Beware landing at Farnborough
Yesterday morning I was flying a Seneca light twin over a fog bound London. Destination was Fairoaks. Ok wishful thinking but approaching CPT I got an actual for Farnborough which was next door to Fairoaks.
Weather was 1500 metres overcast at 200 feet.
Weather was 1500 metres overcast at 200 feet.
Hmmm - some questions:
1. Was this a private flight? You state that someone else paid the landing fees, so was this flight aerial work for an aicraft operator?
2. Had you filed a Flight Plan? If so, what was the declared destination?
3. What was the forecast for your stated destination?
4. Does Fairoaks have any published IFR approach procedures?
5. To what aerodrome operating minima at Fairoaks were you working?
I thought that it is mandatory for you to establish before departure that your destination aerodrome has a landing forecast for your ETA no worse than that required for the type of approach available? And that it is the responsibility of both the aircraft operator and the aircraft commander to comply with this requirement.
The days of launching off 'hoping that Met was wrong' are long gone. I'm sorry, but it doesn't sound as though you had a particularly sound plan, irrespective of its legality - trying to find the cheapest diversion option in flight when your destination is as poor as the original Met forecast stated is not a healthy idea and is well outside the intentions of the Strasser scheme.
A year or so ago, I asked AOPA to intercede on behalf of a member. The pilot had checked the en-route weather, destination and diversion weather and all was well within limts. During his flight, the weather deteriorated unexpectedly so he diverted to Farrnborough - a genuine Strasser scheme diversion. But he was charged a large fee by Farnborough. AOPA investigated; when Farnborough became fully aware of the circumstances they refunded the fees without question.
Last edited by BEagle; 8th Nov 2008 at 07:57.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This concession applies to genuine emergencies and diversions to airfields other than
the destination and the filed alternate airport.
Wide awareness means that GA pilots in a difficult situation can at least eliminate
the cost factor as a potential worry. Publishers of Airfield Data have been asked to
highlight this safety concession and so far Aerad, AFE and Pooleys have agreed
to do this in their “VFR Flight Guide”. No Response from Jeppesen/Bottlang.
Unfortunately
15 Airports/Airfields have so far decided that they will not implement the CAP
667 9.2(c) recommendations. Hopefully they will have a change of heart and join the
majority of UK airfields that have.
Belfast-Intl., Biggin-Hill, Birmingham, Cardiff, Carlisle, Dundee, Exeter, Filton,
Gloucestershire, Humberside, Leeds/Bradford, London-Luton, Manchester,
Norwich, Teesside.
And
3 Airports have not been approached - London Heathrow, City and Gatwick.
In recognition of their outstanding contribution to UK General Aviation
the destination and the filed alternate airport.
Wide awareness means that GA pilots in a difficult situation can at least eliminate
the cost factor as a potential worry. Publishers of Airfield Data have been asked to
highlight this safety concession and so far Aerad, AFE and Pooleys have agreed
to do this in their “VFR Flight Guide”. No Response from Jeppesen/Bottlang.
Unfortunately
15 Airports/Airfields have so far decided that they will not implement the CAP
667 9.2(c) recommendations. Hopefully they will have a change of heart and join the
majority of UK airfields that have.
Belfast-Intl., Biggin-Hill, Birmingham, Cardiff, Carlisle, Dundee, Exeter, Filton,
Gloucestershire, Humberside, Leeds/Bradford, London-Luton, Manchester,
Norwich, Teesside.
And
3 Airports have not been approached - London Heathrow, City and Gatwick.
In recognition of their outstanding contribution to UK General Aviation
I think the principal seems to be to encourage pilots to land and not be deterred from doing so by cost rather than attempting to make a destination which could jeopordise the flight.
Hence Farnboroughs policy of paying the charges and writing in for a refund so you can make a case for your landing there.
My flight although not on a flight plan with filed alternatives was using Farnborough as a genuine alternative and part of my plan for not getting into fairoaks. This would not have met the spirit of what the agreement was put in place for.
My arguement is more on the minimum cost of £360 rather than the weight costing on the aircraft and the fact that there are less and less practically useable airports around the southeast which have low costs for GA and full instrument approaches.
Pace
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A year or so ago, I asked AOPA to intercede on behalf of a member. The pilot had checked the en-route weather, destination and diversion weather and all was well within limts. During his flight, the weather deteriorated unexpectedly so he diverted to Farrnborough - a genuine Strasser scheme diversion. But he was charged a large fee by Farnborough. AOPA investigated; when Farnborough became fully aware of the circumstances they refunded the fees without question.
I fully checked the weather before departure and while hoping there might be an improvement which would allow a landing at Fairoaks really expected to divert into Farnborough or Southend. I also had full fuel 5 hrs endurance for 1 hour flight so I could have gone anywhere in the country
My flight was IFR out of controlled airspace.I did not expect a refund and didnt try for one as it is not my cost anyway but highlighted this for other PPLs IMCR or IR who do fly on a budget in minimal weather.
For your info I hold an ATP and type ratings on corporate jets as well as flying piston and turbine twins.
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lightwater, Surrey
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emergency Diversion
I was returning to Blackbushe, talking to Farnborough. They informed me BB was shut due to a crashed a/c on the runway. They suggested I divert into them at no charge.
Thaey could not have been more helpfull and I had to leave the plane there overnight. All at no charge. There were other BB a/c who landed there also but dont know whether they were charged or not.
Thaey could not have been more helpfull and I had to leave the plane there overnight. All at no charge. There were other BB a/c who landed there also but dont know whether they were charged or not.
I fully checked the weather before departure and while hoping there might be an improvement which would allow a landing at Fairoaks really expected to divert into Farnborough or Southend.
Yesterday morning I was flying a Seneca light twin over a fog bound London. Destination was Fairoaks.
I fully checked the weather before departure and while hoping there might be an improvement which would allow a landing at Fairoaks really expected to divert into Farnborough or Southend.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEeagle
Firstly Fairoaks will only give you an estimate of their weather conditions as it is a pure VFR airfield.
Secondly I am sure you are aware that TAFS which cover fog conditions are vague so you might get a TAF staing becoming 3000 metres few at XYZ between 0800 and 1000 ie fog is very difficult to predict and where it lies.
If you fly in my world you would on a number of occasions be stacked over an airport with a number of other commercial aircraft waiting for an RVR to come up above minima....
I dont really see what your point is. There are pilots who fly for the fun of it and those who have to. If you are somehow trying to say that my flight involved some sort of poor airmanship then all I can say to you is BULL.
I posted this to make PPLs with IMCR or IR capability aware of the costs of using a number of airports with instrument approaches and the diminshing ones with instrument approaches which will not cost you an arm and a leg.
I am lucky I do not pay for flying I get paid for flying but most here dont.
I had numerous destinations available to me, some close some not so close which were within my limits and ability and within the aircrafts range. A request was made for a landing at Farnborough the flight accepted with the costs given which were accepted. Had the flight not been accepted then I would have had to go somewhere else simple as that.
Pace
Firstly Fairoaks will only give you an estimate of their weather conditions as it is a pure VFR airfield.
Secondly I am sure you are aware that TAFS which cover fog conditions are vague so you might get a TAF staing becoming 3000 metres few at XYZ between 0800 and 1000 ie fog is very difficult to predict and where it lies.
If you fly in my world you would on a number of occasions be stacked over an airport with a number of other commercial aircraft waiting for an RVR to come up above minima....
I dont really see what your point is. There are pilots who fly for the fun of it and those who have to. If you are somehow trying to say that my flight involved some sort of poor airmanship then all I can say to you is BULL.
I posted this to make PPLs with IMCR or IR capability aware of the costs of using a number of airports with instrument approaches and the diminshing ones with instrument approaches which will not cost you an arm and a leg.
I am lucky I do not pay for flying I get paid for flying but most here dont.
I had numerous destinations available to me, some close some not so close which were within my limits and ability and within the aircrafts range. A request was made for a landing at Farnborough the flight accepted with the costs given which were accepted. Had the flight not been accepted then I would have had to go somewhere else simple as that.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 8th Nov 2008 at 10:15.
The point is that, if VFR conditions were not forecast for your intended VFR destination, then surely you must have selected an available alternate before departure? If that was Farnborough, then you would have known about the cost before you took off, assuming that you checked the aerodrome details.
Which does seem unreasonably high, I agree.
Which does seem unreasonably high, I agree.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought Pace said he had planned to divert to Sarthand or Biggin?
Personally I would have gone to Southend or Lydd - but as ever it depends if it is just to sit out the weather or you have to consider getting Pax on their way. Neither of these is great for onward travel.
I would imagine Luton would be cheaper than Farnborough, but I havent landed their in a while. Southampton would definitely have been cheaper (even with handling) and good onward travel.
Personally I would have gone to Southend or Lydd - but as ever it depends if it is just to sit out the weather or you have to consider getting Pax on their way. Neither of these is great for onward travel.
I would imagine Luton would be cheaper than Farnborough, but I havent landed their in a while. Southampton would definitely have been cheaper (even with handling) and good onward travel.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace, the way I read your initial post was that you were complaining about Farnborough not giving you a free landing because it was a weather diversion - which I disagreed with. And I think I'm not alone, judging by the amount of flak you received here.
But if you were fully prepared, as your subsequent posts show, to pay a normal landing fee at Farnborough because you already had it as your alternate in your mind/plan, and just were surprised by this rather steep fee, then fine. I agree.
But if you were fully prepared, as your subsequent posts show, to pay a normal landing fee at Farnborough because you already had it as your alternate in your mind/plan, and just were surprised by this rather steep fee, then fine. I agree.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hither and Thither
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, as Fairoaks is a pure VFR airfield, then in the weather conditions you could only expect not to get in to Fairoaks, so were all along expecting to go elsewhere.
The only airfields that can supply Official actual Met reports are those with accredited Met Observers/Forecasters, and then publish this METAR via AFTN. In poor weather conditions, would you really expect to get into Fairoaks on an 'unofficial' weather report and without an IAP?
The original wording of the Strasser scheme was for emergency/precautionary landings, including those caused by a weather element.
Unfortunately IMO, the wording of the weather diversion element of the scheme is now becoming stretched to include WX diversions where there is no emergency or precautionary landing aspect,but just flying to the normal alternate destination, and certain sections of the piloting fraternity are using this to take advantage of some airfields that have agreed to participate.
Again, if your planned destination has the runway blocked at short notice, why should this be a free diversion at alternate if there is no emergency (with your aircraft). Surely every take-off includes the possibility that the runway you want to land on may not be available, and you should have an alternate planned.
The only airfields that can supply Official actual Met reports are those with accredited Met Observers/Forecasters, and then publish this METAR via AFTN. In poor weather conditions, would you really expect to get into Fairoaks on an 'unofficial' weather report and without an IAP?
The original wording of the Strasser scheme was for emergency/precautionary landings, including those caused by a weather element.
Unfortunately IMO, the wording of the weather diversion element of the scheme is now becoming stretched to include WX diversions where there is no emergency or precautionary landing aspect,but just flying to the normal alternate destination, and certain sections of the piloting fraternity are using this to take advantage of some airfields that have agreed to participate.
Again, if your planned destination has the runway blocked at short notice, why should this be a free diversion at alternate if there is no emergency (with your aircraft). Surely every take-off includes the possibility that the runway you want to land on may not be available, and you should have an alternate planned.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEeagle
Yes I am aware of Farnborough and have used it a number of times with corporate jets. No I did not check the landing cost.
One hint I will give you is that when you fly because you have to you do learn to play the system a little
and that is the case with every corporate or airline pilot I know.
Backpacker
The above was correct if I implied otherwise it was more to generate an awareness and discussion of likely problems for the poor PPL who is then faced with huge bills he can ill afford.
My post was also a genuine concern at light GA being pushed out of the system by ever increasing costs and thus making light GA a fun pastime rather than a serious travel tool. I can remember years ago flying a PA28 into places like Manchester and Luton for a cup of coffee. What a change now.
Pace
Yes I am aware of Farnborough and have used it a number of times with corporate jets. No I did not check the landing cost.
One hint I will give you is that when you fly because you have to you do learn to play the system a little
and that is the case with every corporate or airline pilot I know.
But if you were fully prepared, as your subsequent posts show, to pay a normal landing fee at Farnborough because you already had it as your alternate in your mind/plan, and just were surprised by this rather steep fee, then fine. I agree.
The above was correct if I implied otherwise it was more to generate an awareness and discussion of likely problems for the poor PPL who is then faced with huge bills he can ill afford.
My post was also a genuine concern at light GA being pushed out of the system by ever increasing costs and thus making light GA a fun pastime rather than a serious travel tool. I can remember years ago flying a PA28 into places like Manchester and Luton for a cup of coffee. What a change now.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 8th Nov 2008 at 11:20.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: one dot low as usual
Age: 66
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fairoaks also has special rules regarding vis being 3000m for non IFR as it's within the LHR zone. With no published approaches IFR traffic has to somehow get to a position in sight of the runway. Farnborough won't accept responsibility for terrain separation below 1700' QNH, so Fairoaks can be tricky to legally operate into.
I live on the 24 final approach course and I often see/hear planes emerging from the low level clag over my house when the cloudbase is at 500' or lower and vis well below 3km. All home made GPS approaches no doubt.
I live on the 24 final approach course and I often see/hear planes emerging from the low level clag over my house when the cloudbase is at 500' or lower and vis well below 3km. All home made GPS approaches no doubt.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: wiltshire
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace - thanks for the info regarding the costs of a div into farnborough. This , I believe was the point of your posting and I see no reason why BEagle should get on his high and mighty horse and go on about whether it was a private or commercial flight. The guy seriously needs to take alook at his attitude 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plus7G
The nature of these forums is that you expect to get some Flack now and again and I would rather it that way as at least the post is generating opinion and I can quite happily defend my corner
There was a time when you could fly into any airport big or small, get radar services, approaches and blend in with the bigger stuff much like is the case in the USA where all varieties of aviation live together.
I could place a Seneca at Malaga and have done for peanuts in cost in the near past. Light GA is now not wanted in the UK and priced out of existance at the majority of larger airports, basically told to go away and not bother them.
At what point does GA no longer become a practical means of transport but a keep away from anybodies airspace toy for sunny days only.
Pace
The nature of these forums is that you expect to get some Flack now and again and I would rather it that way as at least the post is generating opinion and I can quite happily defend my corner
There was a time when you could fly into any airport big or small, get radar services, approaches and blend in with the bigger stuff much like is the case in the USA where all varieties of aviation live together.
I could place a Seneca at Malaga and have done for peanuts in cost in the near past. Light GA is now not wanted in the UK and priced out of existance at the majority of larger airports, basically told to go away and not bother them.
At what point does GA no longer become a practical means of transport but a keep away from anybodies airspace toy for sunny days only.
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At what point does GA no longer become a practical means of transport but a keep away from anybodies airspace toy for sunny days only.
If you can fly IFR, the issues reduce to PPR, avgas, PPR, PPR, avgas, airport opening hours, availability of Customs, PPR for Customs, and avgas
So, if you have a turboprop, it reduces to PPR, PPR, PPR, airport opening hours, availability of Customs, PPR for Customs
And a call to a handling agent usually sorts all of the above; even to the extent of lubricating certain local "commission arrangements" in the more southern parts of Europe. It is the pilots who are as tight as the proverbial and (like me) try to avoid the handling agent's fee, who get all the hassle.
Farnborough is a bit of an unusual case, I think. But a lot of the bigger European airports (say Prague) are in the £150 area nowadays, 2T.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My post was also a genuine concern at light GA being pushed out of the system by ever increasing costs and thus making light GA a fun pastime rather than a serious travel tool. I can remember years ago flying a PA28 into places like Manchester and Luton for a cup of coffee. What a change now.
Of course we all accept it - and do nothing about it. You will even hear - it is there airport they can do what they like.
Well, I dont subscribe to that view.
There are many reasons why airports shouldnt charge what they like or ban GA.
I hate to drag the Americans into it - but it doesnt happen in the States - and it shouldnt be the case here or in Europe for that matter. Nor, in most cases, is there any justification for it.
I live on the 24 final approach course and I often see/hear planes emerging from the low level clag over my house when the cloudbase is at 500' or lower and vis well below 3km. All home made GPS approaches no doubt.
One hint I will give you is that when you fly because you have to you do learn to play the system a little and that is the case with every corporate or airline pilot I know.
and that is the case with every corporate or airline pilot I know.
Don't like it? Tough.
And Pace, please tell me which airlines these pilots of you acquaintance fly for, so that I can make a positive effort to avoid flying with them.
Of course Fairoaks, if it is ever to be taken seriously, should have some sort of IFR approach available. Even if that's nothing more than a full ATC service and a surveillance radar approach from Farnborough, it'd be better than nothing. An IFR GPS approach to non-precision limits? Regrettably the UK is still a long way from general acceptance of approaches defined by GPS - unless progress is made towards such acceptance and wider availability of IFR activity in general, light GA in the UK will never be viewed as anything more than a rich boy's hobby, I regret to say.