![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jose wrote in
: ... if they make the fee prohibitive enough to achieve a complete ban (which is probably impossible as there is always some one with deep enough pockets who could pay it) they would then run afoul of the FAA. One airport authority tried this at their class B and got slammed down by the FAA. Which airport? Jose Massport - Logan (BOS) in 1988. Basically, it's ok to have a landing fee based on weight, but you can't discriminate. So, if you say charge $1 per 1000 pounds, a light GA aircraft would pay $3 while a 747 would pay about $800. If you try to adjust the weight rate to price out the little guy, you will also price out the airlines. What Massport did was add a "per landing" fee to the weight fee. This was ruled by DOT/FAA to be unreasonable, discriminatory, and preempted by Federal law. Massport appealed but the U.S. Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit, upheld DOT/FAA. An interesting result of the ruling was a DOT/FAA opinion that if an airport can document congestion delays during certain times, it can then implement a congestion surcharge to ALL arrivals during these times. (There are a few permitted exemptions, but scheduled airline is not one of them.) However, it can only do so during the hours that the documented congestion exists. It can't, as Massport tried to do, apply the surcharge 27-7. Currently, I am aware of JFK, EWR, and LGA using a congestion time surcharge. From the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Regional Review, Winter 1997: "Logan's landing fees, like those of virtually all U.S. airports, do not reflect congestion. Fees are based instead on weight. So a typical wide-body jet pays roughly $800 while the smallest plane, which causes as much congestion, pays $25. In 1988, Massport did try a fee scheme that combined aircraft weight with an additional fee per landing. Flights by smaller planes became relatively more expensive, and their use of Logan dropped substantially, although that reduction was also affected by industry consolidations. The scheme ended after it was judged discriminatory against small planes by the U.S. Department of Transportation, which noted that small aircraft paid higher prices even at hours when there was ample runway capacity. At the same time, the agency ruling opened the door to peak-load pricing, noting that "it may be appropriate to raise fees in order to invoke market responses during periods when the airport is congested."" Another reference you may find interesting is the FAA's letter to Massport of June 10, 2004 available at: http://web.nbaa.org/public/ops/airpo...er20040610.pdf -- Marty Shapiro Silicon Rallye Inc. (remove SPAMNOT to email me) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Which airport [was rebuked by the FAA for discriminatory fees]?
Massport - Logan (BOS) in 1988. A few comments from airnav about Logan (BOS): Nov 2004: $391 in fees for an overnight stay. $160 ramp, $42 GPU, $48 security fee, $52 parking, $22 Mass. GA fee and and extra $70 worth of something-or-other fees. [note - unspecified aircraft type - GPU hints it might be a jet?] Nov 2003: $43.30 security fee, $27.50 landing fee, $22 MA General Aviation fee (this is a new fee at KBOS), $27.50 parking fee, and $22 handling fee. [a three hour stay, unspecified type] I don't know what this "security fee" is but in 2003 there were noises that if you made noise you could get it waived. So, I guess they found another way to discriminate. Hire Signature to do it for you. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jose wrote in
: Which airport [was rebuked by the FAA for discriminatory fees]? Massport - Logan (BOS) in 1988. A few comments from airnav about Logan (BOS): Nov 2004: $391 in fees for an overnight stay. $160 ramp, $42 GPU, $48 security fee, $52 parking, $22 Mass. GA fee and and extra $70 worth of something-or-other fees. [note - unspecified aircraft type - GPU hints it might be a jet?] Nov 2003: $43.30 security fee, $27.50 landing fee, $22 MA General Aviation fee (this is a new fee at KBOS), $27.50 parking fee, and $22 handling fee. [a three hour stay, unspecified type] I don't know what this "security fee" is but in 2003 there were noises that if you made noise you could get it waived. So, I guess they found another way to discriminate. Hire Signature to do it for you. Jose That's exactly how the airport authorities game the system! DOT/FAA only ensure just and non-discriminatory landing fees. They do NOT require an airport to provide a public ramp. So, the airport wanting to keep GA out simply charges an outrageous rental to the FBO(s), who then pass on the high costs to transient aircraft. I've sometimes wonder what percentage of Signature's bad reputation with pilots of light GA aircraft should really fall on the airport. -- Marty Shapiro Silicon Rallye Inc. (remove SPAMNOT to email me) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
User Fees | Dude | Owning | 36 | March 19th 05 05:57 PM |
NAA Fees to the US Team | Doug Jacobs | Soaring | 2 | October 29th 04 01:09 AM |
LXE installation XP, strict user permissions. | Hannes | Soaring | 0 | March 21st 04 11:15 PM |
The Irony of Boeing/Jeppesen Being Charged User Fees! | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 9 | January 23rd 04 12:23 PM |
Angel Flight pilots: Ever have an FBO refuse to wave landing fees? | Peter R. | Piloting | 11 | August 2nd 03 01:20 AM |