slowly go downhill for GA
But the essential question that no-one is addressing is why anyone in a position to regulate, govern or influence should care?
I know I sound like a stuck record, but until you sort that one out, the rest is all hot air.
The government has just allowed British Steel to fail. They stand by and watch the high street, the health service, the criminal justice system, the local authorities and so much more going to hell in a handcart. They have no bandwidth for anything that is not Brexit and their own party squabbles. What makes anyone think that they are going to give a flying **** about GA?
Timothy wrote:
But the essential question that no-one is addressing is why anyone in a position to regulate, govern or influence should care?
I think it is that they don’t. GA is often a long term thing which is of no interest to people in the short political cycle.
Perhaps it will split to the microlighight / light grass strip type stuff and the more serious GA being cut off trying to fit in with bizjet pricing with little interaction between the two.
Perhaps it will split to the microlighight / light grass strip type stuff and the more serious GA being cut off trying to fit in with bizjet pricing with little interaction between the two.
Assuming the decline continues, it will split into two communities
The 2nd one will face multiple challenges of course, including the bizjet airfields “doing a Biggin to Redhill” i.e. doing all they can to block any development of any runway which might support bizjet traffic. Not all bizjet owners are willing to pay through the nose and if a CJ4 can land for £100, even only on VFR days, why should they pay £500? But there is some serious £££ around… you can resurface the whole runway at Andreas, or finance a planning application all the way to a DoE appeal with a barrister, for the cost of a TBM engine overhaul. Unfortunately, the TBM owner is as tight as the rest of GA, currently 
Timothy wrote:
hy anyone in a position to regulate, govern or influence should care
For the genuinely private airport, and when everyone is free to create their own if they want to, I don’t think they should.
And given the small number of people involved, and the fact that they have next to no-one lobbying for them, I don’t think they will.
However, there is one strong policy reason why they should (but they won’t):
Through planning and other restrictions, the state severely restricts the ability to create other airports, in effect granting local monopolies. Such a monopoly should come with obligations. So let’s take Biggin Hill as an example. Rochester and Redhill would be good local alternatives, but their local authorities and planning law prevent expansion for light GA, while Biggin squeezes them out. If Rocherster/Redhill could grow, the slow transition of Biggin into a jet-only airport would be less of an issue.
The same applies when granting monopolies to handling agents etc – a monopoly without price controls always leads to higher prices than if there were competition
why anyone in a position to regulate, govern or influence should care
Which is why I think everyone in GA should take some responsibility to build relationships, and influence with those who are in those positions, so that they may care. Or stand for election.
I’d rather be an optimist and look forward to the hope of something better, than to give in and/or hang up my headset.
With regards to local monopolies (airport or handling agent), there’s been a lot of talk over the years. Competition laws exist in the UK, but nobody has yet to open a case with the Competition and Markets Authority, or properly examine whether the UK Groundhandling Regulations 1997 and Airport Charges Regulations 2011 are still appropriate, and correctly enforced.
More reading here: https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-Industry/Airports/Economic-regulation/
James_Chan wrote:
nobody has yet to open a case with the Competition and Markets Authority
Probably because the Competition and Markets Authority has… a monopoly
Band together and buy an airport as a cooperative. Run it the way it should be run. We can change it, we just need to put money where mouth is.
Adam given the possibility of one day becoming a housing development any airport near London has an asking price comfortably into seven figures!
Getting a helicopter licence and type rating in a Gazelle is economically more rational.
The sad thing is that several TBM/etc owners could easily find the money to do this, but in the UK – like most other places – everybody wants to sponge off everybody else. TBM owners didn’t get rich by giving money away… Everybody is looking for a return on the investment, but in GA you should be looking at investing in security of tenure.
Then they complain all over the internet when the place shuts.
In an airport in the vicinity of London, some deep pocket enthusiasts have been noodling buying the airfield and building a high end hangar/home community, with part of the airfield being developed for normal housing – possibly the housing development profits paying back the investment by the aviation community sponsors – in effect getting the airport for free.
Don’t hold your breath unless the government taxes brownfield planning uplift profits – something which most economists would regard as sensible economics.
