Shoreham Handling Agent for 1.5 tonnes up?
 

I hear that as from Feb all aircraft over 1.5 tonnes will have to have a handling agent which i presume is the new KA Exec Handling outfit whos signs are going up at Shoreham, evidently this will be compulsory ???????????? !!!!!!!!:eek:

Various rumours are saying that you will be clobbered around an extra £80 on top of the landing fee, this has got to be total bloody madness if true, evidently based aircraft and aircraft visiting companies on the field will be exempt.

That makes for one very expensive Sunday afternoon cuppa, if anyone knows more let us know please.:{

Nige

Oh Dear

And what exactly do you get for the handling fee

Well why dont you ring KA Exec and ask them exactly what they are going to charge before posting completely unsubstantiated crap?:rolleyes:

In my experience, the nomination of a FBO to handle all visitors is a good thing. They often offer far better facilities for the pilot such as extensive met and flight planning support, free tea and coffee, a private area away from the public, free use of telephones for urgent calls, extensive local knowledge and a far more professional approach than the airport can justify spending money on.
Additionally, at at least three of the airports I know of where FBOs have been nominated, they've negotiated a marginally cheaper landing fee with the airport owner and are still able to offer a hugely improved service.

It's logical that based operators and visitors to specific organisations should not have to use the FBO.

Shoreham's Terminal Building has it's unique charm but is often overcrowded and, with the greatest of respect to the ATC Unit there (who do an execellent job under extreme commercial pressures from the owners), the flight planning facility is woeful.

The appointment of a FBO takes the heat off the airport owner to invest in staff and modern equipment, they just take £5 or so from every landing fee and sit back.
At Shoreham it's a victory for common sense.

Try asking the average flyer which of these facilities they would like to pay through the nose for and I'm sure they'll provide you with a frank answer. Telephone? got a mobile. Private area away from the public? Not sure why I'd want one. Extensive local knowledge? Maybe as to where the nearest hotel is, no chance at most FBO's of finding out for example the VFR entry/exit points. Cheaper landing fees? Maybe they get a discount but very rarely is it passed to the customer. Extensive met and flight planning support? Well if printing the met off 2 hours before I depart counts as extensive met support I'd rather use my phone. And flight planning. Not so sure. Maybe they can delay plans but normally thats about it. They certainly don't get me a route and file it for me, unless it's TAG or Signature Luton.
So that leaves us with free tea/coffee. Quite an expensive brew I'm sure you'd agree?

FBO's have their place but to take away the choice, especially at a GA field, is a poor show indeed. And especially at such a low weight threshold. Above 5700kg perhaps as these are more often than not commercial flights. But to penalise your average GA flyer in a Bonanza/seneca etc etc is disgraceful. It would certainly prevent me going there unless I absolutely had to.

I use FBO's a lot at work and find the vast majority an excuse to extort money for nothing.

Will the FBO stop your car getting clamped if you are late back due to the wx ?

The whole thing sounds like another stupid idea from the property company that runs Shoreham without the first idea about aviation.

Mandatory handling for 1500kg+ would be bizzare, unless prices were set at present levels. But if it is farmed out to a separate business, they are likely to do what handlers do elsewhere and get all glassy-eyed and go for the turboprop/bizjet market which doesn't mind paying £500 at a time.

Modern pilots don't indeed need a wx briefing (they have laptops etc with internet connectivity) but I think the bulk of UK GA is not that far advanced... a computer with wx etc on it would be handy. Shoreham has had a PC for maybe 15 years in the "C" room but it was always hacked to show only Met Office wx, and file flight plans which got printed off in the tower.

There is however a computer of some sort in the main terminal entrance hall. Never used it but it looks like a pilot briefing facility. There is also free wifi in that area.

Wonder what K'n A means? I've never had a good experience of HA's with the exception of Northern Exec who definitely went the extra mile.

SGC

I don't think compulsory handling can be victory for common sense.

Indeed, who needs handling in a Bonanza ? And at Shoreham ?? The lobby overcrowded ??? :):):):ok:

It is a pity because Shoreham presently is an excellent base to fly into the South/Southwest of the UK. It has an instrument approach (essential for visitors flying in from abroad) and there is a company that provides on-site car rentals (Pavilion). Shoreham is excellent to visit
- Brighton
- Farnborough (avoids the £400+ landing fee)
- Greenwich

but of course if some punter is allowed to take £50 off me to print out some met office papers, all of a sudden Southend looks a lot better.

In my experience, any compulsory handling for light (sub lbs 12,500) aircraft is a rip off. Usually it means "Go away, we don't want you !", which is understandable at busy places like Munich or exclusive places like Le Bourget, but which just doesn't make sense at Shoreham, where they should welcome every £20-£40 range visitor they can get.

But hey, it's their airport. If they want to run it into the ground, then good luck to them...

Why would a property company want to run an airfield into the ground?

Could it not be something to do with the olympics?

If they didn't have someone in charge of the visiting aircraft it could very quickly turn to rat poo.

But then again they could just be milking the whole thing like everyone else in the SE of england

I can tell you that has not been my experience with mandatory handling. I find "mandatory handling" is just a way of self important ("International") Airports keeping the GA 'riff raff' away. 1.5 tonnes is just a fancy way of saying anything with a MTOW greater than 1500kg and, if this is the case, is truly disgusting behavior.

I don't agree. I do however think it is a victory for nearby airports who stand to capitalize.

4B

To leave a barren, flat area that is ideal for the building of houses and industrial units, close to the A27 and Brighton? :ugh:

No prices have yet been set in stone, despite me doing my best to find out. They are operational from 1 February and will have an official launch in the middle of February.

It will encompass all those visitors over 1500kg (I am stating fact not an opinion of whether that is right or not) and will not include resident aircraft who will be exempt, or those visiting maintenance organisations on the airfield.

Something of Seneca/Baron size is unlikely to be as much as £80, but will probably be somewhere around £50, on top of the landing fee.

On offer will be comfy seating, meet and greet for any passengers, a computer for the pilot to use, large flat screen TV and presumably an available brew.

It is very much aimed at the business traveller and associated crew, something which Shoreham is hoping to attract in larger numbers. The new general manager is looking to attract corporate/charter traffic and it is felt that they will demand such a facility.
Pricing will be cheaper than Biggin (and most places are cheaper than Farnborough & Gatwick which were quoted), but remain POA for the time being.

I am not the only one to have pointed out that the 1500kg limit is a tad low and should be higher as it even encompasses aircraft like the Cherokee Six. A tad harsh in my opinion.

As factual as I can be at the present time.

The weight is now up to 1900kg. From today's notams:

HANDLING SERVICES ARE NOW AVBL THROUGH KA EXEC HANDLING. HANDLING WILL BE MANDATORY FM MAR 01 2012 FOR ALL ACFT OVER 1900KG. HANDLING AVBL FOR SMALLER ACFT IF REQUIRED, CONTACT KA EXEC HANDLING ON 0844 882 9261 OR AT WWW.KAEXEC.COM AD 2-EGKA-1-1 2.4 REFERS

Close shave!

I have just "discovered" Shoreham as a way to reach one on my clients for regular (ever 2 month) meetings. Handling fee would have put me back in the car!

However, MAUW is 1725kg so no, I think I will decline the handling service and just pay the landing fees and refule.

:)

Does anybody know the business thinking behind this?

In particular behind making it mandatory for what is basically all twins. I see no issue with having a handling company because upmarket traffic does prefer a nice place for passengers etc to sit down.

Peter337
 

I disagree with light aircraft (IMHO below 12500 lbs) mandatory handling for private aircraft at small wannabee airports such as Shoreham. The decision should be up to the owner/pilot should they wish to use it.

Our regular pax do not want to pay for a VIP lounge EVER. They are happy to arrive (last minute usually) and proceed directly to the aircraft. Thats in a twin jet weighing substantially more than that figure. European major airports, of course you can't live without handling agents.

I bet Goodwood gets busier...

Of course.

That's why I asked if anybody has heard of the reasoning behind this.

I am sure that is correct but isn't there a culture in that business that this "environment" is provided as a default? If there wasn't, we would not have the £400 handling setup like Harrods Handling, Signature, etc (which in turn have pushed out 99% of light GA from those airports). If ALL jet operators refused to go along with this, these firms would have to stop charging those prices. But they do go along with it, just like BA provided the Concorde exec lounge as a default.

The setup is not there at a lot of airports Peter for VIP, a lot of these handlers use the normal terminal and facilities. Thats not to say they dont charge the earth. Infact, it's becoming the norm now, with a few notable exceptions to give poor but expensive service. I can't see how we evade the charges, these thieving numpties have our hands tied via the mandatory handling for jets or a weight category. The bills just get bigger... And now there is the ETS to pay!

An example of airports/handlers who don't mandate VIP terminals etc.

Aberdeen (Signature) - a portacabin. Does the job fine.
Klagenfurt - still bloody expensive.
Gdansk (Executive Services) - use pax terminal.
Larnaka (Abelair) - have the choice, use one if you want to.
Pafos - Normal terminal. Nice, new and improving.
Rhodes (Euro Aviation) - use normal terminal. Can be slow like a lot of Greece.
Doha (Qatar Handling) - you have the choice of the new Rizon Jet VVIP terminal (nicest I've been too but very expensive) or the normal route through the pax terminal.
Zadar - very affordable and fast service. Normal building.
Alexandria (Tiger/Zas Aviation) - normal terminal with usual Egyptian delays whether VIP or not, it makes no difference.
Marsa Alam - same.
Haifa - self handle mostly.
Sde Dov - ditto.
Cannakale - normal terminal. No posh facilities. Fine by Turkish standards.
Istanbul (SAW) - normal terminal. Dirty, slow.
Shannon - normal terminal makes sense as VIP rooms are in it... Saves cost.
Ronaldsway - normal terminal.
Nordholtz/Cuxhaven - normal terminal.
Altenrhein - normal terminal, nearly big enough to call it that.
Amman ( Queen Alia) - normal terminal. VIP is available at cost though.
Constanta - normal terminal. Usual Romanian slow service.
Antwerp - normal terminal. No frills.
Le Castellet - normal building pretty much VIP anyway.
Simferopol - normal terminal. VIP available. v costly! Ukrainian usual slow...
Talin - normal terminal. Estonians are quite efficient.
Aalborg - use normal terminal.

The above don't mandate paying for VIP facilities. Why should Shoreham! You can't escape using handling in most cases now for bizjets, but abonanza for goodness sake...

For interests sake, my top three friendliest FBO/handlers are:

Beirut - executive aircraft services. In the VIP terminal.
KLM Rotterdam Jet Centre - fast usually. Easy to use. Expensive though!
Hamburg - Service People FBO. Friendly and efficient.