Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1638859
Wasnt it Biggin that wanted light GA help to extend its hours then specifically shut out light GA from those extra hours to fit in the odd bizjet?...Or am I mixing up airports *... :?: Im sure there was something else controversial as well involving light GA... :?

Regards, SD..

*If I am, Ill delete this post
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1638865
I don’t know all the latest ins and outs I’m afraid but the last thing I heard was that the existing flight schools managed to get their leases renewed after a lot of sweating and disruption?

I imagine the devil is in the detail with this new building. The rent, the duration, other running costs, and all the other T&Cs.
Last edited by James Chan on Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
By avtur3
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1638882
I think the thread title is spot on "Biggin Hill vs. GA" ...

The Biggin press release is talking about 'light aviation' not general aviation; I think there is a subtle difference. Looking at the size of the proposed hangars I see capability for much more than what people here would generally call 'GA'.

I really can't see that scale of development at an airport with London in its name being GA friendly, especially when costs are factored in.

I'd be more tempted to read it as 'light (commercial) aviation' .... :wink:
#1638883
I struggle to see how an investor would get a return without raising fees.
Which in turn would drive out GA
Which could leave Biggin Hill Airport Ltd with a nice shiny terminal building.

Just saying....
#1638884
avtur3 wrote:I think the thread title is spot on "Biggin Hill vs. GA" ...

The Biggin press release is talking about 'light aviation' not general aviation; I think there is a subtle difference. Looking at the size of the proposed hangars I see capability for much more than what people here would generally call 'GA'.

I really can't see that scale of development at an airport with London in its name being GA friendly, especially when costs are factored in.

I'd be more tempted to read it as 'light (commercial) aviation' .... :wink:


From flyer press release:
“A brand new Light Aviation Centre is to be built at London Biggin Hill Airport. The centre will manage all general aviation activity including flight training.”
#1638896
Looks to me like Biggin Hill are planning to take over all "light aviation" at their airport. How would a huge, communal facility work for lots of small businesses? A better approach would be to build a bunch of smaller hangars - small enough to get under the business rates exemption threshold - and let each small business have their own premises.
#1638897
Flyingfemme wrote:Looks to me like Biggin Hill are planning to take over all "light aviation" at their airport. How would a huge, communal facility work for lots of small businesses? A better approach would be to build a bunch of smaller hangars - small enough to get under the business rates exemption threshold - and let each small business have their own premises.


Why? That means less control for BHAL. Their remit is for commercial growth of bizjit as the main revenue stream.
#1638906
Flyingfemme wrote:Looks to me like Biggin Hill are planning to take over all "light aviation" at their airport. How would a huge, communal facility work for lots of small businesses? A better approach would be to build a bunch of smaller hangars - small enough to get under the business rates exemption threshold - and let each small business have their own premises.


I totally agree. That is what all airports should be offering.

What will happen to the existing businesses if they can't afford this new hangar?
By Lefty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1638942
Two points.
1. Looks like the management don’t want the grief of negotiating and contracting with lots of independent flying club and maintenance businesses. Much easier to grant one contract to someone who will take on that problem.

2. Once an airport reaches a specific turnover (£1 million I think) - they are automatically qualified for “permitted development” - which means they can build hangars, parking areas etc without having to request planning permission from the local authorities.
#1638990
Lefty wrote:Looks like the management don’t want the grief of negotiating and contracting with lots of independent flying club and maintenance businesses. Much easier to grant one contract to someone who will take on that problem.


No, don't let that be another Estate Agent who has no understanding of aviation.
#1638998
Lefty wrote:Two points.
1. Looks like the management don’t want the grief of negotiating and contracting with lots of independent flying club and maintenance businesses. Much easier to grant one contract to someone who will take on that problem.

2. Once an airport reaches a specific turnover (£1 million I think) - they are automatically qualified for “permitted development” - which means they can build hangars, parking areas etc without having to request planning permission from the local authorities.


Biggin already have permitted development rights on certain parts of the airport, but not all areas. That allows them to put up 'operational buildings' for aviation purposes without planning permission in those specific, defined areas. You need to have a turnover of over £3m as a general aviation airport to be able to jump onto that (Airport Permitted Development Rights) bandwagon, not £1m
#1639153
The way I read the article, it is definitely for the lighter end of GA, but this looks more like trying to attact one of the big commerical auviation training companies... much easier to deal with then a bunch of pesky small outfits..