AVDATA landing fees - automatic from CTAF calls?
Back in July 2016, I received an invoice from them saying that I had landed in June at Hamilton Island(which I had not). I simply emailed them saying that on that date the aircraft was parked at Archerfield.
Avdata then sent me back a replacement invoice advising of their error for an amount of $0.00.
My advice, the same as previous posts, is to advise Avdata of their error and they will deal with it.
Avdata then sent me back a replacement invoice advising of their error for an amount of $0.00.
My advice, the same as previous posts, is to advise Avdata of their error and they will deal with it.
They have to prove you did land there, you don't have to prove you didn't.
My advice, the same as previous posts, is to advise Avdata of their error and they will deal with it.
Make sure your objections are in writing, either email or post, email is better as it can be time verified the only issue is if they read it.
Add a line at the bottom..."if I do not hear from you within seven days I will consider this matter finalised"
The Avdata system isn't perfect. Technology that photographs the aircraft will be more accurate than the voice recorders which allow for people to be dishonest by using false callsigns or not saying anything at all.
The elephant in the room is the RA-Aus registered aircraft whose owner details are not made available so they can't be invoiced, unless this has changed recently. So they are being subsidised by everyone else who owns or uses the facilities. If you want to make a fuss then make it about that. Avdata on the whole do an OK job.
The elephant in the room is the RA-Aus registered aircraft whose owner details are not made available so they can't be invoiced, unless this has changed recently. So they are being subsidised by everyone else who owns or uses the facilities. If you want to make a fuss then make it about that. Avdata on the whole do an OK job.
Last edited by Clare Prop; 2nd Feb 2017 at 03:13.
Two quick stories:
A mate got an Avdata bill for a YPMQ (I think) landing one time, and I just happened to have read in an NZ magazine of the ZK-same rego transitting thru YPMQ that time. Cancelled by Avdata right away. Tick!
I got a bill for someplace for my aircraft, in bits in the workshop. Sent them an email and a photo of my cat assisting (lounging) on the bare fuselage, bill cancelled by Avdata at once, and they told me I probably needed a new assistant too!
So, just send them a polite email, and they'll fix it without fuss I've found. I don't get worked up over it.
A mate got an Avdata bill for a YPMQ (I think) landing one time, and I just happened to have read in an NZ magazine of the ZK-same rego transitting thru YPMQ that time. Cancelled by Avdata right away. Tick!
I got a bill for someplace for my aircraft, in bits in the workshop. Sent them an email and a photo of my cat assisting (lounging) on the bare fuselage, bill cancelled by Avdata at once, and they told me I probably needed a new assistant too!
So, just send them a polite email, and they'll fix it without fuss I've found. I don't get worked up over it.
So, just send them a polite email, and they'll fix it without fuss I've found
The errors are not usually theirs.
Why are any of you using your callsign? I've flown in various parts of the world, and the more useful information (to other traffic) is aircraft type eg Navajo, 20 miles west, 3000, inbound...
If Navdata is such a screw up, and rely on broadcast registration then....don't use registration!
If Navdata is such a screw up, and rely on broadcast registration then....don't use registration!
Sometimes it doesn't matter whether or not you use a call sign or even avoid an aerodrome altogether.
Just for ****s and giggles, try this experiment: Put a plan in NIS that includes a landing at (and I'll pluck just a few destinations) YTWB, YORG or YGLB. Then sit at home and twiddle your thumbs, or fly somewhere else.
Just for ****s and giggles, try this experiment: Put a plan in NIS that includes a landing at (and I'll pluck just a few destinations) YTWB, YORG or YGLB. Then sit at home and twiddle your thumbs, or fly somewhere else.
AVDATA versus ERSA
YSHT has , as of Jan 1st, started charging landing fees which are managed by AVDATA. Of course there is noting in ERSA about these fees, because its out of cycle. Will I presume, appear in next edition. If you go onto the AVDATA website and look at Borooloola for instance, it says that landing charges are 20/tonne, with a minimum fee of $68.18. However, ERSA mentions no landing charges. How would they be able to charge landing fees when no mention is made in the Pilots bible, ERSA??
Mick
Mick
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with these things is that you can be placed on a bad credit list which can follow your for life.
It's hard to follow the logic of a council that doesn't charge a fee for visitors using ratepayer funded roads, but leaps in and charges fees for those using a ratepayer funded airfield.
Renmark has the right idea because visitors just need to phone the ARO with details of this flight and no charge occurs.
Kaz
What’s a “CTAF(R)”?
And what are the mandatory calls at the aerodromes that are what you think are “CTAF(R)s”?
And what are the mandatory calls at the aerodromes that are what you think are “CTAF(R)s”?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 166C
Responsibility for broadcasting on VHF radio
(1) If:
(a) an aircraft is operating on the manoeuvring area of, or in the vicinity of, a non-controlled aerodrome; and
(b) the aircraft is carrying a serviceable aircraft VHF radio; and
(c) the pilot in command of the aircraft holds a radiotelephone qualification;
the pilot is responsible for making a broadcast on the VHF frequency in use for the aerodrome in accordance with subregulation (2).
(2) The pilot must make a broadcast that includes the following information whenever it is reasonably necessary to do so to avoid a collision, or the risk of a collision, with another aircraft:
(a) the name of the aerodrome;
(b) the aircraft's type and call sign;
(c) the position of the aircraft and the pilot's intentions.
Note 1: See the AIP for the recommended format for broadcasting the information mentioned in this regulation.
Note 2: For the requirement to maintain a listening watch, see regulation 243.
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
What’s a “CTAF(R)”?
And what are the mandatory calls at the aerodromes that are what you think are “CTAF(R)s”?
And what are the mandatory calls at the aerodromes that are what you think are “CTAF(R)s”?
Do you reckon that you could try, just once, being semi-respectful to one of your fellow pilots?
Your constant nitpicking and bickering over irrelevant detail is really becoming tiresome.
It is a pity you don't expend your energy on the issue Sunfish has raised, being far more important than your nonsense about a misused R.