Aviathor wrote:
I am not too shocked about that. It probably means they want to discourage night landings to limit noise and preserve the neighbours.
Quite possible. As far as I understand the only reason Skavsta is open H24 is to serve as an alternate to Stockholm/Arlanda.
If you land after 10 pm you will be charged an extra 100 euro(!) per landing
I am not too shocked about that. It probably means they want to discourage night landings to limit noise and preserve the neighbours.
I find what is going on in Greece a lot more shocking. Same thing regarding the 50 € fee at Bergerac (LFBE) for customs/immigration. Or the landing/handling fees at Landvetter
Malmø Sturup for example, is pretty good. Bromma used to be very good until not too long ago. Still have not understood what happened btw.
In general we do have a big problem in Sweden(probably not unique for us) that a lot of smaller airports are run by people who think that their airport is like Schiphol or Frankfurt. They do not care about General Aviation with propellers. It is obvious in many ways and something we are working on changing but it is a very tough business. The more populated the region is the nastier they are. It seems to be a lot better at in many smaller cities where they actually understand the value of the airport to the community.
Skavsta is one good example of an airport that has not really understood why they exist. Listen to this: If you land after 10 pm you will be charged an extra 100 euro(!) per landing, even though the tower and airport is H24. This also applies to the local aeroclub which is based in the northern part of the airfield and have their own facilities…
It does not make any sense at all.
Rant over.
Emir wrote:
until I get exploration.
I meant “explanation”.
Let us know how it went. Maybe some Swedish forumite may help by making a phone call?
Nobody drove me from the plane. They only drove me to the plane. I’m still waiting for the answer and I won’t pay the invoice until I get exploration.
I am sure they would consider driving you back and forth to the plan as “handling”. Why don’t you query them about it?
It’s not only the problem of the field size or type. Usually, it’s immigration I need arriving outside Schengen area. On top of this, flying six hours to find that some small field without instrument approach is not VFR at time of arrival, is not funny at all. So I have at least 3 good reasons to fly to mid-sized airports but that doesn’t mean that I have to be ripped off. There are plenty airports of that size running sustainable business with modest prices for GA.
And again, I don’t think that prices at Skavsta are high (30 EUR for landing is OK); the problem I pointed out was charging service that hadn’t been delivered.
Sad to hear about your bad experience at Skavsta. It is a typical manner of larger Swedish airports unfortunately. I understand your aircraft type might not allow smaller fields but I always try to choose them since it is for free and there is always a way to arrange transportation in one way or the other.
There’s a whole stink about Signature’s business practices that even AOPA is now fighting in the US. Unsurprisingly, Signature is owned by a British company and has all the hallmarks of the “european” way to charge for non-existent service. Bleed them dry and make sure they have nowhere else to go, is the business model. There will probably be anti-trust lawsuits against them and the cities that allow them to operate as single FBO’s (where they rent all hangar space to keep competition out) on publicly funded airports.
