Red tape: Hi-vis and PPR by telephone

[James Chan]

Just seen a landing voucher in the latest edition of the magazine, in particular a sizeable aerodrome that's normally available for the public to use that requires hi-vis jackets and PPR by telephone.

Does the LAA endorse the use of hi-vis jackets and PPR by telephone?

If not can I request such statements to be removed from advertisements as it will only encourage mandatory hi-vis take up, or, if the aerodrome operator still wants to maintain such silly rules, go one step further and not publish such landing vouchers in the magazine?

(Shock horror!)

On the PPR issue if it's a strictly private farm/community field or there are exceptional circumstances, I can see why PPR by telephone is required, but otherwise I generally cannot see any point of this vs. PPR by radio.

[Chris Martyr]

Two very well brought up points there James, and certainly two issues that I find a tad irritating, although I guess that the LAA would be a little reticent about weighing into the hi-viz argument, as it could be seen as being a bit political.
The more airfields that wish to offer free landings to LAA'ers the better in my view, and I suppose that if their ops policy requires hi-viz tabards then so be it , but now that we appear to be moving towards more enlightened times , it would be nice if airfields , particularly the "small fry who think they're Heathrow" could be jolted into the real world.
I totally accept and agree with employees at any airfield complying with PPE , but GA pilots and their guests shouldn't be forced into using these things , as I'm sure we're all capable of taking responsibilities and making sensible decisions.
If organisations that represent GA could encourage these self styled "regional hubs" to be a little more accommodating in ALL respects , not just to the odd commuter flight , then it surely would up their profile and generate more revenue. But many just don't seem to get it !

Same thing with PPR . Yes I do understand why airfields that take the odd bit of heavy traffic do it, as it's a lot more preferable to talk to a human being by telephone than to have to do a flight plan, but for a small GA airfield it's just completely unnecessary . Pre-calling on VHF should be sufficient .
But I think you'll find that most people vote with their feet on all of these matters.

[Nigel Hitchman]

I agree, the less we amplify these red tape practices the better.
Most airfields that have these "rules" seem to only have them in their ops manual anyway and never require them for day to day operation. Many "PPR" airfields Ive phoned have told me nothing that wasn't in the flight guide, infact most of the time they don't tell you anything except maybe, its runway 28 left hand and the weather or such the like ( which may all have changed by the time you arrive!) Many don't even ask for your registration!
Same with the "hiz-viz" requirement, most when you get there couldn't care less, although there are some over zealous exceptions.
Airfields need to re-write their AIP entry/Flight guide entry to remove all this stuff.

[Chris Martyr]

A wonderful day for a flight to Goodwood I thought.

So I called them by phone at 0820hrs [they open at 0800hrs] and after ringing for a long time , a pre-recorded message told me that there was no-one to take my call and for aerodrome enquiries and PPR press 1.

So I pressed 1 and was told by another pre-recorded message that there was no-one to take my call and "please ring back later".
So I called just after 0900hrs and after ringing for a long time a pre-recorded message told me that there was no-one to take my call and for aerodrome enquiries and PPR press 1.
So I pressed 1 and a young lady answered. "Is this the correct number for PPR I asked" .
"Just a moment, I'll put you through to ATC ".
Yes, you've probably all worked out what happened next, but the most laughable part of the AFISO's pre-recorded message was the bit that went, "If you phone us during time of a high workload, we may not be able to take your call".
But,,,,errmm. Isn't the whole idea of us good people obtaining PPR so these guys can quantify their workload ?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these people supposed to be running a business of which we are the paying customers ?
If GA airfields must persist in having this absurd and useless measure, then can't they please do like Compton Abbas at least, who have a link from their website where pilots e-mail in their details and expected arrival times.
I really, really hope that GWC, with their incredible heritage in aviation and motorsport don't go following in the footsteps of certain other airfields [one quite close to them] and start getting too up 'emselves.
Either make PPR more consumer friendly, or ditch this wretched, unnecessary and counter-productive process now !

[Frank Parker]

Having lived and flown in the USA for the last forty years, I find the whole idea of PPR incredible. I can fly into most airports in the USA with no more than a call to approach. My home airport of KHWO is a good example, Several flight schools, including helicopters, active banner towing operations, four runways, Class D under Miami Class B and adjacent to Fort Lauderdale Class C. Listen to the ATIS, call the tower and get joining information. And that is it! I think that I would find it very difficult to fly in the UK after this! Oh, and I did once pay a landing fee, at Republic Airport on Long Island, long time ago, and that is the only one I have ever been dinged with, a whole $5!

[John Dean]

As a regular visitor to Goodwood (mostly because of the free landing fee for older aircraft!) I have to say that I have never had a problem obtaining PPR. The telephone has always been answered promptly by a friendly voice.

I think you must have been particularly unlucky with your experience, Chris.

[Chris Martyr]

Yes go on Frank ,,,rub it in why don't you .
I'm sure that part of my problem is that I've spent too much time flying in the U.S. Merritt Island Fl. and Winterhaven being particular favourites. Upon arriving at the latter, they come out and chock you then take you in by golf buggy, whether you uplift fuel, use the restaurant or not.
I was rather amused at reading that the CAA want to make the UK the world showcase of GA and I certainly won't be holding my breath on that one !

John is probably right in that it probably was a bit of bad luck on my part at Goodwood yesterday. I did find that humming the Benny Hill Show music to myself helped though.
Although it still doesn't preclude the fact that this PPR malarkey is total nonsense and Nigel Hitchman made the very valid point that most of what they tell you will have probably changed by the time you arrive anyway. As far as GA airfields are concerned, PPR should either be made more user-friendly or preferably ,dispensed with forthwith.

[John Price]

Flew down to Perranporth last week. They say they are PPR.
Answerphone only, so I left my registration, type and ETA and set off.
I don't dwell on it to much!

With regard Hi Vis, because I am such a pain in the bum, I recently went to an airport that requires these things. On arrival they asked me to put one on. On asking why, they stated for Health and Safety reasons. Prepared for this I whipped out a Method Statement and Risk Assessment proving no demonstrated risk and walked off passed a speechless minion.

Priceless!

John.

[James Chan]

Do you have a copy of the Method Statement and Risk Assessment form that you can share with us?

[John Price]

You can have a copy of one if you want. It's just a hybrid of the ones that are approved for use in construction.

John.

[Brian Hope]

From the magazine's viewpoint we simply wish to provide members with a choice of airfields they can fly to and not have to pay a landing fee. The airfields are offering us a freebie, and we are happy to accept it, there are no politics involved and if PPR and hi-vis are stipulated our inclusion of those facts is a courtesy to the airfield that asked that they be included. I agree PPR is a pain but in truth I have never found it an issue worth getting upset over, and I generally avoid the sort of airfields that want me to dress up like a Belisher beacon - it comes down to personal choice.
No doubt John thought his action clever but insulting some poor chap simply doing his job doesn't rate very highly in my book. It's like screaming at the checkout girl over the price of milk. Complain to the airfield hierarchy that decides to inflict us with these silly rules, at least then the message gets to somebody who might be persuaded to see things in a different light.

[dmcnicholl]

...but insulting some poor chap simply doing his job... Complain to the airfield hierarchy that decides to inflict us with these silly rules...

Ah, well now, that does rather assume that he or she is actually doing their job and not wilfully imposing some self arrogated personal prohibition just to spoil your day and possibly help make theirs. I've met this sort of sour, mean spirited spouting of made up non-rules from security personnel. It does occur and not for nothing are such people with such attitudes known as 'jobsworths'.
Our choices when confronted with it are to accept it and let the tide creep higher or to challenge it. To do the latter it should just be possible to ask, with civility, to see the ruling. They will have an ops manual, won't they?

[Chris Martyr]

I have to agree with Donald on that one. There seems to be this perceived vein of self importance in an alarmingly high proportion of airfield staff. I'm actually sitting at Gatwick at the moment and ironically enough, wearing a hi-viz tabard , which of course is quite correct and acceptable in this context, coz I work here. But you don't see 120 punters being led out to board an Airbus wearing them,, [yet].

Some of the smaller airfields have gone completely crazy on this and as I have said earlier , people tend to vote with their feet , especially with the places that want us looking like Brian's proverbial Belisha beacons. I don't think John was trying to look like 'Mr Big' in his heinous act of putting a jobsworth in his place, as an unfortunate truth in all this is that alot of airport jobsworths who delight in throwing their weight around aren't particularly well loaded in the cerebral dept.

I'm based at Deanland . Turn up there in a hi-viz and you'll get laughed off the field.

[C Rule]

I have a real problem with a licensed airfield requiring PP for a normal movement. I perfectly accept that a private unlicensed A/F may require it. If a licensed A/F has a problem accepting traffic at a particular time they should take NOTAM action.

[dmcnicholl]

C Rule, I do too. I mean, they're an airfield for goodness sake, it's what they do. That said, I have on occasion turned up in the vicinity and first contact has been by radio asking to land and have never actually been refused or had any sort of problem at all. So maybe the PPR stated in the flight guides is the fault of the flight guides rather than the airfield's s.o.p.. Don't know, just speculating.