|
|
Post by dovermire on Apr 11, 2009 17:52:56 GMT 1
Been a few weeks since I've been but visited yesterday - Good Friday - to the Aviation Viewing Park so others may well be informed re increase in parking prices, however new ones since my last visit are:-
£5 - 1 adult and car
£7 - 2 adults and car
£8 - Family, 2 adults and I think 3 children and car.
£2 - Pedrstrian
Dave O
|
|
|
|
Post by stu on Apr 11, 2009 19:32:46 GMT 1
Rip off! Nowt beats parking in mud, inadequate facilities and paying extra to see Concorde!! Ballwashers!  Still, at least we still got Southside  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2009 18:29:39 GMT 1
 I thought there was a credit crunch? They might notice a fall in attendances when people bring their families in the summer. Bob 
|
|
|
|
Post by paravion on Apr 12, 2009 21:17:36 GMT 1
Guess who,s paying for the new hanger !
Brian....
|
|
|
|
Post by viscount on Apr 13, 2009 12:16:36 GMT 1
I have always been under the impression that the car park charge provides funds for (and is collected by) the Bollin Valley Nature Trust Ranger Service (or a similar such name). A quite separate organisation to the funding for Concorde and the hangar.
|
|
|
|
Post by columbo on Apr 14, 2009 10:52:33 GMT 1
Sod the AVP in future. Will be interesting what the attendance will be like in winter when the weather turns bad and only the loyal "die hard" spotters will be there supporting the burger bar etc... I went the other day with my family for the last hour just to get my new number books, the bloke wanted £9 for the last hour. Sod that, turned around, went somewhere else and ordered my books from a company down south.
Some great uncrowded places over the other side.
I don't want the park to be free I just don't want to be ripped off!
Steve
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2009 12:19:18 GMT 1
£9 for parking what is basically a car plus occupants for an hour is a little steep. Surely it would be better to just charge for parking as the more occupants there are the more will be spent on facilities such as the cafe, aviation shop, and aircraft tours. As the recession starts to bite, high charges such as this could prove to be detrimental to the other businesses on the site.
|
|
DC-10
New Member
formerly Hightower
Posts: 27
|
Post by DC-10 on Apr 14, 2009 12:30:04 GMT 1
hangar not Hangar Cheers DC-10 |
|
|
|
Post by wardmanstuart on Apr 14, 2009 14:14:17 GMT 1
A few noted from work today
G-EUUD
G-BUSI
G-JECZ
G-FBEJ
G-ERJC
D-ACRF
N14120 CO20
EI-DEK EI202
G-JECO
D-ACHC
G-KKAZ (Parked outside Thomas Cook Hanger)
G-BYAI
N711ZX DL154
N12116 CO100
N839MH DL64
D-AVRC
AP-BHX
EI-FXJ
G-FDZJ
G-FDZP
G-LSAE
TC-JGH TK1993
OM-ASF
PH-BTB KL1081
EI-DAN FR2182
N277AY
|
|
|
|
Post by columbo on Apr 14, 2009 23:42:58 GMT 1
£9 for parking what is basically a car plus occupants for an hour is a little steep. Surely it would be better to just charge for parking as the more occupants there are the more will be spent on facilities such as the cafe, aviation shop, and aircraft tours. As the recession starts to bite, high charges such as this could prove to be detrimental to the other businesses on the site. Spot on that man!! Steve |
|
|
|
Post by philpelham on Apr 15, 2009 22:50:34 GMT 1
To hear people say it's ok that MA PLC should levy a minimum charge of £5 is ok and we should be grateful that they have given us what is basically a field to park on should take a little time to reflect.
Initially when what was the new Manchester Airport which was built in the early sixties we had the best viewing facilities of any airport with the terraces giving access to both alpha and bravo piers,restaraunts,seating and covered areas, so to call the viewing park a facility compared to what has been taken away is beyond belief! The old brick works site on the south side had better views.
As with all things MA PLC nothing can be free or resonable as we see from the parking charges and how they now charge passengers £1 for getting a clear plastic bag to put liquids in at security!
We must also remember when in the sixties the airport was built with our money taken from the rate payers of the Greater Manchester Area it was a amenity not just for passengers but the Greater Manchester community as a whole to enjoy which I feel we no longer have.
Yes times have changed but MAPLC should still have a responsibility to the general public to give us excellent viewing facilities at little or no cost.
|
|
|
|
Post by wardmanstuart on Apr 16, 2009 12:07:31 GMT 1
The AVP is excelant value for money £9 for a family is Brilliant and there is food and a drink for not much extra,i spend about 4 hours there when i go .
If you take your family to Alton Towers or Tatton or Speake Hall it would cost a lot more than £9.
Stuart
|
|
|
|
Post by columbo on Apr 16, 2009 13:53:39 GMT 1
I think feelings on this subject are 50/50. If people prefer to pay the price increase than that is their choice. However I feel it's too steep. I may have paid it if they put the other long mound in a better location, also the little mound for me gets too crowded with non spotters waving their arms in front of my lense every time a "jumbo" goes past.
For me, I'll vote with my feet and go elsewhere where it's cheaper and less crowded. Also all books and models etc... are now being ordered from elsewhere.
Just my personal feelings but looks like I'm a moaning minority?
Steve
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2009 16:46:05 GMT 1
Just my personal feelings but looks like I'm a moaning minority? Steve I don't think you are Steve. All the other places mentioned here are tourist attractions that offer a lot more than just car parking. If you want to do anything other than this, unlike the other places, there are extra (very steep) charges. The AVP is most defenetly in the tourist and liesure industry and not, as other's mention just an aircraft enthusiast facility. Charging a family £9 in the last hour of the day just to park is most definately a rip-off. So, there are at least two of us who think this way. Steve. |
|
|
|
Post by Beemer on Apr 16, 2009 18:53:50 GMT 1
The extra money would have been better spent on a tarmac surface for the car park instead of the lime-stone? gunge we have to paddle thru' now. The hangar has been built for, in the words of the advert "for conferences, meetings and private functions" not for the spotters convenience. It's a shame that the RJX100 is stuck where it is out of the way or is it too small to hold weddings. They could always fit a font in it and hold christenings .
|
|
