KORD airport for instance charges domestic vs international arrivals differently.
I could see that this may have something to do with imports/taxes/tariffs etc, but why are the landing fees measured in \$ per 1,000lbs?
From Anne Graham's book, Managing Airports:
This charging mechanism uses the ‘ability to pay’ principles, since airlines using larger aircraft are in a better position to pay higher charges. Some costs such as runway wear and tear do increase with weight and also larger aircraft require vortex separations, which can reduce the number of aircraft movements during a certain period. Overall, however, there is not a strong relationship between aircraft weight and airfield cost. A flat rate landing charge for all aircraft types may be more appropriate, particularly at congested airports. This is because the cost of occupying the congested runway is movement related and independent of aircraft size. Each aircraft movement will consume the same resource.
KORD airport for instance charges domestic vs international arrivals differently. I could see that this may have something to do with imports/taxes/tariffs etc, but why are the landing fees measured in \$ per 1,000lbs?
Many larger airports (class Bravos) have a landing fee. What's the process for assessing and collecting the fees? How do these landing fees work with general aviation aircraft? Where can I find out what the fee will be? Is it published? How will I be charged the fee? (Pay before leaving the airport, bill sent to my home, etc.) Is the landing fee a flat rate or is it calculated based on aircraft weight or some other factor? I've heard that the landing fee is generally waived if you buy a few gallons of (overpriced) gas at an FBO, is that true? Example scenario: I offer to take a friend up
amortisation In-flight crew salaries Ground crew salaries (boarding crew, aircraft preparation and cleaning, luggage loading, etc.) Catering Various insurances Airport fees (landing tax, etc.) Overflight fees Administrative cost (managing/issuing tickets, etc.) What am I missing? What would be the absolute (and relative) cost budget for each of these? Bonus question: in airline operations...I realise that this question is very broad, but I intend it as an example to illustrate the actual costs incurred by a typical long-haul commercial flight. For this purpose of this question, I would
According to Airbus: ‐ After the flight crew selects reverse thrust, they must perform a full stop landing. Does it really make sense to have this limitation, and why? What happens if you realise there's not enough space to land, and you've still got adequate speed?
Before WWII, flying boats were a popular form of transport, and the advantages are many: No need to build runways, capability of emergency landing on water, availability of large landing sites and no tire wear and tear. Why have they been abandoned?
, and (as far as I can tell) it seems that the landing was uneventful besides the stress of having a hijacker potentially on board (although it's quite understandable if no one made any record of it, given... the ground, was there sufficient damage to require repairs? (I meant this question to be more about the 727 than DB Cooper, but since his was the only landing with stairs open, there wasn't much room...I've never seen a 727's aft stairs open, but presumably, based on an Wikipedia image and common sense, they do reach the ground when the aircraft is on the ground. Furthermore, (as I understand
I imagine that the tires on commercial jets wear out pretty fast with all those squealing landings as the tire suddenly has to spin up from zero to the speed of landing. 2 questions: How many landings does any average commercial airliner tire last before it is discarded? Before landing, why not have a small motor assembly on the landing gear to spin up the tires to the correct speed? Surely this would avoid the degrading tire burn. The tire might last a lot longer and might even offset the cost of the motor assembly.
I did my training around the Seattle area, and was told that landing at SeaTac Airport (the region's major International/Commercial airport), while not strictly forbidden, was definitely frowned upon because it can slow down and interfere with the big planes on schedules. To discourage GA aircraft from using the big airport, they have a variety of landing fees, ramp fees, and prior-approval requirements. But later, I moved near MCI, and was told that landing at the big airport was no big deal. That they're actually happy to have little planes there. If you fly small GA planes, do you land
So the answer in my mind is "of course pilots can fly circling approaches at non-towered airports" (seriously, I could swear that I've done it before, but then again I can't think of any specific examples....). That is, until I ran across this little tidbit in the Air Traffic Control Order while researching another question: 4-8-6. CIRCLING APPROACH a. Circling approach instructions may only be given for aircraft landing at airports with operational control towers. So then the question becomes, why do they have circling minimums at non-towered airports?? No tower here. ATC
was in Bravo, and to turn West and exit. I did say, "Am I not ABOVE Bravo airspace?" He said "No, you're in it" and to fly West and exit. From that moment, I followed approach control's directions to a T, but could not understand why he directed me West (remaining in Class B for 13 more miles) instead of having me climb 1,500 feet or angle back North or North-West to exit Bravo more quickly. I was given...I just flew into Bravo unintentionally 48 hours ago. My error: I thought I was 1,500 feet above the ceiling, but I was 1,000 feet below it. Furthermore, I had an incorrect frequency for Approach