We've rented a 172 in the past to cover spins, since the tapered wing pipers aren't certified for them
photofly wrote:Are you taking pre-PPL partners yet?
Where did you do your spin training?I had barely 4 hours of dual when I started
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
photofly wrote:Are you taking pre-PPL partners yet?
Where did you do your spin training?I had barely 4 hours of dual when I started
The problem with the idea is that its only makes sense if the revenue to be generated is greater than the costs of implementing it. At many small airports there just plain isn't the traffic to justify the cost of implementing and collecting the fee, so the fee only serves to deter traffic - if one can indeed collect it - which in turn defeats the point and of course lessens the return. There are many ways small airports can generate revenue but unfortunately it seems the want of governing bodies to look at this least effective mean first.I think that landing fees are a fair idea.
You put a mailbox at the entrance with "Landing fee 5 CAD please. Thank you".Squaretail wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 12:23 pm The problem with the idea is that its only makes sense if the revenue to be generated is greater than the costs of implementing it. At many small airports there just plain isn't the traffic to justify the cost of implementing and collecting the fee, so the fee only serves to deter traffic - if one can indeed collect it - which in turn defeats the point and of course lessens the return. There are many ways small airports can generate revenue but unfortunately it seems the want of governing bodies to look at this least effective mean first.
Well that would be the simple answer that I've never been able to convince any management group to do. That said though, it still costs something. I mean if your mailbox costs you $20 of materials and you get three landings who pay, well you're out 5 bucks. Either way, its a question of scale. If the above was to help put gas in the lawnmower as your only say maintenance cost, its not a very good return or to be counted on as a revenue stream. I've simplified our airport to make my point. I should say that I'm not against landing fees, just that you'd also better have service for said fee and a reasonable means of paying it. A personal pet peeve is getting bills for places I haven't landed at, and random costs and changes in prices at places I do.
You put a mailbox at the entrance with "Landing fee 5 CAD please. Thank you".
You empty it once a day or once week. Doesn't need to be complicated.
Users of the airport have to sell it as more than just a playground for a bunch of pricks. They have to have more than the "it brings some burger eaters". For example: many small airports in this country that I know of, since in this country are few and far between, actually have users from a wider area. For example, at my home field there are airplane owners who live up to an hour away from the airport which means the airport is bringing people from a wider area which make use of the town's business. Since many small town businesses rely on a local demand any transient customers is a bonus.How do we raise this to being priority 20 out of 10, let alone in the top 10?
NO! Big Mac $5.99+ tax.
They are both too expensive.Not sure what that has to do with the cost of flying.
Many years ago, back in '79 I remember this question coming up in my home town. I attended a council meeting where one of the discussion subjects was to rationalize the expense of maintaining the airport. I was a young commercial pilot working at said airport, and had my ducks lined up for the meeting. When it was my turn to talk, stood up, showed the council members a dozen fuel receipts taken over the last 2 months. Each and every one of those was for putting fuel into a provincial government operated air ambulance citation. Proceeded to explain, that airport is a critical component of our health care system, the primary means of getting folks to a trauma center on occasion.Squaretail wrote: ↑Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:28 am I would also say it should be stressed that as part of an area's infrastructure
Its not hard to get that impression sometimes though if you hang out at a lot of small airports. I wouldn't want tax dollars going to a place that I thought was only used by five pricks who wanted to be treated like princesses. I've been to flying club meetings where the guys present were trying to make a case that there was too much flying going on at "their" airport. The same kinds of guys are sometimes the ones who will make a case for more fees, at least fees for everyone else. One of the things that needs to be heavily countered I've found is some few, but loud voices, of these types. There's also the tendency to make champagne demands on a small airport with a beer budget, which can make the needs of the airport seem outrageous to the layman taxpayer.Aviation is viewed (incorrectly) as a place for the rich,
I must be lucky where I live because I have sat here and thought back through the years about the people at the airport and I could not think of even one that would fit the description of a prick.Its not hard to get that impression sometimes though if you hang out at a lot of small airports. I wouldn't want tax dollars going to a place that I thought was only used by five pricks who wanted to be treated like princesses.
I didn't say there were any small airports that were only used by pricks, only that to the outsider it may seem that way by encounters with some of the users. For example I remember one fellow who showed up to protest a young Eagles day under the guise that it was a "safety hazard" when in actuality I think he was just pissed that he didn't have the airport to himself that day. Another example would be a fellow I knew who felt the need to bitch to the town about how he felt the runway wasn't in suitable condition for his use since apparently it wasn't brushed dry to his specifications. Now I can imagine that it might have been difficult for some of the constituent tax payers to feel sorry for this fellow since their residential streets certainly don't get that kind of attention.small airports that is only used by pricks?
Well, those guys took the time to participate in the goings on of the airport, and that's something that many pilots and owners don't bother to do! Maybe they thought that the airport was "theirs" because they participated. The flying club where I learned to fly, owned the airport. So, yes, if things got too busy (which in my day, they certainly did from time to time), the airport would be closed to non members. 'Sounds fair to me, we were the members.I've been to flying club meetings where the guys present were trying to make a case that there was too much flying going on at "their" airport.