I learn strange things every day - today I got official info that for getting Russian multiple entries business visa I had to provide them with results of my HIV test (not older than I don't know how many days). So when somebody says slot approval or PPR is too much hassle I'll just laugh.
You'll have to admit: wishing to travel to Russia for business from outside is almost as weird an idea as wishing to fly to a non-public aerodrome in the UK from outside! Just as adventurous, too.
(sorry guys, just couldn't resist)
(and above all, let us not start another pro/con ppr argument)
In fact I cannot think of a single public aerodrome in the UK.
All the ones I know of are on private land. Some of the land is Government owned but it comes to the same thing.
The USA is the leader in the "public aerodrome" concept, where the aerodrome has to accept the traffic.
One issue with the Russian requirement for an HIV test is that once you have had the test, even if it is negative (i.e. you do not have HIV) then you are required to declare it in certain situations e.g. applying for life insurance, and the fact that you had the test at all can increase the cost. I vaguely recall that some law was passed to change that but I am not up to date on it.
I think you have to declare it for a JAA aviation medical, though I don't know how far back they can go in the request. For most adults, declaring and detailing every interaction with a doctor would be impractical.
In the UK, a lot of people get HIV tests done at anonymous centres, but then you won't get a certificate for the Russians 
Gloucester is publicly owned.
I can understand the Russian's concern about HIV, but their approach is curious - Russia is surely the place to get HIV if you're unwise, or better yet the place to avoid any opportunity to catch it!
My medical records are my business, and I do what I can to keep them that way. Insurance makes that harder.
Gloucester is publicly owned.
So is Shoreham
Both have or have had PPR at some stage.
Loads of UK airports are publicly owned, but they are not "public airports" in the specific US sense.
I can understand the Russian's concern about HIV, but their approach is curious - Russia is surely the place to get HIV if you're unwise, or better yet the place to avoid any opportunity to catch it!
Surely you have a good chance of getting HIV anywhere if you do certain fairly obvious things?
Actually I always understood the "public" airport concept came from ICAO rather than from from one or another country. Today's practice has of course much hollowed out the concept: major airports, here in Belgium at least, are theoretically public, but have in practice adopted such a lot of rules and measures, financial not the least, that no private flier in her/his right senses will go there - bar exceptional reasons or an exceptional budget. Even then, Antwerp EBAW and Ostend EBOS do have the statute of public aerodromes, but these are exceptions.
The idea of a public aerodrome does stand in France, though, "aérodrome ouvert a la CAP", and also in Germany's "Verkehrslandeplätze".
Even more strange thing is that you don't have to provide results of HIV test if you require business visa for two entries only
for two entries only
Please, Emir, this is a family forum!
