those figures in the tables are the cost to provide services not the cost to operate the aircraft (I could very wll be mistaken though)
Yawn. I think that the actual increase is from $7.50 or what ever ir is to $8.60ish. Those figures in the tables are the cost to provide services not the cost to operate the aircraft (I could very wll be mistaken though)
Last edited by tobzalp; 10th Jun 2004 at 22:32.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish I was incorrect:
The link: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...afield_twr.pdf
$109.55 per landed tonne to be precise.
Let me know if incorrect.
Yawn
The link: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...afield_twr.pdf
$109.55 per landed tonne to be precise.
Let me know if incorrect.
Yawn
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Midnight and Tobzalp
Based on your notes I have gone back into the detail of the price notification.
On 11 May 04 DOTARS (with due consideration to ACCC ruling)have outlined their cost model for 5 years.
The present 'tower' subsity is approved for this budget until 30 June 2005, however, 'no present intension for the subsity to continue' after this date. At this point it becomes user pays.
The five year cost recovery model includes fees to recover all cost, ie up to $110 per landed tonne. Therefore after the 'tower' subsity ceases in July 2005 the price will increase from 8.60 (next years price as outlined in the documents) to up to 109.55 at Parafield in 5 years time.
The trap is in the fine print, please read.
Based on your notes I have gone back into the detail of the price notification.
On 11 May 04 DOTARS (with due consideration to ACCC ruling)have outlined their cost model for 5 years.
The present 'tower' subsity is approved for this budget until 30 June 2005, however, 'no present intension for the subsity to continue' after this date. At this point it becomes user pays.
The five year cost recovery model includes fees to recover all cost, ie up to $110 per landed tonne. Therefore after the 'tower' subsity ceases in July 2005 the price will increase from 8.60 (next years price as outlined in the documents) to up to 109.55 at Parafield in 5 years time.
The trap is in the fine print, please read.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds fine to me Yawn. I am not surprised that a table put out by Airservices would be so subtle. I would prefer in the Q and A section a straight out....'Hi I am an aircraft owner and it costs me $7 to land now. How much will it cost next year'. 'Well sir, it will cost you around $100 more.'
Dick Smith what is your view of these charges? Where is Ferris to point out that the CHARGING SYSTEM is what should be fixed? I love how Dick has made it free for VFR/GA to fly anywhere (clear of A airspace of course) as long as they don't have to take off or land anywhere!
. Nice one.
Dick Smith what is your view of these charges? Where is Ferris to point out that the CHARGING SYSTEM is what should be fixed? I love how Dick has made it free for VFR/GA to fly anywhere (clear of A airspace of course) as long as they don't have to take off or land anywhere!
. Nice one.
It is government policy to remove the subsidy. If you don't like it change the policy or change the governement.
I blame Bryan Gray (RIP) who as a CEO of an airline didn't want to be cross subsidising bits of the Industry that the Airbus A300 didn't use (like Flight Service, like GA airports, like the ARFF at Bankstown, etc.).
I blame Bryan Gray (RIP) who as a CEO of an airline didn't want to be cross subsidising bits of the Industry that the Airbus A300 didn't use (like Flight Service, like GA airports, like the ARFF at Bankstown, etc.).
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tower for BROOME
Dick,
Sorry, but these costs must horrify you.
I have to ask do you still want to push for a tower for BME at these rates?
Some of the GA and charter guys will not be able to afford this level of charging.
If AsA applies the rate of return of investment in these tables there may be the first proven legitimate conservative mistake in the BME DAS. I think the charge for a tower at BME could be closer to $25 per tonne!!
Considering the involvement of ACCC and no allowance for cross subsidy it appears AsA would be locked into this charging regime.
I will ask the consultants who carried out this section of the BME DAS to recheck their figures based on these declared rates of reurns and costs and get them to confirm or allay my fears. I will re-post when I have the answer.
Cheers Mike
Sorry, but these costs must horrify you.
I have to ask do you still want to push for a tower for BME at these rates?
Some of the GA and charter guys will not be able to afford this level of charging.
If AsA applies the rate of return of investment in these tables there may be the first proven legitimate conservative mistake in the BME DAS. I think the charge for a tower at BME could be closer to $25 per tonne!!
Considering the involvement of ACCC and no allowance for cross subsidy it appears AsA would be locked into this charging regime.
I will ask the consultants who carried out this section of the BME DAS to recheck their figures based on these declared rates of reurns and costs and get them to confirm or allay my fears. I will re-post when I have the answer.
Cheers Mike
Mostly Harmless
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Oz (cold & wet bit)
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"change the policy or change the governement"
It just isn't an issue for the gummint. They're just mad on cost recovery.
Many moons ago there was a $2 toll on the West Gate bridge, so everybody drove through Footscray. Using the gummint's cost recovery model if the traffic goes down from expectations by an order of magnitude you encourage it by increasing the toll to $20, which means they get their revenue back. Then the use goes down by another order of magnitude so the toll goes up to $200.
'Course something in the manner of realism intervened and there are now no tolls on the West Gate and it's now (reasonably) safe to cross the street in Footscray (well you won't get killed by a car anyhow).
Encourage GA, don't tax it into extinction. John Anderson, you grubby f#ckwit, this is your regional responsibility.
It just isn't an issue for the gummint. They're just mad on cost recovery.
Many moons ago there was a $2 toll on the West Gate bridge, so everybody drove through Footscray. Using the gummint's cost recovery model if the traffic goes down from expectations by an order of magnitude you encourage it by increasing the toll to $20, which means they get their revenue back. Then the use goes down by another order of magnitude so the toll goes up to $200.
'Course something in the manner of realism intervened and there are now no tolls on the West Gate and it's now (reasonably) safe to cross the street in Footscray (well you won't get killed by a car anyhow).
Encourage GA, don't tax it into extinction. John Anderson, you grubby f#ckwit, this is your regional responsibility.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where is Ferris to point out that the CHARGING SYSTEM is what should be fixed?
If only Dick has used his powers for good, instead of evil. Sadly, Dick is one of the proponents of privatisation, user pays etc and would never admit the real reasons for the demise of GA.
I think it's easy, who is going to fly out of AF when it's $86 a ton when you can fly out of BN where it's only $5.10...throw all the flying schools out to BN! Problem solvered! It will be perfectly safe, afterall the tower is there, aircraft are aircraft afterall!
With chart prices going thru the roof, fuel getting more expensive, ASA charges going thru the roof, and only airlines on the committee is it just me or don't they seem to want GA around for much longer?
With chart prices going thru the roof, fuel getting more expensive, ASA charges going thru the roof, and only airlines on the committee is it just me or don't they seem to want GA around for much longer?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne
Age: 60
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makeup of the committee
Although there should have been invites sent out to more GA interests, ONE GA organisation was invited...
(From the .pdf document)
Any AOPA people reading this care to comment?
(From the .pdf document)
The organisations invited to participate included Qantas, Virgin Blue, Regional Express, Board of
Airline Representatives in Australia (BARA), International Air Transport Association (IATA),
Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA), Australian Airports Association (AAA), and AOPA. While some were unable to participate, Qantas, Virgin Blue, BARA and IATA accepted.
Airline Representatives in Australia (BARA), International Air Transport Association (IATA),
Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA), Australian Airports Association (AAA), and AOPA. While some were unable to participate, Qantas, Virgin Blue, BARA and IATA accepted.
Prof. Airport Engineer
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Australia (mostly)
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Dickcheese for bringing this one to everyone's notice.
Following the links through the Airservices site, I got to their map of Australia on which all the towers are shown: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...o/terminal.htm
Click on any tower, and you can get the full data/cost sheet to match the Parafield one that Yawn posted as a reference.
Launceston for example will be running at between $12.46 and $14.67/tonne over the 5 years.
Following the links through the Airservices site, I got to their map of Australia on which all the towers are shown: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...o/terminal.htm
Click on any tower, and you can get the full data/cost sheet to match the Parafield one that Yawn posted as a reference.
Launceston for example will be running at between $12.46 and $14.67/tonne over the 5 years.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cost of Tower at BME
As advised I asked our consultants to derermine the cost of a D class Tower at BME using the AsA cost and cost recovery statements.
They advise that the Tower will cost $21 per Tonne for each landing.(incl GST)
They advise that the Tower will cost $21 per Tonne for each landing.(incl GST)
Cost Of Tower At Broome
Wally2,
I would humbly suggest you MAY have to revise that figure..
Considerations: For 'rostering' purposes, 'Broome Tower' would probably require 3 full time ATC's - vs the 2 current full time CAGROs.
Possible roster 0600-1300 - 1st ATC. 1100 -1800 2nd ATC.
Gives 2 staff for the busy midday period. This for 5 day working week. 3rd ATC for remaining time, and to fit in the 'rotating' roster, and 'leave relief' etc.
That equates to 3 ATC staff on 'Temp Transfer' to Broome with
ALL associated costs, presumably, to be 'passed on'.
Thats 3 Broome houses at Broome prices - rented or bought by AsA, transfer costs ex where-ever, vehicle allowances, electricity subsidies (for the aircon), as well as the salaries/incentives for posting. These would be ANNUAL costs.
This, plus something for the construction of the actual Tower plus its facilities, amortised over a suitable period - suggest $3M - 5M range to build and equip, amortised over, what would a 'bean counter' say...10yrs - 15yrs..more/less?
Possible extra costs to BIA clients (aircraft operators) as delays experienced thru ATC 'Procedural Separation' standards, thinning their already thin $, and potentially, the number of 'smaller operators', which, in turn, increases the passed on costs to those remaining...
This would be very sad for Broome....
Area QNH 1013...
I would humbly suggest you MAY have to revise that figure..
Considerations: For 'rostering' purposes, 'Broome Tower' would probably require 3 full time ATC's - vs the 2 current full time CAGROs.
Possible roster 0600-1300 - 1st ATC. 1100 -1800 2nd ATC.
Gives 2 staff for the busy midday period. This for 5 day working week. 3rd ATC for remaining time, and to fit in the 'rotating' roster, and 'leave relief' etc.
That equates to 3 ATC staff on 'Temp Transfer' to Broome with
ALL associated costs, presumably, to be 'passed on'.
Thats 3 Broome houses at Broome prices - rented or bought by AsA, transfer costs ex where-ever, vehicle allowances, electricity subsidies (for the aircon), as well as the salaries/incentives for posting. These would be ANNUAL costs.
This, plus something for the construction of the actual Tower plus its facilities, amortised over a suitable period - suggest $3M - 5M range to build and equip, amortised over, what would a 'bean counter' say...10yrs - 15yrs..more/less?
Possible extra costs to BIA clients (aircraft operators) as delays experienced thru ATC 'Procedural Separation' standards, thinning their already thin $, and potentially, the number of 'smaller operators', which, in turn, increases the passed on costs to those remaining...
This would be very sad for Broome....
Area QNH 1013...
