Chartered Aircraft Refused Landing Rights At Mt. Cook

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31097, 28 June 1966, Page 7

Chartered Aircraft Refused Landing Rights At Mt. Cook

A chartered light aircraft was refused landing rights at Mount Cook in March. Th Christchurch man who hired the plane, Mr A. D. Holmes, complained of being told “offhandedly” by a senior Mount Cook Airlines official that if he wanted to land in the area he should have hired one of the company’s aircraft.

The sales manager of the airline (Mr E. G. Beckett) has replied to the complaints made by Mr Holmes.

In a letter to the editor of "The Press.’’ Mr Holmes said he wished to know whether such unfair monopoly had the acquiescence and support of the Government department concerned.

Mr Holmes, a Christchurch man, said that on March 13 he was host to two important overseas visitors, both of whom were potential investors in New Zealand. In order to entertain them on a scale commensurate with their importance, he chartered a twin-engined light aircraft at Christchurch airport with a view to showing them some of the South Island’s scenic beauty. “The charter company, to my utter consternation then informed me that the Mount Cook authorities would not permit landing rights to our aircraft. This news so-astound-ed me that I decided to secure confirmation of the refusal personally,” he said. Mr Holmes made several telephone calls and even offered to pay landing fees of £lO. In each instance permission to land was “steadfastly refused.” He said it was only Tourist Department literature describing the Mount Cook area as the playground of New Zealand that had prompted him to extend invitations to his visitors to visit the area.

“It is disturbing to say the least, that a state of affairs such as this should be permitted by the authorities It is devastating that bona-fide New Zealanders are precluded from enjoying the benefits and beauties of their own holiday resorts unless they bow to the orders and dictates of a private company. “Insult was added to the injury when I was informed

most offhandedly by one of the senior executives that I should have chartered a Mount Cook aircraft if I wished to land on the Mount Cook airstrip,” said Mr Holmes. “Is this carte-blanche monopoly in the interests of New Zealand?” he wanted to know.

“In desperation” he decided to go on to Franz Josef where no landing difficulties were presented. Mr Holmes said it was only unfortunate that transport was not available from the airstrip to the hotel.

He concluded by asking if the average New Zealand businessman should not receive a little better consideration than that which was peremptorily meted out to himself and his guests. Private Fields

“It is certainly unfortunate that Mr Holmes and his guests were not able to visit Mount Cook but this was in no way the fault of Mount Cook Airlines. Mr Holmes is obviously not in possession of the full facts,” said Mr E. G. Beckett, sales manager of Mount Cook Airlines, commenting on the complaints made by Mr Holmes. i “The Mount Cook region is l served by three air-strips, the first of which is adjacent to the Hermitage Hotel and is used by the ski-planes of Mount Cook Air Services, Ltd., a subsidiary company. This is a private field, constructed, owned and operated by that company. “The second is known as the Tasman field and is used exclusively for the scheduled DC3 flights of Mount Cook Airlines. It also was constructed by, and is owned and operated by Mount Cook Airlines,” said Mr Beckett. “The third strip is Birch Hill. This is a public air-strip restricted to commercially licensed pilots but available for public use within the limitations set by the Department of Civil Aviation. “The company has developed the Hermitage and Tasman airfields for its exclusive use. and it should be realised that the Mount Cook region can become quite busy with air movements. These strips have cost the company a considerable amount of money and were developed because the public airfield did not meet the company’s requirements. Because of the varying flying conditions in the area, the considerable air activity, and the essential need to maintain timetables with scheduled services these air strips are not available for

public use,” Mr Beckett said,

“As an example a visiting aircraft on one occasion used the DC3 Tasman strip and the pilot left his aircraft parked in such a position that the DC3 could not land until the pilot had been located and the aircraft shifted.

“Mr Holmes appears to have misunderstood the company official, who was a senior airline captain. The company captain did not state that Mr Holmes should charter a company aircraft, but pointed out that at that time of the year there were two return services to Mount Cook a day by the company, and that there was time for them to catch the second service, spend a couple of hours at Mount Cook, and return to Christchurch that evening. There were sufficient seats available for Mr Holmes and his friends, and the flight would be less costly than a charter aircraft,” said Mr Beckett. “I am surprised that the charter company did not inform Mr Holmes of the

true state of affairs and if they were not able to operate into Birch Hill they should have referred him to a company, or the Canterbury Aero Club, qualified to operate into Birch Hill.

“While understanding Mr Holmes’s feelings I feel it should be pointed out that a scheduled service is normally far cheaper for visitors to such remote areas than charter aircraft. Mount Cook Airlines have not only pioneered this service but expended considerable money in constructing airfields and annually spend large sums on the promotion of the area overseas,” said Mr Beckett

When the matter was referred to the Department of Civil Aviation in Christchurch, Mr H. H. Skilling, regional operations officer, said he had no comment to make. The Mount Cook company’s explanation fully, answered the correspondent Departmental regulations governing the use of airfields, both public and private, were available to all pilots.