What would you deem to be a fair Landing Fee?

[englishal]

Why does your aunt rant on the way home

[yintsinmerite]

I agree about the approach of low landing fee (free yes please), but then make your money by getting people to spend on other items (fuel, aviation supplies, food/drink). Fact of life, I have never landed anywhere without uplifting at least a cup of coffee and a slice of cake and in some cases a whole meal, a new headset and a new map.

Someone told me the minimum charge for EGGW sometime ago. Its a fine airport, with great facilities and ATC that puts most to shame, but over a hundred and fifty quid is excessive, plus they apparently won't let you get to the shops or cafe.

[Vont phood]

Is it normal practice for airfields to run all the facilities i.e. Fuel, restaurant etc? If they don't, then how would these businesses being busy help the airfield with its running costs?

I'm sure I was told of an airfield in UK that tried to emulate the USA FBO approach of free handling with fuel, but they had to give up when too many flyers dropped by and uplifted only a small amount of fuel before taking full advantage of all the services!!!

If the charges were to be collected by accessing the extra revenue from food and fuel etc, isn't it likely that the food and fuel would be more expensive thereby deterring visitors?

Not trying to be negative just cannot see how nil landing fee can be achieved

[slim_slag]

Not trying to be negative just cannot see how nil landing fee can be achieved

The money comes from somewhere else. Typically in places with zero landing fees this comes from the government, either local, state or federal. The government money comes from various sources, including taxation or user fees. Other income eg rental will come from businesses on the field, some of which might not even be related to aviation. Some local governments even see an airport as a positive influence on the local economy!!! No such thing as a free lunch.

[helicopter-redeye]

Except where you are a based aircraft and pay basing charges instead. Then the landings should be 'free' because they are paid for a different way (thus gntee'ing income for the home base who get a lot of fuel margin and other revenues as a result)

[Vont phood]

But where the current fee collection system includes landing fees, then to remove them would require an adjustment of other charges upwards to make good the shortfall wouldn't it?

[FlyingForFun]

The rumours around a certain airfield where I fly from fairly regularly (I can't say where, but a look at my location may provide a hint) are that RyanAir don't pay any landing fees. What they do is bring several hundred punters a day through the terminal building. This in turn means that the bar, newsagent, duty-free shop, car hire shop and so on are far busier than they would be without RyanAir, which in turn means the airfield can charge them higher rent..... I don't know if this is true or not, it's just a rumour, but unfortunately it doesn't extend to GA.

FFF
-----------

[Vont phood]

Is it likely that removing landing fees for GA would result in hundreds of additional movements per day? If you count the fact that inbound pax on Ryaniar are usually different ones from the outbound, then you'd need to attract 200 extra movements to rival RYR.

It doesn't strike me as a like for like argument FFF

[helicopter-redeye]

That's the whole business model behind the Low Cost Airlines. They also buy fuel (loadsa JetA1) and provide work for baggage staff, check in people, ticketing, security, etc, which is provided by the airport and to the local economy.

Thus avoiding the fixed cost and paying variable based on the PAX paying first.

This is why certain 'airports' have never attracted any commercial flights/ or for very long, because they have asked for money (margin) rather than supporting the local economy.

In some cases it also contravenes EU policy around subsidy and protection.

See the Charleroi case last year as an example.

The model for commercial flying to come. Income from sources other than landing fees.

[rans6andrew]

landing fee heaven

In the summer we went touring La Belle France for a week. Most GA fields charged nothing for landing and some let us camp for free as well. Even the big outfits were very reasonable. We used all of the facilities at Caen, full ATC talk in with hold while a medivac flight jumped the queue, landing, overnight parking, fuel, use of briefing and met rooms (including phone for up to the moment conditions at our next destination) and we payed normal fuel charges and just over 6 euros for the rest. The fees were much the same at Rouen.

I suspect that we would not have this thread on here if the charges in the UK were similar to those in France.

The fees at Headcorn on the way out and Lydd on the way back together made up half of the fees for the whole trip!

Andrew

[surely not]

Isn't the point that VP is making, that the money has to come from somewhere?
rans6a your fees were courtesy of a benevolent French Govt. and local Chambre de Commerce.

[Evil J]

To get back to the original post. I think what a fair landing fee is depends on what you get for your money, like anything else in life.

Which is better value; going into a larger airport having radar and controlled airspace protection, instrument let downs full ATC and a marshaller to get you and your pride and joy into a nice parking space fit for a 737 and paying £25 - 40 or going to a delapidated GA airfield where the radio is never manned, the runway is pot-holed and unmarked and there is nowhere to even get a drink let alone something to eat; and you have to find your own parking space and you get stung £10 for the priviledge.

Personally I think the larger airfield is better value in the above case.

[helicopter-redeye]

There may be different land ownership/ cost situations in France and overseas generally (can't land a helicopter off a licensed field for instance..) which changes the cost situation all round.

The best value I ever got in the UK was Southampton. Landing fees (plus a hold for jet traffic); handling; 4 nights parking on the big ramp and the mini bus across the ramp to the terminal for £19 + VAT. A days car parking would have been more expensive.

h-r

[Readability5]

£50 for as many as you can make in a whole year at EGKH.

You get it free if you're visiting and buy half a lamb from ATC, and the bacon sarnies are mighty fine as well.

[Chilli Monster]

How's this for unreasonable - Cork, 250 Euro compulsory handling - and that's before the landing fee and the parking charges.

For that you get a geezer with a van and a pile of weathers which wasn't route specific. Rip off Britain has got up and moved to Ireland I think!

[cubflyer]

I would rather see free landings and the airfield make their money from other sales such as Fuel, food etc. Even if they dont own the restaurant, it presumably pays them rent to be there.
I but appreciate that in the UK at the moment this is not really possible, due to the costs of operating the airfields.
As mentinoed before in France the local Chambre of Commerce own the airfield, pay for the infrastructure and pay for the ATC if there is one (or maybe this is paid for centrally) The Aeroclubs dont pay rent or rates, but even get paid something for people under 25 flying (or they used to anyway). Its similar in the USA many airfields are owned by the local city who pay for all of the facilities. FBOs just rent/own their building and buy in the fuel, they dont pay for the upkeep of the airfield.
All unlike here in the UK when the airfield operator has to pay for the airfield, any work needed on it, employ people to run the ATC if required pay commercial rates on their buildings and hangars etc.
In the USA there is a big subsidy for airfield improvements/maintenance from the Fuel tax, why cant we have this over here!!!

I think anything over £10 is unaceptable and would rather see fees closer to £5. I dont understand why some airfields charge lower fees for training flights. These flights need the facilities that airfields provide, whereas private flights dont!
I dont need a licenced runway, lights, navaids, ATC etc so I would prefer to pay a charge reflecting this. All I need is a small peice of runway, smooth grass being prefereble, but hard will do.

I cant believe people who say they thing £25 is reasonble to land at places like Exeter! Seems like a rip off to me. I thought £16 at Cranfield was bad enough!
Although still too expensive, Staverton seem to have seen the light and reduced their landing fees for smaller aircraft, resulting in an increase in traffic, increased fuel sales and no doubt more business for the restaurant, shops etc. Pity they are yellow jacket paranoid and got all these fences though.

I find I generally go to fly-ins, where there is more goign on anyway, and the landings are usually free. I buy some food and probably fuel, so the airfield Im sure makes their money.

[Aussie Andy]

Well, if you're running a business in a free market environment and you are not subsidised, then you have to deal with pricing as best you see fit and in the interests of your business! So the above seems to me to be just so much hot air and largely wishful thinking!

Instrument approaches are expensive too (ref. my recent post elsewhere on this) - but nobody ever said it was going to be a cheap hobby I guess...

Sorry to be harsh, but we have to be realistic! If you don't like a price, don't land and thus market forces will decide (or move to France or the US where the municipal fields are sub'd - I know I'd like to!)

Andy