Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869317
Sounds like it needs better regulation or funding or both then - Openreach has minimum standards by law to maintain the core part of the telecoms network.
User avatar
By Charliesixtysix
#1869320
James Chan wrote:
I'm not proposing nationalisation, but I think the companies that own and run core infrastructure (runway, ramps, taxiways), should in some cases be separated from those who provide products/services (maintenance, flight training, handling, clubs, aircraft leasing etc.) on that infrastructure. For the reasons it happened on train lines, postal services, telecoms, etc.


Apart from Gloucester, isn't that also the situation at several of the other airfields currently under threat?
e.g Gamston, Popham, Wellesbourne, Old Sarum.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869321
Charliesixtysix wrote:
James Chan wrote:
I'm not proposing nationalisation, but I think the companies that own and run core infrastructure (runway, ramps, taxiways), should in some cases be separated from those who provide products/services (maintenance, flight training, handling, clubs, aircraft leasing etc.) on that infrastructure. For the reasons it happened on train lines, postal services, telecoms, etc.


Isn't that already the situation at several of the airfields currently under threat?
e.g Gamston, Popham, Wellesbourne, Old Sarum.



The netco/servco model you refer to worked pretty well on the telecoms infrastructure encouraging innovation, but the carry forward of a universal service obligation from the old Post Office telephones land line world wasn't well handled which is why we have poor bandwidth problems for some folks.

In other contexts, such as railways and utilities, it works much less well as there's no added value market to provide the investment funds. In most airfields, maintenance, leasing clubs etc. ARE independent but pilots are too tight to pay the necessary charges to ensure rents are adequate to fund the infrastructure :twisted:
By rdfb
#1869345
kanga wrote:But AOPA still and still alone does have the 'access' which the other Associations seem to lack.


I spent a while on AOPA UK's website a few years ago with the idea that I might join. However, I couldn't find any manifesto or evidence of them campaigning on the issues that I care about. For example, there's nothing, or virtually nothing, about ensuring "Just Culture" on alleged infringements, or any specifics on what they've done recently to maintain or improve access of light aircraft to "commercial" airspace/aerodromes, LARS being variously unavailable at weekends or even at all in certain areas, or around planning law regarding aerodromes.

(there are probably areas that I care about more than the above, but I can't think of the entire list off the top of my head)

If they did actually actively campaign on the issues that I care about, then I'd be happy to join. But take the current example. Apparently nobody complained to the CAA that the current FAA licence situation is a problem. So presumably, AOPA UK doesn't see that as within their scope either.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869362
AOPA UK sits in catch 22 to a degree, limited membership limits its capability and limited capabilities limit its membership.

People need to remember the words of Tom Lehrer. “Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you put into it!”

If everyone joined it might have the same power and influence that other AOPA especially US have .
kanga, James Chan, Stampe liked this
By Loco parentis
#1869363
Watching them over the years, I get an impression that they see themselves , or did, as quasi ' Establishment ' and therefore reluctant to rock the boat. As for Mr. Shapps, I borrow a previously famed question: Would you buy a used car from this person ?
Peter Gristwood liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1869364
A good start might be if the magazine featured articles on any of the UK's most successful GA manufacturing enterprises: The Light Aircraft Company, Metal Seagulls, Cameron Balloons, ..

[ie, rather than on the Cessna Citations, PC-24s, .. etc or their likes, which seem to be commonly featured at the moment]

.. or on the biggest GA 'fleet operators': LAA, BMAA, ..

[ie, rather than the likes of NetJets etc]
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869368
Sorry @kanga for once we disagree AOPA needs to engage with the wider picture and not duplicate the work of the specialist outfits like LAA
User avatar
By leiafee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869370
Stewart Luck spoek at the rally about becoming a local councillor for the express purpose of raising awareness of their local airfield and the benefits to the community - got the local council to declare it a “community asset”.

I had to skip out to get away to take off in time to hear more but it was interesting thst the council when having GA stuff explained to them in person with the benefits were amenable.

I’m not sure what the practical implications of such a statement are but itks better than having them as enemies at least!
ChampChump, Flying_john, kanga and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By Peter Gristwood
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869387
johnm wrote:AOPA UK sits in catch 22 to a degree, limited membership limits its capability and limited capabilities limit its membership.

People need to remember the words of Tom Lehrer. “Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you put into it!”

If everyone joined it might have the same power and influence that other AOPA especially US have .

I hear what you say, but I've not found either AOPA nor the LAA represent my interests as I operate a low end,
Part 21 aircraft. I feel this group falls between any representative organisation - at least whenever I've asked them
User avatar
By Bald Sparrow
#1869390
My experience is that AOPA UK were unable to help me with an N-Reg/FAA problem. However, one of their committee reply in a very negative way (and he was wrong) and I have always had a feeling since then that they don't support N-Reg in the UK.

AOPA UK needs to change to attract more members. Posting here might help.
By rdfb
#1869396
kanga wrote:A good start might be if the magazine featured articles on any of the UK's most successful GA manufacturing enterprises: The Light Aircraft Company, Metal Seagulls, Cameron Balloons, ..


If we're talking about lobbying, I don't see how the contents of their magazine is relevant at all, except where they might use it to inform the membership about the progress of their lobbying efforts, or of political matters of this type that are important to them. I'm quite happy to get my aviation news from other sources, and to me the idea of spending what I see as lobbying money on producing an infotainment publication actually puts me off. I do value this kind of journalism; I just don't see how would help with the task of representing the lobbying interests of the membership.
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1869407
What many people overlook is that MP's and those that take on Ministerial positions can not unilaterally change laws or rules. They can push people to the front of the queue and get stuff done on individual cases when they are within the existing rules. But getting the rule book changed, is a slow, difficult job. It is like trying to stear a glacier.

We should also remember that the 650 elected are "managing" a country of over 65 million people squeezed into a relatively small space, we are one of the more densely populated countries on this planet and one of the few with health and social care.

To put GA pilots into perspective, assuming there are around 20k of us, the UK processed 26k asylum seekers last year alone. We are a tiny section of the community with very much "first world" problems.

Mr Shapps wasn't issued a magic wand, he merely had his hand lashed to the wheel. He can't fix everything how we want.

As I've said time and time again, if we want to save airfields "we" need to spot and buy them before anyone else takes an interest.
bogopper, Charliesixtysix, Grelly and 4 others liked this
User avatar
By TheFarmer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869415
And, we need to make sure it’s worthwhile for the owners to have them.

If their choice is either a bunch of people whinging about having to pay £7 to land, who whinge about having to call for PPR, and then moan about fuel being 2p more than somewhere 85 miles away…….OR £10m over 5 years, I’m pretty sure most people would sway one way there…
bogopper, Charliesixtysix, Cessna571 and 6 others liked this
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7