Bankstown Airport – Desperately Sad
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Wherever required
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apathy alive and well in Apastralia
The general consensus is that part of the problem with increasing costs in GA is tied in to the sell off of all the secondary airports.
Archerfield chamber of commerce have done a great job in identifying these and many other shortcomings and now the Moorabbin CC has also come on board, but industry support is almost non existent ! Maybe it's time instead of complaining amongst yourselves about excessive charges you took the time to read the official Acts and leases and see who is ripping you off and who is standing by and letting them. Get involved.
As to the selling off of land this is not possible with leasehold. BAL and other Airport operators are permitted to sub lease to others by building commercial structures eg. Bunnings. Good luck to them provided it doesn't interfere with Aviation. (loss of runways etc)
As to establishing private airfields, good idea but who will convince the local councils, planning/ zoning etc when even at the Cwth level there is no support. Operators join your local Chamber or Action group as AOPA appears a total waste of time when it comes to anything aviation. A USA AOPA would never have even let it get started. Apathy is alive and well in Apastralia, long live corrupt bureaucrats.
"Empty Skies are Safe Skies"
For info, I have heard that the Georges River golf club (adjacent to Bankstown airport) has been, or is about to be sold to B.A.L. Interesting.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The white paper produced by the government appeared very supportive of general aviation as a whole if I remember correctly, Will that turn into something tangible.
I am aware of a couple of times in the last few years of councils being supportive of the creation of a maintenance base by way of interest free loan etc.
Councils are pretty savvy these days, so although entirely possible,
I think you would have to attach to any proposal, a pretty robust, honest
Return of investment estimate, services gained and how attractive it might be
To an existing community.
In remote locations it would be easy to justify, but obviously that's not where most keep their aircraft.
As most of us live coastal, maybe the selling point for government and council would be the ability to, more easily service fire bombing aircraft for example.
The state government are only too happy to spend millions on leasing fire fighting and support aircraft and infrastructure, how about spending a few percent of that on government land to build some runways and a few hangars, some private body's, flying groups etc, can be the "body corporate" in effect, and viola', now you have a facility that the government wants, community want, and not held to ransom by private corporations. Just a thought.
I am aware of a couple of times in the last few years of councils being supportive of the creation of a maintenance base by way of interest free loan etc.
Councils are pretty savvy these days, so although entirely possible,
I think you would have to attach to any proposal, a pretty robust, honest
Return of investment estimate, services gained and how attractive it might be
To an existing community.
In remote locations it would be easy to justify, but obviously that's not where most keep their aircraft.
As most of us live coastal, maybe the selling point for government and council would be the ability to, more easily service fire bombing aircraft for example.
The state government are only too happy to spend millions on leasing fire fighting and support aircraft and infrastructure, how about spending a few percent of that on government land to build some runways and a few hangars, some private body's, flying groups etc, can be the "body corporate" in effect, and viola', now you have a facility that the government wants, community want, and not held to ransom by private corporations. Just a thought.
Cars engineered to be low maintenance. I think not. Car engineered to be assembled on a production line. Large components bing bam thank you next. That is till they require repair.
Like a switch in a mates European car. $154 for the switch. 4000$ to change it. Requires the whole dash and most of the engine to be dismantled to gain access to the dash bolts.
Like a switch in a mates European car. $154 for the switch. 4000$ to change it. Requires the whole dash and most of the engine to be dismantled to gain access to the dash bolts.
Look at the distance cars travel these days before they're considered scrap! 200k+ is common, and taxis seeing half a million clicks before things start to be replaced in earnest! Unthinkable twenty or thirty years ago.
Yeah, well perhaps you should leave the design philosophy to the designers. Weight is only one of the many design criteria. The real problem is that (GA) aircraft designs haven't actually moved on much from the 50's production technology, except perhaps in the less regulated sectors like LSA... If we were still driving around in 1980's Magnas and VB Commodores, driving would be as **** as flying in the certified aircraft fleet is today!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFS..........
I have not seen anyone yet, that come close to addressing Dick's original question.
His offer to do costings.
Here is a question then.
All of the fire fighting aircraft to a large degree are kept, maintained, assembled and initially at least, Operated from airports owned in a lot if cases at sold off secondary airports I assume. As such, the cost built in to contracts to cover these expenses must be significant, particularly when operating Very large fire fighting turbo props or jets.
What is the cost of operating at these airports.
-Parking, landing fees, transport to effected areas eg.(most bush fires are not at inner city burbs)
- what would be the savings to infrastructure with reduced time to effected areas and ability to operate larger aircraft closer to where they are needed.
-what could the projected savings be over the next century as people and infrastructure continue to move into more densely tree'd (bush land) areas.
I don't blame the guys who now own the secondary airports, for the most part, I highly doubt most of the people associated with them are too enthusiastic about aviation in general, in other words, GA aviation exists to a large degree because of peoples enthusiasm
For flying, love of it even, sense of adventure, it gets romanticised a lot if you will.
They have every right to engineer for profit, we will never be able to compete with amatil coca-cola or schenker logistics, or even Jeep. Essendon airport, most likely still exists only due to the major corporate Bizjet activity, and the people that own them.
So as it becomes clear that they can make significantly more money from large logistics companies and wharehouses, why other than their contractural obligations would they not lean that way.
Would a landing field reduced to just helicopter movements still qualify as an airport?
As the urban sprawl continues, incidents become more of a Media melodramatic plaything, and liability becoming more of a focus, land becomes more valuable, there will be pressure to move airports with a "large amount" of activity away from built up areas.
All of this is going in one direction.
I believe investment is sort of happening (airport upgades)with the government grants that have been on offer, so
In that respect it has been encouraging and supportive, although this does not change
The crux of the issue at larger, corporate owned inner area, airports.
I have not seen anyone yet, that come close to addressing Dick's original question.
His offer to do costings.
Here is a question then.
All of the fire fighting aircraft to a large degree are kept, maintained, assembled and initially at least, Operated from airports owned in a lot if cases at sold off secondary airports I assume. As such, the cost built in to contracts to cover these expenses must be significant, particularly when operating Very large fire fighting turbo props or jets.
What is the cost of operating at these airports.
-Parking, landing fees, transport to effected areas eg.(most bush fires are not at inner city burbs)
- what would be the savings to infrastructure with reduced time to effected areas and ability to operate larger aircraft closer to where they are needed.
-what could the projected savings be over the next century as people and infrastructure continue to move into more densely tree'd (bush land) areas.
I don't blame the guys who now own the secondary airports, for the most part, I highly doubt most of the people associated with them are too enthusiastic about aviation in general, in other words, GA aviation exists to a large degree because of peoples enthusiasm
For flying, love of it even, sense of adventure, it gets romanticised a lot if you will.
They have every right to engineer for profit, we will never be able to compete with amatil coca-cola or schenker logistics, or even Jeep. Essendon airport, most likely still exists only due to the major corporate Bizjet activity, and the people that own them.
So as it becomes clear that they can make significantly more money from large logistics companies and wharehouses, why other than their contractural obligations would they not lean that way.
Would a landing field reduced to just helicopter movements still qualify as an airport?
As the urban sprawl continues, incidents become more of a Media melodramatic plaything, and liability becoming more of a focus, land becomes more valuable, there will be pressure to move airports with a "large amount" of activity away from built up areas.
All of this is going in one direction.
I believe investment is sort of happening (airport upgades)with the government grants that have been on offer, so
In that respect it has been encouraging and supportive, although this does not change
The crux of the issue at larger, corporate owned inner area, airports.
Last edited by Perspective; 13th Oct 2014 at 10:18.
Well, I'm not sure if this is useful or not, but here it goes.
I was getting to the point a month ago where I almost bought an aircraft for the first time, a Piper Pacer. I could afford to buy it, I could afford to insure it, I could afford to run it... I couldn't afford to store it. I'm a normal person and purchasing an aircraft was something I wanted to do out of love, completley lacking in any fiscal common sense, but my passion for flying is such that I was very keen. But it was just too much. Maybe in a few years... after everything has increased in price again
Now this wasn't at Bankstown, I can only imagine that BK would be worse in terms of aircraft storage. Paying thousands of $$ a year just to park an aircraft inside a shed, or even on a patch of grass is a bit of a killer. I'm not sure what the other fee's are like at BK, but they all add up.
I'm aware this isn't any great insight, I guess all I'm tryingt to point out is that GA might be busier in a private capacity if people weren't getting screwed out of every $ they have before they even get to say "clear prop." The passion is there for me, but its just too much.
I was getting to the point a month ago where I almost bought an aircraft for the first time, a Piper Pacer. I could afford to buy it, I could afford to insure it, I could afford to run it... I couldn't afford to store it. I'm a normal person and purchasing an aircraft was something I wanted to do out of love, completley lacking in any fiscal common sense, but my passion for flying is such that I was very keen. But it was just too much. Maybe in a few years... after everything has increased in price again
Now this wasn't at Bankstown, I can only imagine that BK would be worse in terms of aircraft storage. Paying thousands of $$ a year just to park an aircraft inside a shed, or even on a patch of grass is a bit of a killer. I'm not sure what the other fee's are like at BK, but they all add up.
I'm aware this isn't any great insight, I guess all I'm tryingt to point out is that GA might be busier in a private capacity if people weren't getting screwed out of every $ they have before they even get to say "clear prop." The passion is there for me, but its just too much.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Junior,
YSBK charge you over $30 a day just to park outside on the grass.
Over $900 a month, just to cast a shadow over their land. It's not like they don't have the space either! $900 a month, that doesn't value add to the aviation experience. It doesn't keep your plane out of the elements. It is a ripoff, plain and simple. I really don't know how they justify such a charge?! I'm sure it doesn't cost them ANYWHERE near that amount for you to park.
YSBK charge you over $30 a day just to park outside on the grass.
Over $900 a month, just to cast a shadow over their land. It's not like they don't have the space either! $900 a month, that doesn't value add to the aviation experience. It doesn't keep your plane out of the elements. It is a ripoff, plain and simple. I really don't know how they justify such a charge?! I'm sure it doesn't cost them ANYWHERE near that amount for you to park.
That really is just outrageous.
I love flying more than I love anything, and it saddens me that in order to pursure my passion I need to either completley ignore every other financial aspect of my life, or win the lottery!
I love flying more than I love anything, and it saddens me that in order to pursure my passion I need to either completley ignore every other financial aspect of my life, or win the lottery!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The $30 a day parking on the grass, hangarage fees etc are all I imagine calculated down to the square foot based on the present day valuation of the land, I cannot imagine what that would be but I wouldn't be surprised if it ran into a billion.
Deals can be done for hangarage I know, but 120K a year for a small hangar that might fit six cherokee's, if you can find one thats not full of carpets, furniture, tractors or cranes still runs to more than parking outside.
The commonwealth didn't pay a cent for the land but eventually charged through the FAC to park on it. Admittedly at a reduced rate.
They then leased but really sold it to the current owners for a couple of hundred Mil for the three airports, BK, CN, and Hoxton, which the new owners flogged off straight away for pretty much what they paid for the lot.
Probably most of that went in McBank management fees because BAL has some serious debt now even after flogging Hoxton.
Privatisation of our airports I believe can never be called as a success except for the interests of them that bought them.
It did nothing for the government because they haven't received a cent in tax since.
It hasn't been a success for the public, our airports rating very poorly around the world.
Its been a major disaster for the industry that uses them, captive to monopolies able to milk them of every cent they can.
I also believe that the corruption that has occurred with all the secondary airports make Eddie Obeid look like a saint.
Deals can be done for hangarage I know, but 120K a year for a small hangar that might fit six cherokee's, if you can find one thats not full of carpets, furniture, tractors or cranes still runs to more than parking outside.
The commonwealth didn't pay a cent for the land but eventually charged through the FAC to park on it. Admittedly at a reduced rate.
They then leased but really sold it to the current owners for a couple of hundred Mil for the three airports, BK, CN, and Hoxton, which the new owners flogged off straight away for pretty much what they paid for the lot.
Probably most of that went in McBank management fees because BAL has some serious debt now even after flogging Hoxton.
Privatisation of our airports I believe can never be called as a success except for the interests of them that bought them.
It did nothing for the government because they haven't received a cent in tax since.
It hasn't been a success for the public, our airports rating very poorly around the world.
Its been a major disaster for the industry that uses them, captive to monopolies able to milk them of every cent they can.
I also believe that the corruption that has occurred with all the secondary airports make Eddie Obeid look like a saint.
Wedderburn looks very busy and healthy, as does Mittagong, as does The Oaks, as do many small strips near Sydney that are owned or leased by people other than spiv property developers. I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of owner-maintenance carried out on them as well.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of owner-maintenance carried out on them as well QUOTE.
Human behaviour is a perpetually fascinating subject. CasA think like that too.
Human behaviour is a perpetually fascinating subject. CasA think like that too.
You're another interesting case, Frank.
I'll rephrase what I said, to include words that I thought were implied. I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of perfectly legal owner-maintenance carried out on them as well.
I'll rephrase what I said, to include words that I thought were implied. I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of perfectly legal owner-maintenance carried out on them as well.
The commonwealth didn't pay a cent for the land but eventually charged through the FAC to park on it. Admittedly at a reduced rate.
He doesn't qualify for government assistance because he wasn't in a war zone, he spent his 21st birthday away from home.
Mickjoebill
They had to pay an annual payment to the council to compensate for the fact there would be no ratepayers there.
We still pay those "rates" though the only service the local shire provides is emptying the bins...and we have to pay separately for that.
We still pay those "rates" though the only service the local shire provides is emptying the bins...and we have to pay separately for that.