Recreational aircraft landing fees - feedback needed please.

[Country Flyer]

16 hours ago, Blueadventures said:

An airfield up my way has landing fees; and these are reasonable. In recent years they waive the landing fee if you purchase fuel or have a feed at the cafe on the field.  This is great, as we semi regularly go there and have brecky or visit the town for the day as there is a bus service.  Very pro aviation.  Something like that may work at Broken Hill.

What airfield is this ??

[Country Flyer]

21 hours ago, waraton said:

Does your airfield waive landing fees for recreational aircraft and how is this done?

Do landing fees impact on your flight planning?

 

I know landing fee discussions are done to death but my aero club (Broken Hill) is looking at putting a proposal to council to waive these costs for recreational flights. We believe the city loses traffic due to the charges but evidence in anecdotal. Some airfields offer exemption by application/registration and some just don't charge. Any information you provide which supports our proposal can be incorporated into a proposal. 

 

 

I had to stop in Gunnedah NSW for fuel and found out the visit charge was the most expensive one I have received Vs eg Merimbula NSW (Chalk and Cheese)... so Gunnedah is off my list of stops for fuel. I know in the total scheme of things not a lot to stop. Buy fuel, no fees... good idea.   

I like the idea of under 1500Kg FOC BUT make it easy for aircrafts to make a donation PAYPAL ? Airports aren't cheap to maintain and look after,  so making donations to even free ones would be on my books..... as long as its easy to do and don't have to go looking for the bank account details, paypal names etc etc. MAKE IT EASY FOR people to do :) then drop AVDATA  Councils Im sure would be happier with more money in their accounts (As long as people were honest and/or donated ??? )... well thats my 5c worth :)  BTW Broken Hill is on my flight list when your RFDS opens back up....

[skippydiesel]

10 hours ago, kgwilson said:

.....................We live in a user pays society............................ .

No offence KG but does this phrase really mean - all to often it actually means paying twice or more, for the same asset/service. Not suggesting your lovely little airfield at S Grafton should not ask for landing fees, if that the only funding avenue available to you. I am just gobsmacked at the Australian publics whole sale acceptance of a mantra (user pays) which has seen the tax/rate payer plus user paying for the same asset/service, to many asset services being discontinued because they cant stand alone, as a breakeven/profit entity , when they were never designed/expected to do so. 

 

Is S Grafton being used for emergency response aircraft ? or for any other community activity? - if so it should be being financially supported (to some degree) by the rate paying community

[Ian]

Given the choice, and there generally is one, I will choose the place with no fees. I will specifically avoid those places with higher than average fees. I don't mind bearing some of the costs associated with running an airfield as long as they are reasonable and reflect the requirements of the aircraft involved. There are a number of caveats associate with this though.

Airports tend to attract business into the community so from a business point if view they are and should be a loss leader funded by the community.

Airports are public goods and service a far wider community than simply those who use it on a regular basis especially in times of duress and emergencies. All levels of Government should recognize this and contribute accordingly. If you want water bombers to be able to operate effectively when there are bushfires you need an airport, if you want mass evacuations in times of duress airports are very handy. If you want large tankers to operate you need a large airport. The requirements relating to bushfires control will continue to escalate as it's extremely unlikely that effective responses to global warming will occur until its an absolute disaster, the science is crystal clear however people stuggle to comprehend basic math and logic. The recent bushfires have just been the prelude and a distributed network of forward airstrips in fire prone area will be a key strategic asset in efforts to manage these risks.

In relation to the collection of fees, if a significant proportion of the fees ie  more than 5% are being siphoned off in management charges that should fixed and the parties involved should be named and shamed. If the councils involved are party to this they should also be named and shamed. Agreeing to high commission deals just because you don't directly bear the cost is simply laziness and incompetence and funneling money that should stay in your community back into the bid cities.

 

Trying to charge for gold plated solutions is commonplace, for example when the surface is upgraded to cater for RPT, that upgrade cost shouldn't be expected to the borne by those who don't need it however these costs are typically used to justify fees. You will often seen local councils spending millions on a terminal building and then claiming this as a cost associated with running the airport when in reality it's just a vanity project.

 

[facthunter]

You can't look after grass if there's a fair it of traffic even if it's only Ultralight's. Top dressing it to get rid of worn areas is tedious so using a sealed surface seems like the next step. Ever priced that sort of thing?  You also can get prop nicks off the surface it it's not swept.  You have to reform taxiways and weed them  Windsock don't last long  You need a cattle proof fence to keep stock off.  A suitable tie down and parking area. then maybe a petrol bowser and a toilet. Then you need Insurance to cover the number of people involved. I always had 3rd party cover for events I held on my block. THAT costs.

  To start with the proposition Of I'm not paying is crazy and unrealistic.. Next people complain there aren't enough suitable places to land with any facilities. The overworked FEW usually keep these places going out of dedication.  Nev 

[Flightrite]

Avdata are the enemy! I don’t know how many times I’ve received bills for ldg fees etc inc YSCB which I’ve never been there privately!  
It’s all about choice, if I can I’ll avoid the money grabbers at ever chance!

[Ian]

It seems strange that they could bill incorrectly for a flight into controlled airport with controlled airspace. Unless of course they farm the voice recordings to someone not familiar with the english language.

I was interested in the solution that Caboolture were using. The issue with radio calls is that they're easy to fake or mistake.

 

I'd like to see ADSB made mandatory for all flights and also have the Government provides an open source ADSB reference design and test compliance suite and program. This would drive the price down to a nominal cost so that the price reflects the components.

However the ADSB standard is an incredibly dumb standard, signals are easily spoofed and have less security than a standard phone handset. It really does need to be fixed.

 

[facthunter]

It DOES happen and it's a pain getting them to pull the bill.  It seems some of them are just typos. You shouldn't have to prove you weren't there. Just declare you weren't and you've perjured yourself if you are lying.  Nev

[Blueadventures]

7 hours ago, Country Flyer said:

What airfield is this ??

Shute Harbour (YSHR).

[Kyle Communications]

The other thing about my radio project is when listening to all the calls through out the day..it is amazing just how many crap radios there are..so another thing with the monitoring is to be able to notify the owner of the aircraft to get it fixed...Ycab at the next ERSA will have radio as mandatory

 

 

[bushcaddy105]

My home base airport, Port Pirie SA, is owned and operated by the Port Pirie Regional Council. Their policy is NOT to charge landing fees and to welcome visiting aviators who are most likely to stay overnight when on an East-West trip or return.

The Port Pirie Flying Group operates the card swipe fuel facility (Avgas and Avtur) with prices pegged to Adelaide and also stocks the pilot's lounge with snacks, drinks, etc. with the proceeds going to local charities. One motel in town provides a free courtesy pickup and delivery service in to town (5Km away and with meals to die for), or local flyers will willingly offer a ride if present. The ARO and caretaker lives on site. Everyone concerned is happy!!! Avdata doesn't get a look-in.

 

Is there a better model for airport operators to follow? Please share our happiness! Port Pirie - the friendly city.

[Kyle Communications]

Now thats how it should be run..the difference is the council does not run our airfield  we do as a club and so are responsible for all the costs like fencing and maint and buildings etc The club does not want to make a fortune only get enough funds to run the place without going in debt and expand the facilities. Our biggest cost by far is the runway maint due to the now extreme overuse by commercial ops

 

[bushcaddy105]

I should have also mentioned- the council annually leases the sizable croppable area (ex WW2 airfield) to a local farmer and also leases hangar space in the one remaining Bellman hangar, thus providing off-setting income towards operating costs.

[skippydiesel]

22 minutes ago, Kyle Communications said:

Now thats how it should be run..the difference is the council does not run our airfield  we do as a club and so are responsible for all the costs like fencing and maint and buildings etc The club does not want to make a fortune only get enough funds to run the place without going in debt and expand the facilities. Our biggest cost by far is the runway maint due to the now extreme overuse by commercial ops

 

So why are you not charging the "commercial operations" the full cost of their use of the airfield/facilities ?

[APenNameAndThatA]

I stopped at the aerodrome in Charleville. Don’t know what the landing fee was but the guy at the cafe gave me a courtesy car for the two days I was there!!! 

[Kyle Communications]

Skippy..its a long story and the less I put out there the better. The current committee has a new direction forward. The club members voted last year for a major change in the people running the place. Our AGM is next month and I believe the current commitee will most likely be voted back in due to the changes we have made...but lets say it the charges are soon to happen. Thats why I am getting this device ready.

[jackc]

It would be nice if the Councils were lobbied to get rid of Avdata and use a better method of managing fee collections to lower landing costs and see Councils get the fees direct,  Aviators might feel a bit better about the whole thing without money grabbing  Avdata parasites? being involved.

[Paul davenport]

Airports are part of the infrastructure of councils and a cost of doing business.  Following the principle of user pays let’s see them charge people for using parks and gardens, foot paths, libraries.  Only my opinion 

 

[kgwilson]

22 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

No offence KG but does this phrase really mean - all to often it actually means paying twice or more, for the same asset/service. Not suggesting your lovely little airfield at S Grafton should not ask for landing fees, if that the only funding avenue available to you. I am just gobsmacked at the Australian publics whole sale acceptance of a mantra (user pays) which has seen the tax/rate payer plus user paying for the same asset/service, to many asset services being discontinued because they cant stand alone, as a breakeven/profit entity , when they were never designed/expected to do so. 

 

Is S Grafton being used for emergency response aircraft ? or for any other community activity? - if so it should be being financially supported (to some degree) by the rate paying community

We get Careflight (they are a profit making outfit) so they get charged, Angelflight (Charity so no charge) & the Westpac Helicopter on hot days when they can't take off from the Hospital (no charge). We also charge an annual fee of $400.00 for the AIA college training Chinese students who come in for 10-20 landings a week (before Covid but nothing now) . The Council hires Choppers for survey work etc & they use the aerodrome but are always happy to pay. We get no support from anywhere & the total of landing fees annually is around $1,000.00 a year or 2% of our costs.

[skippydiesel]

39 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

We get Careflight (they are a profit making outfit) so they get charged, Angelflight (Charity so no charge) & the Westpac Helicopter on hot days when they can't take off from the Hospital (no charge). We also charge an annual fee of $400.00 for the AIA college training Chinese students who come in for 10-20 landings a week (before Covid but nothing now) . The Council hires Choppers for survey work etc & they use the aerodrome but are always happy to pay. We get no support from anywhere & the total of landing fees annually is around $1,000.00 a year or 2% of our costs.

The community/rate payers should be giving you something for the emergency flight facilitation.

[Ian]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that the Grafton Airport which is maintained by the Council is about 12km out of town so Grafton has two aviation facilities, one for commercial and the other catering to the local flying community. The fact that it is much closer to town is a significant plus.

[kgwilson]

Yes like most Councils, Clarence Valley is inefficient and broke so they were keen to get rid of South Grafton back in 2015 as they did not want to have to maintain 2 aerodromes but wanted it to go to the highest bidder. This shows you how dumb councillors are. It is Crown Land so you cant just sell the lease. I put up the proposal on behalf of the Hangar Owners as a Not for Profit Incorporated Association so we are now the lessee. The council got its pound of flesh as we have to pay them rates. Patient transfer flights always come to South Grafton as it is only a couple of km to the Hospital compared to 17km to the actual Grafton Airport which is way out of town where they spent millions on a terminal etc and get 2 Rex flights a week.

[Old Koreelah]

4 hours ago, Paul davenport said:

Airports are part of the infrastructure of councils and a cost of doing business.  Following the principle of user pays let’s see them charge people for using parks and gardens, foot paths, libraries.  Only my opinion 

 

Spot on, Paul, but don’t hold your breath…

 

Without any consultation, our local council recently announced they will be charging landing fees. Later, during a box-ticking meeting I was told this was to ensure equity with other users of council services.

I responded by pointing out that council provides costly infrastructure for free camping without expecting caravaners to contribute. The equity arguement is meaningless because my 380kg plane has almost no impact on our roads, etc. compared to an RV setup weighing several tonnes and discharging sewage and waste into our local systems.

 

I also challenged the general misconception that pilots are rich; some of our Aero Club members are age pensioners. My plane cost a tiny fraction the price of a typical car-caravan setup, yet I pay and they don’t.

(Even worse, most of our members live out of town and have no access to most of the services our rates pay for!)

 

 

 

[Paul davenport]

I could not have put it better myself

[Ian]

In general I think that GA needs to do more PR work, look at the bikies charity rides currying public goodwill.

The whole Angel flights program should be advertised more widely and activities involving the locals should occur on a regular basis.