Shoreham school closed down
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shoreham school closed down
Sad to say another flying school bites the dust. Was down at Shoreham today and noticed Ace Aviation had it's doors padlocked, locks changed and an eviction order in the window.
Hope no studes lost their hard earned.
Hope no studes lost their hard earned.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over the last few years, Shoreham has had between 6 and 8 fixed-wing schools. Several have closed down in the last 2-3 years. It is impossible to make money when there are enough students (willing to sit in a 30 year old can) for approximately 1 school.
It's a great airfield, with excellent ATC, but nobody there has yet done the obvious thing: tap the conspicuously wealthy population in their 20s 30s and 40s in that part of the country, and set up something operating modern sexy planes with the sort of decent navigation kit which present day punters expect (not Cessnas or Pipers), covering the whole route from a PPL to a PPL/IR, and teaching people to actually fly somewhere interesting....
It's a great airfield, with excellent ATC, but nobody there has yet done the obvious thing: tap the conspicuously wealthy population in their 20s 30s and 40s in that part of the country, and set up something operating modern sexy planes with the sort of decent navigation kit which present day punters expect (not Cessnas or Pipers), covering the whole route from a PPL to a PPL/IR, and teaching people to actually fly somewhere interesting....
Flies for fun
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Wishing it was somewhere sunny!
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A and C here is Ace Aviation website and info about the aircraft;
http://www.aceaviation.info/info.php?i=57
Here is the G-info site; http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/aircraft_re...nfo/search.asp
As nearly always is the case, the aircraft wern't owned by the school and therefore if anybody is owed money, they have no claim on the aircraft.
Sad but true
http://www.aceaviation.info/info.php?i=57
Here is the G-info site; http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/aircraft_re...nfo/search.asp
As nearly always is the case, the aircraft wern't owned by the school and therefore if anybody is owed money, they have no claim on the aircraft.
Sad but true
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Kent
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm... Not sure I buy your argument IO540. Not many clubs (if any) have a fleet of sexy planes, nor a customer base expecting that. Yet plenty of outfits seem to be able to survive.
I wonder if there is another reason for Shoreham's high casualty rate.
I wonder if there is another reason for Shoreham's high casualty rate.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KCDW
Most likely the large number of schools all operating the same sort of planes and attracting mostly customers who don't have much money. I have known some instructors at Shoreham and they were paid £10/day retainer plus £20/hr for any flying. Some were paid zero retainer. This is one of the ways a school can "survive" for some years.
Shoreham would be a really great location for a well managed well funded operation but with all the competition it would never make money. It would have to go after an entirely different client base. According to the local press, Transair were going to set up a Cessna Pilot Centre (which is what ACE appeared to be) but I haven't heard any more about that, which doesn't suprise me as at the time it would have brought the total of fixed wing schools to nine, and Transair is definitely a well run business. The average punter can't tell the difference between a new Cessna at £150k and a 30 year old one.
The company originally trading as ACE Aviation was Stanair Ltd - they used a "Stanair" callsign if I recall correctly.
Most likely the large number of schools all operating the same sort of planes and attracting mostly customers who don't have much money. I have known some instructors at Shoreham and they were paid £10/day retainer plus £20/hr for any flying. Some were paid zero retainer. This is one of the ways a school can "survive" for some years.
Shoreham would be a really great location for a well managed well funded operation but with all the competition it would never make money. It would have to go after an entirely different client base. According to the local press, Transair were going to set up a Cessna Pilot Centre (which is what ACE appeared to be) but I haven't heard any more about that, which doesn't suprise me as at the time it would have brought the total of fixed wing schools to nine, and Transair is definitely a well run business. The average punter can't tell the difference between a new Cessna at £150k and a 30 year old one.
The company originally trading as ACE Aviation was Stanair Ltd - they used a "Stanair" callsign if I recall correctly.
Last edited by IO540; 24th Aug 2004 at 08:23.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SE UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking of schools closing down I have heard rumours about Cabair closing their Redhill operation very soon. The Cessnas will be taken onto the Biggin Hill fleet.
Anyone confirm or deny?
Regards
Anyone confirm or deny?
Regards
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zummerzet
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO 540 et al,
Stanair went under after the debacle with a certain CFI - Ace now is (was) under new management and going well. I'm sure you'll get the story of what's gone on soon enough, but lets just say don't jump to the usual conclusions.
AFAIK no students have lost money on deposit, as this wasn't the way the new management wanted to operate - to their credit. I stand to be corrected though.
Cheers,
JP
Stanair went under after the debacle with a certain CFI - Ace now is (was) under new management and going well. I'm sure you'll get the story of what's gone on soon enough, but lets just say don't jump to the usual conclusions.
AFAIK no students have lost money on deposit, as this wasn't the way the new management wanted to operate - to their credit. I stand to be corrected though.
Cheers,
JP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically at least £10,000 was owed on aircraft bills. No idea on what was owed on the premisis, but when Stanair ltd was liquidated the bill was £36,000. I believe selling the one aircraft they did own paid that off, but clearly more money is owing on the premisis.
One or two people did have money on account. The whole thing was badly, if not maliciously, run (although some would say it was!) With all of this happening the owner and the owners mum went of to australia on a flying holiday for 3 weeks at a cost of several grand each. A not particularly bright 17yo was left in charge of the operation assisted by 2 more (much brighter teenagers). Less than a week on their return this happened. When it did happen the owner was no where to be seen. She left a 16yo to deal with the airport and another 16yo to rescue student records and deal with customers.
Ace has never been going well since the liquidation of Stanair. There was never enough revenue from 2 aircraft to cover 3,100 a month rent let alone all the aiport bills on top of that.
One or two people did have money on account. The whole thing was badly, if not maliciously, run (although some would say it was!) With all of this happening the owner and the owners mum went of to australia on a flying holiday for 3 weeks at a cost of several grand each. A not particularly bright 17yo was left in charge of the operation assisted by 2 more (much brighter teenagers). Less than a week on their return this happened. When it did happen the owner was no where to be seen. She left a 16yo to deal with the airport and another 16yo to rescue student records and deal with customers.
Ace has never been going well since the liquidation of Stanair. There was never enough revenue from 2 aircraft to cover 3,100 a month rent let alone all the aiport bills on top of that.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JP
Surely it couldn't have been going that well with all those overheads, instructors leaving to other flying schools and aircraft owners and financial backer pulling out.
Shame though
Surely it couldn't have been going that well with all those overheads, instructors leaving to other flying schools and aircraft owners and financial backer pulling out.
Shame though
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All,
As I was at EGKA yesterday somebody was paying to release one of the Ace Cessna's and it took off about half an hour later I beleive, I heard him being questioned over the R/T before it was confirmed and approved.
Just what I heard and saw, I have no more background than that.
EzY
As I was at EGKA yesterday somebody was paying to release one of the Ace Cessna's and it took off about half an hour later I beleive, I heard him being questioned over the R/T before it was confirmed and approved.
Just what I heard and saw, I have no more background than that.
EzY
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It happens and will continue to happen. The moral is, and always has been, NEVER pay up front for training at a UK flying School/Club. If the organisation is reputable, they will not ask you to!!
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A great shame, and as usual, it will be those who have most to lose who lose most.
If the CAA were to immediately do one thing, and one thing only to improve the shoddy image of flying schools going under, owing £1000s, and the owners getting off scott free, it would be to enforce an ABTA type bonding system which would guarantee a refund of monies owed.
There's no doubt that it would be very expensive for flying club operators to initially come up with the lump sum, but this would be part of the business plan, and if they couldn't afford that, they don't operate.
It would sort the wheat from the chaff, and it would be simple, but very very effective.
If the CAA were to immediately do one thing, and one thing only to improve the shoddy image of flying schools going under, owing £1000s, and the owners getting off scott free, it would be to enforce an ABTA type bonding system which would guarantee a refund of monies owed.
There's no doubt that it would be very expensive for flying club operators to initially come up with the lump sum, but this would be part of the business plan, and if they couldn't afford that, they don't operate.
It would sort the wheat from the chaff, and it would be simple, but very very effective.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The full gory details of why these schools have ceased trading, often in "dramatic" circumstances, will never come out in a public forum. Only the people very close to the finances and day to day running (these two things are often not at all connected!) might know, and they certainly won't post it on pprune.
There are always rumours going round, especially at an airfield where there are far too many schools for the number of customers, some better substantiated than others, but only a fool would post them publicly because, rest assured, they would be exceedingly libellious if they turned out to be even slightly off the mark.
And if they aren't off the mark, it will be pretty obvious who they came from - because so few people know what really happened. I've heard a few things straight from the horse's mouth so to speak and no way can this ever come out.
It is a real shame that GA commercial operations attract so many people of a certain type.
There are always rumours going round, especially at an airfield where there are far too many schools for the number of customers, some better substantiated than others, but only a fool would post them publicly because, rest assured, they would be exceedingly libellious if they turned out to be even slightly off the mark.
And if they aren't off the mark, it will be pretty obvious who they came from - because so few people know what really happened. I've heard a few things straight from the horse's mouth so to speak and no way can this ever come out.
It is a real shame that GA commercial operations attract so many people of a certain type.
Peoples' Champion!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have heard rumours about Cabair closing their Redhill operation very soon
Oh dear, I think I'm getting old. . . .
BH
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: sussex
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all of this happening the owner and the owners mum went of to australia on a flying holiday for 3 weeks at a cost of several grand each.
Would certainly send my brain into, "Hang on a minute mode"
if I worked or flew there.I'm sure it was a nice club, but....Oz... oh please!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: West Sussex,England
Age: 57
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, as you all say Sad that another club has closed down, but on the plus side more work for the remaining schools !! and many of the students and instructors have found new homes.
There are a few unhappy people around that appear to have lost money on account but then haven't we all at some point been caught out.
But I feel sorry for the goldfish, he sitting there in a tank not getting fed, assume the airport manager has assumed responsibility for him !!!
Think the owner and mum were ill advised to take over the flying school premises, looked good but cost too much each month with only 3 aircraft to bring in the pennies and never recovered from the "stanair" days.
Would be interesting to see who paid for the Oz holiday, assume a "fact finding" trip.
There are a few unhappy people around that appear to have lost money on account but then haven't we all at some point been caught out.
But I feel sorry for the goldfish, he sitting there in a tank not getting fed, assume the airport manager has assumed responsibility for him !!!
Think the owner and mum were ill advised to take over the flying school premises, looked good but cost too much each month with only 3 aircraft to bring in the pennies and never recovered from the "stanair" days.
Would be interesting to see who paid for the Oz holiday, assume a "fact finding" trip.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sussex
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all - the owner was in hospoital having surgery at the time that this all happened, hence not being there to deal with anything. From speaking to some of her staff she is still very ill and has already undergone major surgery - is it very British to kick a person when they are already down especially when no one who has posted thus far seems to know much in the way of facts, to have lost money with this company or have suffered any grievance by them.
Secondly - I went into the club over a year ago and had a chat with her about her holiday to Oz which was being paid for by her mum. I think you will find you are bordering on slander to suggest that it was paid out of company funds without any evidence.
Thirdly - the compan y is not in liquidiation and from visitin companies house and making a few phone calls it does not appear that it has any plans to go into liquidation. This means that the business must have been trading solvently and was therefore not struggling at the time of the holiday - I never knew I lived in a country where hard working people taking a holiday was such a crime!
I think that rather than look at the company itself you should direct your attention to why so many companies at Shoreham do not survive. Could it be that there is a seemingly permanent crowd of old women who wander round the flying clubs showing no loyalty to any one who persist in bitching and slagging off individaul after individual. Could it also be the ridiculously high rent rates and fees inflicted on everyone who dares enter the perimeter? If you look at the percentages, EGKA loses more flying clubs per year than practically any other airfield in england - time for the council to ask some questions.
Lastly, from speaking to some of the staff it seems that the airport itself may have acted quite unreasonabley in this case which was not helped by the unavoidablwe absence of the owner and the immediate bitching of some individuals around the field, all of which made it pointless to reopen the premises.
I suggest everyone sits back and looks at this for what it truly is. The business was a good one and I for one loved flying there. This is another sad day for Shoreham and it would do everyone better to focus on happier events instead of bitching on unfounded basis.
Secondly - I went into the club over a year ago and had a chat with her about her holiday to Oz which was being paid for by her mum. I think you will find you are bordering on slander to suggest that it was paid out of company funds without any evidence.
Thirdly - the compan y is not in liquidiation and from visitin companies house and making a few phone calls it does not appear that it has any plans to go into liquidation. This means that the business must have been trading solvently and was therefore not struggling at the time of the holiday - I never knew I lived in a country where hard working people taking a holiday was such a crime!
I think that rather than look at the company itself you should direct your attention to why so many companies at Shoreham do not survive. Could it be that there is a seemingly permanent crowd of old women who wander round the flying clubs showing no loyalty to any one who persist in bitching and slagging off individaul after individual. Could it also be the ridiculously high rent rates and fees inflicted on everyone who dares enter the perimeter? If you look at the percentages, EGKA loses more flying clubs per year than practically any other airfield in england - time for the council to ask some questions.
Lastly, from speaking to some of the staff it seems that the airport itself may have acted quite unreasonabley in this case which was not helped by the unavoidablwe absence of the owner and the immediate bitching of some individuals around the field, all of which made it pointless to reopen the premises.
I suggest everyone sits back and looks at this for what it truly is. The business was a good one and I for one loved flying there. This is another sad day for Shoreham and it would do everyone better to focus on happier events instead of bitching on unfounded basis.