Maybe Switzerland but elsewhere this is rare.
The other problem with apps is that you end up with so many. Like parking apps. And because these connect to a server, they are protocol dependent and occassionally break. I’ve just had to deal with a litigation situation where I was unable to pay for parking; thankfully the owner of the car park dealt with it.
I find it hard to believe somebody wants to write yet another phone app, which could so easily be a website.
Peter wrote:
I find it hard to believe somebody wants to write yet another phone app, which could so easily be a website.
Peter, some (like AeroPS) are both, and I use the website to pay the Southend fees.
Edit: And if the question was why people insist on writing an app? Maybe a trend for some?
But let’s get back to the topic. An app for PPR? How would you induce airports to get on board?
It’s a classic network effect problem. Any half way competent dev team could knock together an app to submit PPR requests. Someone with a bit of commitment could even come up with a sensible interface for doing consistent “noise abatement” circuit diagrams and actually make the app useful.
The problem is you’d then be hoping to get someone to pay for it. Tangling it up in a full airfield management app if anything makes it harder to adopt. A grass strip probably doesn’t need slots but it might need to tell you that unless you’ve got floatation tyres on you’d best give it a miss until it dries out.
The only conceivable way I see this working out is for it to be integrated into Skydeamon et al. You have georeferenced circuit diagrams already, most pilots are doing their flight planning there and it’s obvious who is going to pay for it.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I think rather than bashing those who provide software solutions to airfields, the question should be why PPR is becoming the norm rather than the exception and what this general trend does for GA.
Well, MyPPR makes things easier, not more difficult. Anyone saying otherwise is lying. ENOP use MyPPR, and due to heavy airsport activity (gliders, parachute as well as noise), it’s a requirement to read a certain chapter in their book about this, and how to fly there. You have to hook of that you have read it, only then can you send the PPR (anyone can also just hook off without reading anything, but that’s another thing entirely). Anyway, the same place on MyPPR also say that if you visit and DO follow the instructions in that chapter, the corresponding take off fee is removed 
The largest “problem” with MyPPR is that most private fields don’t use it. The reason is that the owners think it’s too much hassle. Yet another “thing” to relate to that they see no use for. More stuff to remember and keep track on. But the use is steadily growing though.
To put most of these field in the AIP would be ridiculous. It would be like MyPPR times 10000.
Ideally, if that word can be used in this circumstance, the PPR system would be similar to AIP and use some kind of NOTAM, hopefully 2023 version of NOTAM Info was standardized. But this would require large effort by the owners, and for what? It has to be as light weight as possible, but even that is too much for many (ie MyPPR).
Norway is however a relatively unique ecosystem.
for it to be integrated into Skydeamon et al
Indeed, but SD are probably reluctant to take on a project with so many open ends which can break and produce a crap user experience which will then pollute their general reputation. All indications I have seen and heard is that there is only one programmer; the others generate data scraped from a variety of sources like the AIPs.
They would need to set up a server with an “admin” interface for airports’ use, etc. That’s a big job. I am doing a project at work which will need something broadly similar (remote admin of a product) and even speccing it is so complex that I decided to abandon it for a while…
bashing those who provide software solutions to airfields
I don’t think you have read my posts.
There is a real danger of GA becoming like car parking, run by badly written apps with badly written servers which tend to not work right when you need them most. Due to national/cultural allegiances across Europe, no app will ever achieve penetration. So there would be loads of apps…
Imagine a car parking app which breaks when you are about to park at the airport. What will you do? The most practical approach is to deal with the fine when you get back (I did that, the parking app outfit denied any problem, I was prepared to go to a CCJ especially as I had multiple witnesses with their phones, but it got cancelled).
Then imagine a PPR app which breaks when you are planning a trip… if the place is unmanned then prob99 nobody will be around to deal with it anyway.
Thankfully the vast majority of airports accept payment in person, or – like at say Ouessant – you stuff a €10 note in a letterbox
All pilots I know who fly a lot and to tight schedules totally hate all this stuff. They hate Myhandling and every other incarnation of it. And you know what the end result is? They are happier to call or email a handler because it “just works” (and they speak English). The end result of that is that is supports handlers and their 3 digit fees. So basically GA screws itself by doing this…
But if one is going to do “something”, a website is dramatically more reliable, for lots of obvious reasons.
Indeed, but SD are probably reluctant to take on a project with so many open ends which can break and produce a crap user experience which will then pollute their general reputation.
That’s probably true but chances of getting any kind of payment for a specific PPR app are low enough to be not worth bothering with.
In fact, if I wanted to make some money out of airfields I’d come up with an app which made it easier to make a case for redeveloping an airfield into a nice housing estate. That would certainly get their owners reaching for their wallets.
Come to think of it, a buggy hard to use PPR application might just about do the trick…
@Peter, sorry for later reply – and I love the thread title – though equating the UK’s PPR disease to a rat infestation is perhaps a bit unfair to the rodents.
So most choose not, and instead register as private
Is that a real thing? I know Licensing is a real thing, but “private or public” registration? I wonder if @jacko knows.
No, there’s no such thing in the UK and as for “Prior Permission Required”, the UK ANO provision requiring pilots to obtain landowner’s permission before landing is unenforceable without the aerodrome owner’s cooperation.
As an airfield owner I’m content when pilots are so overcome by considerations of courtesy and airmanship as to call or text before landing at Glenswinton. And I’m (usually) just as happy when they drop in on a whim or because they need a leak or a mug of tea (or both). Freedom. It’s unfashionable, but it’s why we fly.
Freedom. It’s unfashionable, but it’s why we fly.
+1, and the essence of it all
Jacko wrote:
Freedom. It’s unfashionable, but it’s why we fly.
Exactly. And the over use of PPR which is in 99% unnecessary and just a hassle and CYA airfield politics is opposed to that.
Peter wrote:
Imagine a car parking app which breaks when you are about to park at the airport. What will you do?
Usually take the form they still have stacked and fill it in. Then you either get billed later or you put the amount in the envelope. That is how we do it.
Or, if they have a local machine running in the C-Office where you can do what you need to do. So far, that has never been a problem on any the airfields I’ve been to.
Actually I wonder if this thing really is an installable app or rather a website, which opens with a link from the airport. That is how airmanager works, no app to install. Also I don’t see an app here on their site, but maybe I did not look close enough.
Peter wrote:
But if one is going to do “something”, a website is dramatically more reliable, for lots of obvious reasons.
Well yes, that is what I think it is. At least that is what most of those I know are.
I fully agree, having 20 apps for the same thing is stupid. If anything, they have to integrate with the existing Flightplan solutions like SD or Foreflight e.t.c.
But the real danger to GA is the fact that PPR is being misused for any and all stupidities and therefore force “solutions” like this which we’d not need without it.
dublinpilot wrote:
But in many countries, PPR is an unfortunate fact of life. Every airport in Ireland is PPR. (Some choose not to enforce it, but legally it’s PPR). I presume it comes from the requirement to have the land owners permission to land there.
But that doesn’t require an individual permission given for every single aircraft movement.
You could give blanket PPR by simply publishing on a website “All aircraft [meeting specification] have permission to use [airfield] during [hours].” That statement entirely satisfies the requirement that landowner permission is given. There’s no need to require individual permission be sought for every single movement. For instance, see Jacko’s airfield (Glenswinton). There’s a handful of other airfields in northern England that don’t require the pilot gain permission for each and every flight. A bit like a privately owned car park. You need permission to use those, but absolutely no one insists that every motorist makes a phone call to obtain individual permission first before using the car park. There’s usually some kind of blanket permission so long as you comply with certain conditions (e.g. payment for parking).
Other PPR systems seem in reality more like PNR via the website (e.g. Manchester Barton which seems entirely automated, or the Old Warden website, or Wellesboune, there’s probably many others)
