Landing Fees

[Ultralights]

Dont worry RAAus are busy at the moment, just got a lovely letter from them demanding Landing fees of $48 for Bankstown and Camden airports... even though i have never flown the Savannah into Camden airport.

 

 

[Sapphire]

Dont worry RAAus are busy at the moment, just got a lovely letter from them demanding Landing fees of $48 for Bankstown and Camden airports... even though i have never flown the Savannah into Camden airport.

My Sapphire got charged a landing fee thousands of miles away. At the time it was in a trailer in front of my house for sale. How do they identify these a/c - a lottery machine?

 

 

[dodo]

I have heard in the past of pilots make deliberately misleading calls (Savannah nnnn, where nnnn is a another aircraft of the same type on the register). Never seen it done,but have heard plenty of complaints similar to yours,

 

dodo

 

 

[poteroo]

Dont worry RAAus are busy at the moment, just got a lovely letter from them demanding Landing fees of $48 for Bankstown and Camden airports... even though i have never flown the Savannah into Camden airport.

You can't just ignore it - that is considered as being acceptance. You need to send/email them a written statement that your diary shows you were at............., and spoke with............... on that day, and add to that a copy of your M/R which clearly shows that your aircraft was not even flown on that day, or, if it was, then spell out where you travelled from/to. In one case of this - I was able to gain a retraction of the account, by showing that a 1 hr local flight in WA unfortunately had me landing at Hobart! It seems that we're guilty until proven innocent!

 

happy days,

 

 

[facthunter]

Used to happen to me all the time with the Citabria. Even when the thing was in for maintance, You have to prove it wasn't you. Are the RAAus doing this for the airport owners? It will drive everyone mad. Costs more to collect the money than the money outstanding's value Phone calls galore!! . Perth Intl, Mount Isa .. places I am supposed to have been.. A real PITA. Nev

 

 

[ave8rr]

Are the RAAus doing this for the airport owners? Nev

Good to see that the airport owners are at last trying to get what is owed.

Avdata have been able to pass the bills to the owners for years so I guess Avdata are now just sending the bill to RAAus and let them (RAAus) get what is owed as they have the owners address details. I wonder if RAAus are adding a 10% collection fee. I did read in the magazine a few years back that that would happen.

 

 

[ave8rr]

I have heard in the past of pilots make deliberately misleading calls (Savannah nnnn, where nnnn is a another aircraft of the same type on the register). Never seen it done,but have heard plenty of complaints similar to yours,dodo

If a pilot can afford the fuel for the tank then they can afford the landing fee in my opinion. I run an aerodrome and know what it costs to maintain that aerodrome especially if Certified or Registered. Have just had CASA here for two days for the annual audit (Certified Aerodrome). If they went over everything in RAAus like they do with us then I can see why RAAus is in trouble with audits if all is not as it should be according to the Regs.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

So one of the things you learn about is VHF radio and we all know that its relatively short range right? Well yes in general that is so, but like most things with radio for each ruile there are on occasions one or more exceptions.

 

There are specific ocurences when the ionosspere for a bunch of reasons is perfectly happy to bend the radio waves so that they are no longer trapped localy or radiate into space but can in fact be heard in other parts of the nation as they follow the curvature of the earth....

 

Its also a fact that for the short range we need, the 5W or 6W output of our transceivers, when working with an appropriate antenna and cabling, is heaps more power than is needed. Net result from time to time you may well hear another aircraft of your channel and think the calls that guy made make no sense at all. Dont just assume he's an idiot but give the thought to the fact that he may be no where near where you expect he is......

 

This might......be why from time to time you get a result that you wouldnt expect from the billing people.....Next time it happens just check and see what teh frequencies were where you were flying and then see what they are where they argue you were. You might just find a common frequency......

 

Now if transceivers were power reduced to what we need for the local area.......actually no, if transcievers went digital and included gps location, aircraft callsign in the header of the mesaage, and you could set a filter that said ignore transmissions from anywhere greater than X miles from my location then we would end up with much better quality audio a display of the station calling on the panel, the ability to have ADSB (via VHF built in) and much of the rubbish we were discussing here gone.......

 

But back from the future........to the current where we arent even sure if we'll fly at all in the coming months!!

 

 

[Guest Lofty1]

It's about time RAA were charged landing fees. Poor GA pilots have been coughing up since day dot on this one. The RAA register really needs to become public because there is no need for it to be private. I've been on the GA register for 20 years and have never had an issue with my details being made available. If it is an issue just get a po box or register in a company name.

 

 

[dodo]

GA and RA are deliberately different, in a number of areas. And RA,for all it's faults,is a member run organisation. If there was a legislative reason for RA to be on a public register, they would be on a public register. As there isn't, it is up to the membership, and I can't see what the aviation rational for making it public would be.

 

As GA, and therefore, not an RA member, your best bet is to complain to your MP (explain that you reason, and make it clear it isn't just wishing to influence an organisation you have chosen not to be a member of).

 

But I agree on the billing: everyone should pay their bills, not just GA. I am just deeply suspicious of the current billing system, that seems to result in a very high error rate,with no consequences for attempting to bill people incorrectly - and the stories I referred to earlier weren't just RA, most were GA.

 

dodo

 

 

[Ultralights]

I have No issue with paying the fees, actually, the fees for Bankstown were cheaper than i had expected, at YWOL, we paid a yearly fee.

 

the RAAus just forwarded on the letter for payment, so i only have to pay directly to Bankstown airport corp. actually, after looking at the bill, both camden and Bankstown are owned by the same company, so could just be a typo

 

 

[dazza 38]

A C210 that broke up in mid air north of Roma a while back. The pilot took off from Roma .It was noted that he used a different rego ( I read about this accident last week).Than the one his aircraft had. Could have been a mistake, or it could have been for another reason.

 

 

[Guest john]

To All Interested RAAus Members,

 

Over the years what several of us owner pilots have done when Avdata have sent incorrect landing fee accounts when the respective aircraft has not been at that location on the date of the invoice, we have responded to Avdata by sending them a Pro Forma Invoice in return for the estimated professional costs it will take for our Accountant or Lawyer to respond to Avdata concerning the received Avdata invoice advising Avdata that when they have paid this ProForma Invoice in full, then the incorrect invoice Avdata invoice will be paid, & of course a cheqeue was never received from Avdata.

 

Avdata have also been advised in the past in writing when having sent out an incorrect invoice that they may decide to issue legal proceedings for recovery of this incorrect invoice & the relevant evidence will be presented to the Court at the appropriate occasion, & surprisingly enough nothing was ever heard again from Avdata.

 

 

[winsor68]

I have no issue with the Fees but believe both GA and Ra registers should NOT be public information.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Ask them for a photo/footage of your aircraft at that airfield on that date/time. point out to them that these days even council parking nazis do this to avoid any mistakes or disception from either party involved.

 

 

[408059]

Not sure about what the fuss is all about. I operate a very small homebuilt GA aircraft and about 3 times a year get an invoice for landing in Essendon. It seems that someone is using my call sign or has a very similar one and it ends up on my tab. I have never been into Essendon and my aircraft does not have the instruments for it. A quick call to Avdata and the matter is usually resolved in 30 seconds.

 

Steve

 

 

[Guest Lofty1]

The public GA register is great for research and ultimately safety purposes plus it is a great business tool. I have thousands of aircraft owners at my fingertips to contact if I need to. If I need to crosshire, buy or sell an aircraft it is invaluable. Based in my experiences with it I can't see any downsides.

 

 

[biggles5128]

Airports are necessary parts of our infrastructure, as are roads (Both locally managed) imagine if every town you passed through a toll had to be paid. Yes we pay car registration however this makes up less than 10% of the renewal costs, the rest is a tax that apparently goes towards providing infrastructure. Just as the case with fuel, a high percentage of the cost is a tax.

 

The amount of fuel you burn is directly related to the amount you fly your A/C, this has a direct relationship to the number of times you land.

 

I accept that if you go to the big smoke, you will pay for the priviledge of being there, either fly in or drive in, but come on, just because you can fly into Oodnadatta instead of driving there, you get a bill.......

 

It's another case of if you contribute to society there is always some bastard there to relieve you of some well earned cash.

 

 

[ave8rr]

Airports are necessary parts of our infrastructure, as are roads (Both locally managed) imagine if every town you passed through a toll had to be paid. Yes we pay car registration however this makes up less than 10% of the renewal costs, the rest is a tax that apparently goes towards providing infrastructure. Just as the case with fuel, a high percentage of the cost is a tax.The amount of fuel you burn is directly related to the amount you fly your A/C, this has a direct relationship to the number of times you land.

I accept that if you go to the big smoke, you will pay for the priviledge of being there, either fly in or drive in, but come on, just because you can fly into Oodnadatta instead of driving there, you get a bill.......

 

It's another case of if you contribute to society there is always some bastard there to relieve you of some well earned cash.

Can't agree biggles. Alot of airfields are privately owned and / or operated and don't receive any of that tax you talk about and only rely on a "small" landing fee to contribute to the huge cost of operating the airfield. Running an aerodrome is NOT cheap. See post 6 above.

 

 

[biggles5128]

Yep but the majority are owned and run by councils who many have been given the airfield by the commonwealth in the past. Councils and communities benefit from the flying public who generally utilise taxis and local motels etc, it has been noted on many forums that pilots will overfly an airfield which attracts landing fees for one that doesn't in order to obtain fuel etc.

 

Yes, some are private and should be patronised. The mere pittance that is received from landing fees is not the difference between airports remaining open or not, given the cost of recovering these fees. When I land at places like South Grafton, I happily give the club my $5 as it (directly) benefits the club.

 

The propaganda pitched by some councils is akin to all pigs are fuelled and ready to fly.......

 

Glen Innes has recently installed a camera to capture the registration of aircraft. The problem is that it is situated in a position which only records aircraft that cross the terminal side of the holding point, you can fly in and do touch and goes all day and not get your picture taken. This amounts to penalising the residents of the airfield and not those that are essentially "landing", the basis of the fee.

 

 

[Ultralights]

its not just the landing fee issues, im quite happy to pay them if they are reasonable, and actually at an airport i have flown to, as for reasonable, i dont mean, "as soon as the aircraft has shut down and the door is open, walk up to me and demand a landing fee as im still undoing my seatbelts. That will be $15! sorry, i dont have cash on my, no problem, i have eftpos inside.." yeah, i had a great flight thank you very much, see you again soon.... not likely..

 

for half that price i get 3 runways, proper lighting, miles and miles of taxiways and ILS if i want, and professional guidance from the guys in the tower.

 

 

[biggles5128]

"Build it and they will come". If a local pub in a little town put on free beer you watch the population grow, this would mean so many spin offs for other businesses and the town. I know that the pub would go broke in this scenario but you get my drift. We need to do what ever we can to promote and encourage aviation, not out price and out tax the damn thing into extinction.

 

 

[Guest SAJabiruflyer]

Let's draw a parallel...

 

I have a small business, employing 4 people. We charge for nearly everything we do - because nearly everything we do costs me money. In my office, when customers come in looking for advice, we have a 5 minute limit,, after which we charge them. The people who dont want to pay - we dont really see the point of having them as customers. We're not a charity. Does that sound harsh? Take that 5 minutes and times it by the wages I pay, and then by 10 customers a day, and it's cost me about $30 to offer free advice. Of course, I also appreciate the other side - offering a bit of free advice may return to me in the form of more work. It's a tricky one and a constant balancing act that I work on daily with myself and my staff.

 

Sooo...

 

At the airport I fly from, the Owner has to pay 2 staff full time wages. The income from Hangar Site Rentals etc, all need to go towards the running costs. I havent paid a landing fee, but if I was a visitor, I would have no problems paying up, because as someone who has "been there done that" (run a business) I appreciate that everything costs money. When you break it down, even one aircraft landing has an impact on the runway surface. Times that by hundreds or thousands, and you begin to appreciate the costs of upkeep and maintainence. Mowing the grass? Painting lines? Patching cracks? Extending the runway (like they did recently)? Paying for power? Internet costs? Electricity? Insurance? Buying Fuel? Maintaining Fuel Bowsers? Servicing the Airport Tractors used to mow the grassed areas? Installing a new electronic gate to help control access? Everything costs money! Why should an Airport Owner pay for that out of his own pocket - well that is what we ask them to do if we dont pay landing fees! By the way, my airport usually waives fees if u buy fuel.. on which they make a profit of... bugger all. If it's a council owned airfield - what will the council do to a negative-income asset? Yep, they'll sell it developers.

 

We're in a User Pays Society. And i'm down with that

 

 

[Ultralights]

i think some might have missed the point, landing fees, no problem paying... excessive landing fees yes. especially when the airfield is in poor condition and the runway would have been smoother covered in speedhumps. and it was a council operated airport..

 

as for user pays, well, yes and no. private airfields, no problem there, but public airports, should be more like who benefits pays... community benefits, community pays, as well as air operators and people who directly use the airport of course.

 

 

[biggles5128]

I appreciate what you are saying ultralights, however your business needs to run at a profit or you don,t survive. Airports are an important infrastructure that will mostly never run at a profit, they are like roads and the rail system.

 

What would happen if local councils said that the boat ramps are running at a loss so decided to shut them down, the implications to tourism would far outweigh the costs of continuing to provide a service.

 

Again it seems to those that hold the purse strings that if you fly an aircraft you must be well off so lets get a dollar out of them.

 

There are a number of councils who could not give a rats rectum to see an airport close because they would save a heap of money to put into something else. Thankfully there are those that have the wisdom to see the spin offs from fly in visitors, the RFDS that flys in or the boys and girls dropping water over vast amounts of country that is on fire.

 

Like it or not, airports are necessary for the wider community and not just those who might fire up the old girl on a Sunday morning. Local and state Govt should continue to fund these important pieces of real estate without the need to hit people up for in-proportionate landing fees , after all, isn't that what we pay our taxes for... I'm certainly not getting my share for the taxes that goes into the Sydney road system or the national museum...