Peter wrote:
IFR isn’t really anything to do with this, other than that you won’t get a well maintained airfield for €4 let alone one with instrument approaches unless there is a huge cross-subsidy coming from somewhere.
I present to you in all its glory the GPS approach into Cliff Hatfield Memorial KCLR. Look closely at the airport and tell me how much money is spent on it annually 
But hey there’s a hotel on the field so you could stay and visit friends at the nearby prison if you wanted…
It’s a runway with a concrete pad on which you can park your plane. I’m sure you could figure out a rental car. What else do you need?
Silvaire wrote:
Look closely at the airport and tell me how much money is spent on it annually
Around $10.7 billion?
Concerns also exist about the fairness of the distribution of the funding
burden between commercial airlines and GA operators. Domestic
commercial passenger flights, and some flights typically considered GA
flights that carry commercial passengers,24 are subject to, among other
potential excise taxes, the passenger ticket tax, the passenger segment
tax, the cargo/mail tax, and the fuel tax. GA flights (excluding those that
carry commercial passengers) are subject only to a fuel tax. As a result,
the revenue contributions of similar commercial and GA flights may be
substantially different. For example, the taxes that the Trust Fund would
receive from two different types of business jet flights would be
substantially less than the taxes received from similar commercial flights
(see table 2).
The answer for KCLR is zero, as far as I can tell. It’d be interesting to know what has to be done to ‘maintain’ the GPS approach for legal use, if anything, or if anybody ever uses it.
Sadly one can’t compare these because in the USA the approaches are designed by the FAA (paid for by the US taxpayer) whereas over here the airport has to pay something like 30k per approach end (and this is even for GPS approaches whose “maintenance” is funded by the US taxpayer
Regardless of reality distorting taxes being paid, unecessary airport ATC, Flugleiters etc, I wonder how much it actually costs to design a GPS approach and “maintain” it technically for say 30 years, averaged per year? I assume it has to be flown and recertified periodically? I wonder how FAA does that at a duster strip like KCLR?
achimha wrote:
C210_Flyer wrote:
It sets a bad precedent and Im sure other airports will follow.
If other airfields install RNAV procedures and then charge 4 € from people who declare an intention of using them via a flight plan, I think it is a fantastic precedent. Should have it in a lot more airfields all across Europ
Still waiting for an answer.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Now Ive asked you this question before, which you have not answered. How many flights a year have you flown into EDMS while on an IFR flight plan to do maintenance?C210_Flyer wrote:
Out of those IFR flight planned flights, how many were in VFR conditions?
How many flights have you filed an IFR Flightplan to depart EDMS while it was in VFR conditions?
It sets a bad precedent and Im sure other airports will follow.
When others follow this idiocy it means that you will have 2 Charges for the same IFR route filing. One when you leave the other when you arrive. A Z plan or a Y plan
will make no difference you will still be charged an IFR fee from Departure and destination airport.
I like it when people pull numbers from you know where. Now its 4Euros I guess to show how reasonable this whole thing is. Well its not 4 its 5. And as I and someone mentioned what guarantees that it will remain at 4 3 2 1 Euro? Has anyone ever witnessed prices going in reverse? 99% of the time its the other way around going higher.
But lets get back to fundamentals no airport has the authority to bill you a route fee. And when my IFR portion of the flight was over Hungary and rest of the trip continued VFR with a landing in Germany, it is beyond their Jurisdiction. Anything outside the Airport Traffic Area is outside their jurisdiction.
Besides why are you defending their cost structure when you know nothing about it?
Peter wrote:
Sadly one can’t compare these because in the USA the approaches are designed by the FAA (paid for by the US taxpayer) whereas over here the airport has to pay something like 30k per approach end (and this is even for GPS approaches whose “maintenance” is funded by the US taxpayer
Wrong again the US Taxpayer does not fund it. It comes out of the Aviation Trust Fund which users of the system pay into. So the guy who never even gets into an airplane will not pay. The guy who orders from FedEX overnight will help contribute because his package was on the aircraft and it paid with a fuel surcharge whose expense was passed to the customer.
That statement is a convenient way to tear into ones Ale.“Its so much better there than here cause its our system over which we have no control. Ash give me another one!”
Well we have been fight the political Hogs at the trough of special interest money for a good 20 yrs. Each time the Budget comes up they want to privatize the system and each year we fight back so it stays the same. “Dont fix that which is not broken”.
Its a pain in the Butt but at least our pilots see the danger and act instead of making excuses.
Peter wrote:
IFR isn’t really anything to do with this, other than that you won’t get a well maintained airfield for €4 let alone one with instrument approaches unless there is a huge cross-subsidy coming from somewhere
I dont have their books open but here are a few facts and even with this we might be wide of the mark either side.
Landing fee with VAT 21 Euros additional to that, IFR Route Fee 5 Euros arrival and 5 Euros departure.
Let not forget thats a <2T aircraft with a B class noise certificate. I see mostly my size airplanes and up. Lots of Turboprops and lesser amount of Jets they pay a lot more than 21 Euros.
While the airport would be hardpressed to maintain the itself in its current state with just movements Its other source of income are the leases for the Hangars and the business on the airport. There are 3 great shops there plus a bunch more. So as a landlord they make a bit more.. Along with a restaurant and Motel.
I guess Vilshofen EDMV will be closing soon because they have a fraction of the movement with very few corp planes and a lot fewer leasees.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Its a pain in the Butt but at least our pilots see the danger and act instead of making excuses.
+1
