Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By IMCR
#1844217
Personally I think this fee by UK standards very reasonable.

However, it is interesting how we get so excited about it.

In the land of capitalism the last time I landed at Miami Int. I was taken aback when it was suggested I really should take fuel. The fuel prices were pretty average for Florida, not the cheapest, but no significant premium. I asked why. Well, the landing fee is $50, otherwise free with fuel. The hospitality, including soft drinks and some food was also free, as was the drive to and from the aircraft.
kanga, WelshRichy liked this
User avatar
By skydriller
#1844278
IMCR wrote:Personally I think this fee by UK standards very reasonable


Thats part of the problem isnt it..?

What do you get for the fifty quid? Land and stay less than 2hrs...to do what while there?

Dont get me wrong, Ive happily paid 150 for a long weekend where I was picked up, wizzed through security & transported to the to hire cars, refreshments for my partner while I had help with flight plans etc. So to me its about value, not price...

Regards, SD..
By Forfoxake
#1844317
Rob P wrote:
skydriller wrote: Land and stay less than 2hrs


You've never been to Glasgow then?

Nobody would want to stay longer.

Rob P

PS: "Fewer"


I know you are joking but Glasgow has lots of interesting shops, parks and museums.

But if that does not appeal to you, there is always Paisley, in which the airport is situated!
By riverrock
#1844320
Glasgow is a city with loads of character - largest shopping area outside of London, probably best night life / clubs in the UK, second busiest arena / music venue in the world (after Madison Square Garden), has second most green spaces of any city in UK (and that's because Edinburgh has Arthur's Seat in the middle).
Very much a working city but a friendly one and does have the tourist stuff too.

But then I'm biased :D
User avatar
By Rob P
#1844345
Having done several motor industry gigs at the SECC I have a heavily jaundiced view of the city I'm afraid. If I never go back it will be far too soon.

That said, Old Trafford / Manchester was worse.

Rob P
By Forfoxake
#1844367
Rob P wrote:Having done several motor industry gigs at the SECC I have a heavily jaundiced view of the city I'm afraid. If I never go back it will be far too soon.

That said, Old Trafford / Manchester was worse.

Rob P


The SECC is a soul-less modern building in a redeveloped part of town.

Try Kelvingrove Art Gallery/Museum and Park, the Botanics, the People's Palace in Glasgow Green and Pollok Park (with the Burrell Collection when it reopens). Byers Road and Merchant City for some nice pubs and restaurants. And Loch Lomond is only half an hour away.

PS Edinburgh is less than an hour away too but we don't talk about that!
By rdfb
#1844385
IMCR wrote:In the land of capitalism the last time I landed at Miami Int. I was taken aback when it was suggested I really should take fuel. The fuel prices were pretty average for Florida, not the cheapest, but no significant premium. I asked why. Well, the landing fee is $50, otherwise free with fuel. The hospitality, including soft drinks and some food was also free, as was the drive to and from the aircraft.


What's ironic is that in the case of aviation, it's the US that appears to be socialist, and the UK capitalist. In the US airports and ATC are federally funded, so that's why competition has brought the landing fee down to nothing or nearly nothing when you're clearly costing them more than that to serve you. Equal access is also federally mandated to airports receiving federal funding, which is basically all of them. In the UK, the government's capitalist "user pays" policy has led the CAA to permit siloed airspace and (commercially) unregulated airports, even though they have local monopolies thanks to planning laws, leading to the deliberate pricing out of GA at most major airports. The CAA could still fulfil their "user pays" mandate with joined up airspace and the provision of equal access with pricing that fairly reflects costs, but that's harder to set up and even harder to transform into, so they haven't done that, and so we have disjoint, effectively-closed-to-GA airspace, effectively-closed-to-GA airports, an excess of infringements and so on.

Rant over. Carry on :)
kanga, flybymike, UpThere liked this
By IMCR
#1844387
Never been to Glasgow, maybe a good thing. I have been to Edinburgh many times - it is a beautiful city.

It is a good rant. Access to airports and central government funding has always seemed to me a very good idea, but, sadly, that horse has left.
User avatar
By Rob P
#1844392
Forfoxake wrote:
The SECC is a soul-less modern building in a redeveloped part of town.


Nothing much wrong with the building, if you like that sort of thing. It was the people there who managed, every time, to turn it into a hateful experience.

I'm sure there are some good bits, but I'm not encouraged to return and explore.

Rob P
By rdfb
#1844400
IMCR wrote:...but, sadly, that horse has left.


I'm not sure it's completely gone. In my view the lack of joined up airspace is the primary cause of infringements (as can be seen by considering other countries) and infringements are taken seriously. In my view, if GA took the unified position that this is what needs to change to fix the problem, then maybe we have a chance. Especially since I'm quite sure that an alternative setup is perfectly possible even following "user pays". The toughest part is convincing the powers-that-be that CAT isn't actually paying their way at the moment if you consider the costs they impose on GA airspace and airport users.