Recession leads to Depression.
Or; the old chicken and egg argument. Without ‘air services’ operating into and out of aerodromes, it is understandable that Councils feel reluctant to commit to upgrade or even full licencing. Without facilities, it is understandable that aircraft will not want to use the airfield.
Hitch – “Those airports owned by councils have been under crucible-like pressure in the recent past with many threatened with closure or being subject to sudden, significant rises in fees and charges.”
In the USA the City Fathers bid and compete for aircraft to operate into their airfields. They realised that air travel was an efficient, effective tool for business and a good thing for the local economy. Business recognised the time/ cost savings and of benefits of using aircraft. But then, they have a greater population base in the more ‘remote’ areas of the country. Australia does not have this benefit. Services in Australia by such outfits as Rex, Qlink etc, are dependent, for sustainability on ‘traffic’ people in, people out, for business of pleasure. They provide a service which may be sustained only on a ‘minimum’ passenger load basis and price the fare accordingly to cover that limiting factor.
The problem Councils have is a simple one: To make the airport viable they need traffic – people in – people out. To achieve that there needs to be a reason for folks to want to go there; business or pleasure. How to attract people and business and development to ‘their’ town? A good place to start would be a ‘local’ air service; but how? Councils will not ‘chip in’ to support the huge set up costs, business interests will shy away from the horrendous, risky process of establishing a service and the uncertainty of a return on the investment. This hurdle to be met before the battle of compliance is dealt with. It can be done, in has been done, quite successfully; but – those services were established a long while ago, back when such things were ‘do-able’. Before red-tape and compliance lunacy strangled development. There was a time when many country airports had a direct service to a major hub. Population has grown in the rural areas, air services have diminished, yet the need for service still exists. It is an ever increasing tangle. Always a wry smile when I see 100 million causally flicked to the ‘land rights for gay whales’ lobby; yet nary a penny put toward ‘development of air services to rural and regional air services. Never a question raised about why the potential for development, at an entry level is made so difficult, that investors quietly fold their cheque books and by a McDonalds franchise instead. For a ‘developing’ wealthy nation we seem not to care too much about getting matters aeronautical sorted and back on track. Then we hear things like this:-
Hitch - “According to Morgan, AOPA has learned how to deal with the councils and found a way to show them how to keep their runways. The secret, he says, is that councils generally have no aviation experience and really don't understand that there are options for airports other than adhering to CASA's rules on registered or certified airports.”
It is, I’ll grant you one solution. Perhaps once or twice a week a light aircraft will land on an ALA, provided fuel is available and depart. It may even deposit some passengers to visit for a while. But will those landing fee cover the cost of maintaining the aerodrome? The RFDS will use it, but who else? Would a potential Regional air service be prepared to bear the cost burden of upgrading an ALA to standard? I don’t think so. This notion may preserve the airport, but in the long run, the weeds or the developers will claim it. In the USA an airfield is not too bad an investment – as it stand now, here in Australia, an airfield is simply an expensive liability; neither use nor ornament. A national problem no one seems to give a Tinkers cuss about.
Hitch – “The problem with downgrading regional airports to ALAs is that you can now forget your aspirations about getting a regional air service. For those country towns that will never support RPT, the downgrade to ALA status is a logical step. For the others that have RPT or are agitating to get one, keeping the airport registered or certified is crucial: airlines hate landing on goat tracks and hate the goats that use them. But with RPT comes the cost of security, terminals and associated infrastructure that RPT income rarely covers completely. It is to the private owners and hangar lessees that the airports turn to make up the shortfall. Right now there is no answer to that one, and if one is not found soon, I can see a future where the private owners will have to decamp to the ALAs and leave the major regional airports to the airlines. If AOPA has a panacea for that one, I will be very impressed indeed”.
Bang on the old button Hitch. Short sighted, limiting and counter productive; at all levels of government. Much could be done to alleviate the decline; the place to begin would be within the Regulations governing aviation. Simple things like the cost of placing an aircraft into a higher category and the surety of keeping it there. Like entry level Air Operator Certification process; which would terrify an investor, just on a time/cost basis. City Fathers need to be encouraged to attract aircraft and air services. I’m certain that in every council chamber across this wide brown land there is a collective groan every time ‘the airport’ is mentioned. You can hear the developers licking their lips as Council flounders and curses.
It is not a matter of where to lay the blame for the present sad state of affairs; but where to lay the blame for restrictive practice which prevents investment in aviation ventures and development. Time this government got real, got off it’s arse and dealt with the problem – in a Bi-partisan way; for it is crippling aviation development, outside of mining, in this country. Take a look at the incredible problems at Hobart – then; ask how did we ever descend to third world status? We can’t even manage our major hubs properly – what chance has the Kickinatinalong’ town council got?
My two bob, spent as pleased me best.
Toot – toot.
Or; the old chicken and egg argument. Without ‘air services’ operating into and out of aerodromes, it is understandable that Councils feel reluctant to commit to upgrade or even full licencing. Without facilities, it is understandable that aircraft will not want to use the airfield.
Hitch – “Those airports owned by councils have been under crucible-like pressure in the recent past with many threatened with closure or being subject to sudden, significant rises in fees and charges.”
In the USA the City Fathers bid and compete for aircraft to operate into their airfields. They realised that air travel was an efficient, effective tool for business and a good thing for the local economy. Business recognised the time/ cost savings and of benefits of using aircraft. But then, they have a greater population base in the more ‘remote’ areas of the country. Australia does not have this benefit. Services in Australia by such outfits as Rex, Qlink etc, are dependent, for sustainability on ‘traffic’ people in, people out, for business of pleasure. They provide a service which may be sustained only on a ‘minimum’ passenger load basis and price the fare accordingly to cover that limiting factor.
The problem Councils have is a simple one: To make the airport viable they need traffic – people in – people out. To achieve that there needs to be a reason for folks to want to go there; business or pleasure. How to attract people and business and development to ‘their’ town? A good place to start would be a ‘local’ air service; but how? Councils will not ‘chip in’ to support the huge set up costs, business interests will shy away from the horrendous, risky process of establishing a service and the uncertainty of a return on the investment. This hurdle to be met before the battle of compliance is dealt with. It can be done, in has been done, quite successfully; but – those services were established a long while ago, back when such things were ‘do-able’. Before red-tape and compliance lunacy strangled development. There was a time when many country airports had a direct service to a major hub. Population has grown in the rural areas, air services have diminished, yet the need for service still exists. It is an ever increasing tangle. Always a wry smile when I see 100 million causally flicked to the ‘land rights for gay whales’ lobby; yet nary a penny put toward ‘development of air services to rural and regional air services. Never a question raised about why the potential for development, at an entry level is made so difficult, that investors quietly fold their cheque books and by a McDonalds franchise instead. For a ‘developing’ wealthy nation we seem not to care too much about getting matters aeronautical sorted and back on track. Then we hear things like this:-
Hitch - “According to Morgan, AOPA has learned how to deal with the councils and found a way to show them how to keep their runways. The secret, he says, is that councils generally have no aviation experience and really don't understand that there are options for airports other than adhering to CASA's rules on registered or certified airports.”
It is, I’ll grant you one solution. Perhaps once or twice a week a light aircraft will land on an ALA, provided fuel is available and depart. It may even deposit some passengers to visit for a while. But will those landing fee cover the cost of maintaining the aerodrome? The RFDS will use it, but who else? Would a potential Regional air service be prepared to bear the cost burden of upgrading an ALA to standard? I don’t think so. This notion may preserve the airport, but in the long run, the weeds or the developers will claim it. In the USA an airfield is not too bad an investment – as it stand now, here in Australia, an airfield is simply an expensive liability; neither use nor ornament. A national problem no one seems to give a Tinkers cuss about.
Hitch – “The problem with downgrading regional airports to ALAs is that you can now forget your aspirations about getting a regional air service. For those country towns that will never support RPT, the downgrade to ALA status is a logical step. For the others that have RPT or are agitating to get one, keeping the airport registered or certified is crucial: airlines hate landing on goat tracks and hate the goats that use them. But with RPT comes the cost of security, terminals and associated infrastructure that RPT income rarely covers completely. It is to the private owners and hangar lessees that the airports turn to make up the shortfall. Right now there is no answer to that one, and if one is not found soon, I can see a future where the private owners will have to decamp to the ALAs and leave the major regional airports to the airlines. If AOPA has a panacea for that one, I will be very impressed indeed”.
Bang on the old button Hitch. Short sighted, limiting and counter productive; at all levels of government. Much could be done to alleviate the decline; the place to begin would be within the Regulations governing aviation. Simple things like the cost of placing an aircraft into a higher category and the surety of keeping it there. Like entry level Air Operator Certification process; which would terrify an investor, just on a time/cost basis. City Fathers need to be encouraged to attract aircraft and air services. I’m certain that in every council chamber across this wide brown land there is a collective groan every time ‘the airport’ is mentioned. You can hear the developers licking their lips as Council flounders and curses.
It is not a matter of where to lay the blame for the present sad state of affairs; but where to lay the blame for restrictive practice which prevents investment in aviation ventures and development. Time this government got real, got off it’s arse and dealt with the problem – in a Bi-partisan way; for it is crippling aviation development, outside of mining, in this country. Take a look at the incredible problems at Hobart – then; ask how did we ever descend to third world status? We can’t even manage our major hubs properly – what chance has the Kickinatinalong’ town council got?
My two bob, spent as pleased me best.
Toot – toot.