Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Greece enforcing slots

A useful data point for the group would have Peter deliberately turn up, say, 5 hrs late at Sitia & see what happens.

Sitia isn’t ever open for 5 hours so that will be a problem

With the small Greek airports, you have to hit a 2hr slot anyway…

I would file for the start of the opening time slot and then one can always slow down during the flight.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Hodja wrote:

A useful data point for the group would have Peter deliberately turn up, say, 5 hrs late at Sitia & see what happens.

Given that Sitia is only open for 1.5h a day at random times, that test would probably not work

I hope AOPA Greece can fight this stupid idea of enforcing slots for the practically non existent GA at airports with almost no traffic.

If Greek slots aren’t heavily enforced in terms of time, and mostly constitute an advanced form of PPR it’d be ok.

Hardly, I would say. That would be like your second parallel PPR procedure.

Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany

I am already in contact with people from within the system.

It looks like there are good news (for GA) and it is not as bad as it looks (for GA).

In short all I can tell you for now is that it was implemented to BA/GA (as a group category) because a Corporate aircraft (BA) from a CJ3 to a Boeing 737 BBJ in some airports occupy(ied) one of the only (say) 2~3 parking spots available to airliners.

Issued PPR (number) was securing (in legal language) the aircraft’s “day parking” but the actual times of occupying the parking positions were not (in legal language) able to be enforced.
Even though the above two aircraft examples arrived IFR with a PPR there was no SLOT to govern their ground parking position occupancy, only commitments via the handling agent etc. etc..
This in turn (when not adhered to) generated CTOTs to IFR flights arriving after them regardless if they carried 1 or 200 passengers.

The same happens with a light GA IFR flight but in this case (according to my sources) the airport cancels swiftly the CTOTs of the next IFR flights (generated automatically by CFMU) since they know that the GA can park off the airliner’s parking positions and as airborne traffic they have the ability to “squeeze” them in/out. CFMU only knows about IFR hourly capacity regardless of aircraft size.

More on the subject soon.

LGMG Megara, Greece

Sorry Petaskas,

you are so nice. Every time a new bullsh.. comes around the corner, you speak up, explain us all the details, defend the decisions and generally take all the stick that comes from us. Hats off for that.

But still, you will need to take even more stick, I am afraid.

In short all I can tell you for now is that it was implemented to BA/GA (as a group category) because a Corporate aircraft (BA) from a CJ3 to a Boeing 737 BBJ in some airports occupy(ied) one of the only (say) 2~3 parking spots available to airliners.

Issued PPR (number) was securing (in legal language) the aircraft’s “day parking” but the actual times of occupying the parking positions were not (in legal language) able to be enforced.
Even though the above two aircraft examples arrived IFR with a PPR there was no SLOT to govern their ground parking position occupancy, only commitments via the handling agent etc. etc..
This in turn (when not adhered to) generated CTOTs to IFR flights arriving after them regardless if they carried 1 or 200 passengers.

The same happens with a light GA IFR flight but in this case (according to my sources) the airport cancels swiftly the CTOTs of the next IFR flights (generated automatically by CFMU) since they know that the GA can park off the airliner’s parking positions and as airborne traffic they have the ability to “squeeze” them in/out. CFMU only knows about IFR hourly capacity regardless of aircraft size.

Would you read that yourself once again?

It’s ridiculous. Time and again, it’s doctoring around a problem that doesn’t exist elsewhere. Other countries manage without any double, interconneted PPR procedures, now even involving CTOT measures, etc. Could you accept that?

Also, just because somewhere, once in a year there is a misfortunate misalignment of circumstances and one big boss receives a major delay or parking problem doesn’t mean one can use that to justify the “necessity” to introduce bureaucratical steering procedures for flying and parking all over the country. That’s communistic. Instead, a principle of reasonableness must be applied when the size of a problem and the size of the restrictions aimed to solve it are considered.

It’s getting crazier and crazier every day. You think the country can generate growth, when the most noticable “innvoations” coming from Greece are restrictions?

Last Edited by boscomantico at 17 Aug 16:38
Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany

Petakas Thank you for clarifying the why and from whence. However Bosco is right. 1 incident causes such a shift of policy? Such a Draconian policy. Its too bad that badas* was not flying a Bonanza. We would get free landings and Champagne on arrival in Greece if he was.

Im flying in there to go on vacation, read that to mean have fun and rest. Part of that sentence refers to no aggravation. When I arrive back will give a report.

Keep in mind what happened when the Italians went nuts and wanted to charge 10s of thousands of Euros for any newer aircraft that stayed for longer than a few days. That Tax law was revised in no time.

By the way what happened in Italy also occurred in the State of Maine USA. So its not just a European phenomenon. Once they, in the legislature, got the picture of cause and effect, they quickly remedied the situation. Its amazing how quickly they could revise the law when they want to.

KHTO, LHTL

@Peter,
Securitisation isn’t privatisation. This thing I’m talking about actually happened:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1deb8586-1a9a-11df-bef7-00144feab49a.html#axzz3j6jTLhqn

EGTF, LFTF

Petakas,

A Slot only enforces arrival/departure in a particular time period around the slot time. You don’t need a departure slot to arrive anywhere, so it does do nothing about parking. How is the solution (slot) supposed to solve the problem (aircraft hanging around too long)?

Quite to the contrary, PPR can solve the parking. “Hello, N123BIGWIG, calling to arrange PPR for an A380” – “Ok, when are you planning to arrive and leave?” – “20 August, departing 2 January 2016” – “sorry, no.”. End of conversation.

Or simple things such as “NOTAM – Little-Field-In-Greece: MAX PARKING FOR ACFT > 20M WINGSPAN: 2 HRS”

Biggin Hill

Cobalt wrote:

Or simple things such as “NOTAM – Little-Field-In-Greece: MAX PARKING FOR ACFT > 20M WINGSPAN: 2 HRS”

They’ve had these NOTAMs for a long time and they’ve always been complete BS because the GA aprons are empty. They are simply doing a terrible job managing their airports.

LGIR - IRAKLION/ NIKOS KAZANTZAKIS
A0585/15 NOTAMN
Q) LGGG/QFAXX/IV/NBO/A /000/999/3520N02510E
A) LGIR B) 1504010001 C) 1510312359
E) LONG STAY OF GENERAL AVIATION A/C AND A/C CONDUCTING BUSINESS 
FLIGHTS (AIRTAXI SEERVICES) IS NOT PERMITTED, UNLESS THERE IS 48 HRS 
PRIOR NOTICE AND APPROVAL BY LGIR AIRPORT AUTHORITY.

Securitisation isn’t privatisation. This thing I’m talking about actually happened:

I think one needs to be an ft.com subscriber to see whatever article it is. I just get the base page and a load of popups trying to sell me something

If you sell off all the income from commercial property, surely it then becomes almost worthless for privatisation? You get the Shoreham Airport situation, where the only way to get income is to build some new stuff and get new rents. Still, that’s OK if they want to build a load of duty free shopping malls.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top