Forcing GA out...

[XL319]

I find a lot of airports now are forcing GA out to small grass strips etc by bringing in handling agents who charge £50.00. Doncaster is a prime example of this. Anyone had any experiences?

[S-Works]

I don't think it is a case of forcing GA out, more that the bigger airports do not want or warrant the infrastructure to collect the fees and deal with the small aircraft as it is not profitable. The handling agents exist to support the larger GA operators and as such they have the ability to process these costs. They have overheads and as such expect to cover them.

In the UK airports are self funding and have to make a profit for the shareholders. Someone has to pay for this and that is the customers or the airport of which us as GA vsitors are one. The numbers of small aircraft that visit big airports are miniscule.

Personally I don't see the issue with paying for a handling agent as long as you get the service you expect. That includes things like arranging Taxi's, weather briefing, booking in out etc. Most places I have been to do this very well.

[pulse1]

The numbers of small aircraft that visit big airports are miniscule.

The context of this thread is not necessarily "big airports". It is airports who have resorted to the use of handling agents who charge a lot more than the landing fee, just for taking the landing fee. This would include Bournemouth International Airport where I would have thought that GA visitors used to greatly outnumber commercial aircraft movements.

Now I would imagine, although I do not know, that the number of small aircraft visiting is miniscule BECAUSE of the handling charges applied whether you need the additional services or not. I am not complaining about that, it is just a statement. I believe that it was done in order to seperate the GA operation so that we didn't get caught up in the security required for commercial passengers. The seperate operation obviously has to be paid for.

It's just that I, like many others, no longer go there unless I have to and that's usually for technical visits where you don't pay it anyway.

[S-Works]

When I say "big" airports I mean these exacte airports, they have given over GA to more lucrative CAT in order to survive/make profit for the shareholders. And the number of light GA aircraft visiting IS miniscule and has been proven does not pay for the infrastructure. While we might not agree with it that is a fact of life. If I need to go to East Mids, Bournemouth, Birmingham etc, I expect to have a handling agent and pay the costs. If I don't want to pay then I find a farmstrip etc. But for a business trip where I HAVE to be in and out then I expect to pay for the infrastructure in the same was as the CAT does. What is the difference from me using the ILS, lights etc from the BA flight behind me?

And as pulse points out paying for handling instead of having my shoes taken apart and my toothpaste confiscated is a god send.

Originally Posted by pulse1

The context of this thread is not necessarily "big airports". It is airports who have resorted to the use of handling agents who charge a lot more than the landing fee, just for taking the landing fee. This would include Bournemouth International Airport where I would have thought that GA visitors used to greatly outnumber commercial aircraft movements.
Now I would imagine, although I do not know, that the number of small aircraft visiting is miniscule BECAUSE of the handling charges applied whether you need the additional services or not. I am not complaining about that, it is just a statement. I believe that it was done in order to seperate the GA operation so that we didn't get caught up in the security required for commercial passengers. The seperate operation obviously has to be paid for.
It's just that I, like many others, no longer go there unless I have to and that's usually for technical visits where you don't pay it anyway.