But Cooma is in NSW....:}

Thank you for adding to my store of knowledge and embarrassment. Im guessing this bastard piece of legislation was enacted as an adjunct to the transfer of airports from the Commonwealth to Councils?

I searched Austlii and it seems there is mirror legislation in each of the States.

How they justify charging for a flight that doesn't land and doesn't use their facilities or services, I'm damned if I know.

I think I'll stick to the criminal law...at least they're honest crooks!

Kaz

The RNAV I presume is a service. A landing is about access to property.

Way back in the recesses of my memory there was a case where a landowner tried unsuccessfully to claim ownership of the airspace above his property but the black letter overrides this as far as aerodromes are concerned.

Join the airport users action group and add more weight to their representations.

Kaz

I had something similar with Rottnest Island charging me for a missed approach via AVDATA. They had no right to charge me for the airspace above Rottnest. It took a lot of to and fro and was quite fun watching so many people passing the buck around, but they shut up when I told them that the so-called "Rottnest" chargeable airspace was not depicted on aeronautical charts and even if it had been they couldn't prove my distance from the island when I commenced the missed approach etc etc etc...I wasn't going to give in and eventually they issued me with a credit, quite sure I used up a lot more than $50 of their time arguing about it.

To be fair that is the only time that they argued about it, normally a credit is issued in the event of a dispute as they have to prove you DID land there, you don't have to prove that you DIDN'T.

The landowner was Lord Bernstein, who claimed - unsuccessfully - that a pilot doing aerial photography over his land was trespassing. Various laws have been passed in Australia to make clear that an aircraft overhead property in the ordinary course of navigation is not trespassing on that property. Not quite the same a prohibiting charges for being overhead...

I make it a habit to avoid, to the extent practicable, anywhere that charges.

The selling off of Commonwealth aerodromes is one of the more aggregious crimes against the taxpayer and aviation.

I wonder where he is these days, you know, the fellow with the same name as a famous London Palace.

CC

Perhaps someone can tell me what the current charge is for adding and maintaining an RNAV approach to an airfield? I have been told anywhere from $20,000 to $80,000 to establish and I suspect the same again every few years to have the approaches re-surveyed. Also, to have an RNAV approach the airfield must be either registered or certified, both of which attract a cost. I personally think Councils should cover those costs as a benefit to rate payers and attracting business and tourism to their area. However, a privately owned airfield is a different story because they have to cover their costs or there will be no airfield. Please remember not every airfield is owned by a Council or the Government.

From the Aerodrome Landing Fees Act 2003 (Victoria)
Aircraft means an aircraft registered under Part 3 of the Civil Aviation Regulations.

Thank goodness mine aren't. Nor are any!

I dont know what the NSW rules say but the Victorian ones have a few interesting things.

Does this mean that an approach for maintaining proficiency once trained does not attract a fee?

How many aerodromes have advertised their fees in a daily newspaper and the Government Gazette?

Exactly.

Kaz

Maybe this is why they print the prices on the Avdata invoices.

Very few, I suspect if my Council is any indication. a strong argument for administrative estoppel

Kaz

Thread dredge.

I received a landing fee for an airport that I did not land at.

What I did do, was file a flight plan to that airport, but landed elsewhere. I didn't go within 20 miles of said airport.

This leads me to realise that AirServices are providing AvData with flight plan information, or they are somehow scraping it from Flight Radar 24.

I thought that Avdata had to collect their information from other sources, such as radio calls, ARO, ADSB or cameras.

Does anyone know if there's an agreement between ASA and AVData for this?

I don't know the authoritative answer to your question (though I'd back 'scraping' if I had to bet folding money). But on the numerous occasions on which I've had the same experience as you've described, I've merely written to AvData and explained the 'delta' between the plan and the actual, and that I will therefore not be paying the charge. No further corro.

They certainly do collect data from ASA (no idea how that's legal, but IANAL) - they've confirmed that in writing to me recently when I challenged them on fraudulent landing fees - which they have refused to remove from my latest invoice, BTW...

Interesting that they readily admit they cannot confirm the charges, yet invoice you for them anyway - and then expect us to tell them that they've got it wrong. So even if you put a plan in for tomorrow to YXYZ but the weather's iffy and you leave the plane in the hangar, AvData's still going to invoice you for that landing at YXYX (and any AD's you had on your plan as waypoints and overflew, too)

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e327514772.png

Yep. It’s just a ‘invoice and hope’ system.

AvData has no standing to pursue alleged charges. The aerodrome owner does.

If an aerodrome owner wants to commence debt recovery action against me for $7.50, on the basis of a flight plan I submitted to Airservices but I never flew in fact, let them have at it. So far, none of them has been that stupid.

The onus is on them (the aerodrome/ Airservices) to prove that you did land there, not on us to prove that we didn't.

I regularly get landing fees for places where it would be impossible for my little aeroplanes to go (such as a quick hop from Perth to Queensland and back in time for lunch) often it is people using false callsigns to dodge paying landing fees. If they have humans transcribing the callsigns there can be misheard or mistyped callsigns as well.

Beware also because if you file a flight plan and you run more than 30 minutes late AsA will charge you tower fees twice, once from the flight plan and once from the flight strip. I also get Airservices charges for towers I have never been to. Sometimes I get charged the landing fee for a touch and go. Every month I give them a list of lines that they need to credit me back for, and they always do.

Check every line of every invoice!

From what I can deduce ASA provides many 3rd parties flight plan data in near real time.
Next time you file a plan, go check FR24, FlightAware etc. they’ll have the exact plan waypoint to waypoint.

Someone I know got sick of false AVDATA charges and sent them fair notice that if he ever gets any more, he will be invoicing THEM at his professional consulting rate of $175/hr or whatever, minimum three hours, for his time to correct their errors. He has not mentioned any since, maybe he just ignores them now.

Surely, (Clare ;-)) that isn't legal. I'd be making a call to Consumer Affairs.

This is what happens when you charge for ghost services.

https://www.watoday.com.au/business/...06-p5fp4b.html