Landing fee at CYOS

[photofly]

Guess I'll just fly in NORDO next time for a few touch and go's

That, is a really good point.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Or, just do those touch n' gos at Collingwood or Wiarton. They have no landing fees for single pistons.

Just sayin'

[photofly]

Actually I was thinking more for based pilots: if you land or takeoff there NORDO, and hurry to and from your hangar, it's unlikely that anyone is going to know your aircraft moved. Want fuel? Make sure you get it on a day you don't fly. I'm not advocating dodging a fee, but I suspect most pilots will try to avoid it, one way or another.

[Squaretail]

That’s one reason why landing fees just aren’t effective as a revenue generator at small airports. Local traffic will figure out quickly how to avoid it and still make use of the facility, and irregular traffic will probably just refuse to pay. After all, is it worth the trouble to send someone to collections who might be two provinces away? Those kinds of folks will not come back. If you are losing out on a several hundred dollar fuel sale just to try to get an extra 15 bucks, it’s sort of the definition of pound foolish, penny wise.

The biggest issue is however that landing fees are expensive to collect and administer in the big scheme of things. A video system or a transmission recording system isn’t cheap to install, and still require someone to spend the time reviewing them and invoicing. In my experience both of which are horrifically prone to error - by the amount of landing fees I have received over the years from places that were never visited by the aircraft. A double negative, you didn’t get the revenue AND you pissed off someone else who might fly into your airport in the future.

[digits_]

Actually I was thinking more for based pilots: if you land or takeoff there NORDO, and hurry to and from your hangar, it's unlikely that anyone is going to know your aircraft moved. Want fuel? Make sure you get it on a day you don't fly. I'm not advocating dodging a fee, but I suspect most pilots will try to avoid it, one way or another.

Or you're so pissed off about the fee you'd rather spend 50 dollars hopping over to somewhere else for fuel, even if it's more expensive. They shouldn't underestimate humanity's pettiness

Does the hangar land lease include a clause that forces the airport operator to keep the airport operational for XX years?

[anofly]

its a nice evening, you have been out changing the oil in your sky cutter 2000, you have run the engine, its not leaking, its ready to go... why not take a little 15 min flight to make sure and do 2 circuits before the sun goes down, so two landings, and put it back in the hanger.... oh....
its $ 70.00.... thank you very much.....

[AirFrame]

Or you're so pissed off about the fee you'd rather spend 50 dollars hopping over to somewhere else for fuel, even if it's more expensive. They shouldn't underestimate humanity's pettiness

Well, if you were coming out to go flying anyway, why not make it to a destination without a landing fee? And possibly cheaper gas at the same time?

Then come back in NORDO, and hustle into the hangar... Except if you have a radio you're required to use it.

[photofly]

Except if you have a radio you're required to use it.

Eh, what?

[Aviatard]

Except if you have a radio you're required to use it.

Nahhhhh

[JasonE]

It's not showing an MF....

The day I did my flight test, the radio was so busy/annoying I turned it off. The examiner asked "Can you do that?" My response "Why not, we are in glass G airspace." I passed.

[AirFrame]

Except if you have a radio you're required to use it.

Eh, what?

Use of Mandatory Frequency(MF) and Aerodrome Traffic Frequency(ATF) When operating in accordance with VFR, or in accordance with IFR but in VMC, pilots have sole responsibility for seeing and avoiding other aircraft. Aural and visual alertness are required to enhance safety of flight in the vicinity of uncontrolled aerodromes. At uncontrolled aerodromes for which an MF or ATF has been designated, certain reports shall be made by all radio-equipped aircraft.

Emphasis mine. And before anyone else says it, no, the AIM isn't regulations, but if there's an incident, explaining why you didn't use the radio will be difficult.

There's also:

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft operating at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome shall maintain a continuous listening watch on the appropriate frequency for aerodrome control communications or, if this is not possible and an air traffic control unit is in operation at the aerodrome, keep a watch for such instructions as may be issued by visual means by the air traffic control unit...

Which suggests that if you have a functioning radio you have to at least listen on it. "It was turned off" doesn't mean inoperative.

[photofly]

The AIM also includes this rubric:

The information in this publication is to be considered solely as a guide and should not be quoted as or considered to be a legal authority.

Regarding 602.96:

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft operating at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome shall maintain a continuous listening watch on the appropriate frequency for aerodrome control communications

There are no aerodrome control communications at CYOS, so there is clearly no need to keep to a continuous listening watch for that purpose.

[AirFrame]

The AIM also includes this rubric:

The information in this publication is to be considered solely as a guide and should not be quoted as or considered to be a legal authority.

As I said...

And before anyone else says it, no, the AIM isn't regulations, but if there's an incident, explaining why you didn't use the radio will be difficult.

Regarding 602.96:

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft operating at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome shall maintain a continuous listening watch on the appropriate frequency for aerodrome control communications

There are no aerodrome control communications at CYOS, so there is clearly no need to keep to a continuous listening watch for that purpose.

That's your interpretation. Mine is that pilots making calls on an ATF are controlling themselves. Regardless, suggesting one turn off a functioning radio at an ATF airport is at least as safety-stupid as not wanting to install a 406MHz ELT, wouldn't you say?

[Aviatard]

That's your interpretation. Mine is that pilots making calls on an MF are controlling themselves. Regardless, suggesting one turn off a functioning radio at an MF airport is at least as safety-stupid as not wanting to install a 406MHz ELT, wouldn't you say?

Agreed except this is not an MF.

[photofly]

That's your interpretation. Mine is that pilots making calls on an MF are controlling themselves. Regardless, suggesting one turn off a functioning radio at an MF airport is at least as safety-stupid as not wanting to install a 406MHz ELT, wouldn't you say?

Not keeping a listening watch on the appropriate frequency at a Mandatory Frequency airport is a breach of 602.97(2). Not making the required reports when operating at a MF aerodrome or flying through a MF area would breach 602.99 to 602.103. Those are all different provisions from 602.96.

And as has been pointed out, there's no MF at CYOS.

Yes, people do safety-stupid things, especially to save $35 per landing. I'm not condoning it, but it will certainly happen. If I fly in there in my Piper M600, $35 is small change. If I fly in there in my homebuilt, or Luscombe, or ultralight, then $35 might double the cost of the flight.

[Cessna 180]

"Owen Sound Traffic, Red Cessna 5 miles west, 3000 feet, planing overhead the field for the left downwind runway 18, Owen Sound."

[AirFrame]

Agreed except this is not an MF.

Corrected my post, I meant to say ATF.

[AirFrame]

If you're flying into an uncontrolled airport in the middle of nowhere, just use a fake registration. Pick one that's on the "available marks" list. Now you can talk to other traffic, and nobody listening on frequency will be able to find a billing address to send a landing fee to...