Airport/Facility Feedback on AirNav

OtisAir

OtisAir

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
642
Location
Lansdale
Display Name
Display name:
OtisAir
Do you provide feedback on airports and facility's on airnav dot com? I try to and sometimes make my decisions to land (or not) at a particular place based on recent feedback if it's been left. I do wish more fuel prices were up-to-date on it though and even guaranteed.

Adventurepilot also is a good place to leave feedback.
 
Yes, I try to leave feedback about the FBO or experience there if I get services, as I read them regularly when I'm finding out where to go and who to go to on Airnav.
 
OtisAir said:
Do you provide feedback on airports and facility's on airnav dot com? I try to and sometimes make my decisions to land (or not) at a particular place based on recent feedback if it's been left. I do wish more fuel prices were up-to-date on it though and even guaranteed.

Adventurepilot also is a good place to leave feedback.
Click to expand...
I stopped doing it in AirNav because if you say anything remotely critical the admins there will delete it. I put up a comment about that had some good and some not so good about an FBO. The not so good was that their tie downs were poor and required me to dig out a lot of dirt to get to the tie down hook and I mentioned that anyone should be prepared to do a little digging. I got a note from their admin that my comment was being removed as it did not confirm to their policy for "site sponsors" IOW some pigs pay to be more equal and not have accurate info listed.
 
smigaldi said:
I stopped doing it in AirNav because if you say anything remotely critical the admins there will delete it. I put up a comment about that had some good and some not so good about an FBO. The not so good was that their tie downs were poor and required me to dig out a lot of dirt to get to the tie down hook and I mentioned that anyone should be prepared to do a little digging. I got a note from their admin that my comment was being removed as it did not confirm to their policy for "site sponsors" IOW some pigs pay to be more equal and not have accurate info listed.
Click to expand...

At that point I be a pain in the ass, and start posting it over and over under different names.
 
There's no point anymore. Airnav has become afraid of lawyers, and will actively delete entries that are too negative.

Beyond that, an FBO has to pay to receive comments, so if there's a bunch of negatives....guess who stops paying?
 
SkyHog said:
There's no point anymore. Airnav has become afraid of lawyers, and will actively delete entries that are too negative.

Beyond that, an FBO has to pay to receive comments, so if there's a bunch of negatives....guess who stops paying?
Click to expand...

Sounds like we need a new airnav, that's funded on the other side. $1-$5/year membership - if at all. Data storage and bandwidth is so cheap nowadays you could almost do it gratis. Once set up, it should be pretty much hands off. All Airnav does is parse the data from the FAA.
 
EdFred said:
Sounds like we need a new airnav, that's funded on the other side. $1-$5/year membership - if at all. Data storage and bandwidth is so cheap nowadays you could almost do it gratis. Once set up, it should be pretty much hands off. All Airnav does is parse the data from the FAA.
Click to expand...

I have an idea....
 
EdFred said:
Sounds like we need a new airnav, that's funded on the other side. $1-$5/year membership - if at all. Data storage and bandwidth is so cheap nowadays you could almost do it gratis. Once set up, it should be pretty much hands off. All Airnav does is parse the data from the FAA.
Click to expand...
AOPA provides a forum to comment on airports and, as far as I know, doesn't permit airports or companies to back out of publishing them.

That is one of the problems with AirNav. I know one FBO that felt the comments were unfounded and just disabled all comments on AirNav. Personally, I think that sends the wrong message, because now people just presume they're really bad and avoid them, though that isn't the case. Not my call, though.
 
We do need a new AirNav IMHO

It's not just that advertisers can suppress comments -- which we've never taken advantage of (I respond and leave them) -- but they will not even show an FBO who does NOT advertise at $x00 per year.

The site is actually doing a disservice to pilots by not showing them all of the facilities that are available at an airport.

...I still leave comments, though, when I can, both good and bad.
 
And you can't leave comments about our airstrip either.
 
EdFred said:
Sounds like we need a new airnav, that's funded on the other side. $1-$5/year membership - if at all. Data storage and bandwidth is so cheap nowadays you could almost do it gratis. Once set up, it should be pretty much hands off. All Airnav does is parse the data from the FAA.
Click to expand...

That's how AirNav started. I even donated.

He decided he wanted a steady paycheck so the charge for listings was born and the utility of the data was gone.
 
Time for a new airnav then. I don't want to make any $$ off it, just enough to pay for the static IP.
 
EdFred said:
Time for a new airnav then. I don't want to make any $$ off it, just enough to pay for the static IP.
Click to expand...

I'll let Jesse take my idea for which I never got a round tuit.

Jesse, let's talk. I even have a domain name.
 
If Jesse wants to set it up, I'll donate some programming time. I already have code to get the FAA database on airports, the NACO AFD pages and Approach plates, airport diagrams. Plus we have the pictures from the GoFlyAmerica project.
 
Well, nevermind then, I was gonna do it, but nevermind
 
Areeda said:
If Jesse wants to set it up, I'll donate some programming time. I already have code to get the FAA database on airports, the NACO AFD pages and Approach plates, airport diagrams. Plus we have the pictures from the GoFlyAmerica project.
Click to expand...

Perhaps persuade Jesse to add it to www.Jesseweather.com ...????
 
SkyHog said:
Well, nevermind then, I was gonna do it, but nevermind
Click to expand...
I think this would make an excellent community project. Not only is there plenty of programming to do there's lots of information to be gathered.

Joe
 
As someone else said the AOPA Airport Directory has a members comments section. Between that, Airnav and posting questions here, I've received good info. Still, another directory wouldn't hurt especially if it addressed ground transportation specifically.
 
SkyHog said:
There's no point anymore. Airnav has become afraid of lawyers, and will actively delete entries that are too negative.

Beyond that, an FBO has to pay to receive comments, so if there's a bunch of negatives....guess who stops paying?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of having to pay to receive comments. I did have to pay to get my prices listed. I am appreciative of comments. Of course, we generally generate good comments. We have had one bad comment which remained posted but to which I responded with "the rest of the story"..
 
Graueradler said:
We have had one bad comment which remained posted but to which I responded with "the rest of the story"..
Click to expand...
And that is a good way to handle it. Let both sides come out and then let the reader decide. But some places and people too, get really defensive when every they hear anything other then complete kow towing and directed admiration. Those types of places with 'glass egos' are probably best to avoid. But there is not a good way to find them on AirNav because those places will have negative or even less than positive responses removed.
 
I still use Airnav and I do leave negative feedback when the FBO deserves it. I heard in the past that Airnav erases any negative feedback, so IMHO time for a new source!

It IS alot of work, so what can I do to help? (i cant program... but I can enter data into a system!)
 
I have a domain name that I would be willing to donate to a non-revenue based sidebar project - unless of course it IS revenue based and I get a BIG CUT! :cornut: lol.

Oops, I meant to hit advanced and missed the button and hit submit...

The domain name indicates aviation related camping sites and I guess it would be a subset of the bigger site that sounds like is being planned. I'd be happy to donate it to the project.
 
Last edited:
You guys who whine about Airnav, I wonder if you ever flew a long x-country to an unfamiliar airport before Airnav existed. Basically you would choose a fuel stop or landing site for no apparent reason and pay whatever the fuel prices were that day. The annual AOPA guide would tell you if there was a restaurant or courtesy a year ago when the directory was published. Or you could call a dozen FBO's to ask what their prices are.

Airnav changed all that. It was one guy's project at first, free with a request for donations. It does take some time to enter the data, so why begrudge him and his few employees now a chance to be paid for their work. That site has saved me thousands of dollars over the years, and I have visited many airports I would never even have heard of without recommendations from the site. I have never gone wrong visiting an airport of FBO with positive reviews.

There are more than a few negative comments out there, and frankly some of them are idiotic and embarrass me as a fellow pilot. But some are useful. If you read multiple listings, it would be obvious that there cannot be a no-negative-comment policy. I can't speak to every single comment, but if you have an issue, have you ever written to the people at Airnav and asked them? When I contact them, I get a prompt, courteous response that actually answers my concern.

One example, when I asked why the Atlantic FBO completely vanished last year, I got a full answer explaining that Atlantic threatened to sue them out of existence. You guys who want to say "Make my day," what do you think a small company would have to pay to defend a lawsuit against a large national corporation, even if the small company is 100% right? Would you take them on? What if the FBO starts threatening to sue posters of negative comments on AOPA's board? How long will those comments last?

Yes, current prices are important. That's why I update prices practically every time I land the plane. After all, I'm checking the site for my next trip anyway, and it only takes a few seconds. Even if the price hasn't changed in six months, and update a couple days ago is more useful than one a long time before.

Maybe someone out there is willing to do all the updating and editing for free. Go right ahead, but I think you'll find it gets old pretty quickly. In the meantime, I doubt you'll find a more useful site for trip planning than Airnav, and I would hate to go back to the days before it existed.

Jon
 
4CornerFlyer said:
You guys who whine about Airnav, I wonder if you ever flew a long x-country to an unfamiliar airport before Airnav existed. Basically you would choose a fuel stop or landing site for no apparent reason and pay whatever the fuel prices were that day. The annual AOPA guide would tell you if there was a restaurant or courtesy a year ago when the directory was published. Or you could call a dozen FBO's to ask what their prices are.

Airnav changed all that. It was one guy's project at first, free with a request for donations. It does take some time to enter the data, so why begrudge him and his few employees now a chance to be paid for their work.
...

Maybe someone out there is willing to do all the updating and editing for free. Go right ahead, but I think you'll find it gets old pretty quickly. In the meantime, I doubt you'll find a more useful site for trip planning than Airnav, and I would hate to go back to the days before it existed.
Click to expand...

Ummmm nobody is "entering data" other than the users. As we discussed, the airport data comes from the FAA. The sectional inserts are public data. All that is required in "entering" that data was automated a decade ago.

The fuel prices and comments, mostly gone now, and even the pictures came from users who provided it voluntarily.

Just like a certain hamburger site, you don't get to ask the community to voluntarily provide the data and then mark at as copyrighted, put it in a book, and charge the community to see it, or worse, as airnav did, and delete any data, including the user comments, on a facility that doesn't pay to be listed.

The only thing the "paid employees" need to do is manage letting the facility show up or not based on subscription receivables and delete any negative comments on payers, along with taking the commissions on the added "features" like travel booking. NONE OF THAT "work" SERVES THE COMMUNITY that did the work of providing the data.

Being that we have several volunteers here, we will have a new site that will do all the "entering" of the same public data and invite users to provide input again, only promise that the information will always be there at no charge.

You'll have no need to be embarrassed.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Jon points out one of the problems of this as a volunteer effort. If Atlntic or someone were to threaten to sue, who would be liable? Who would pay for defense? What laws and regulations cover the publishing of information like that? I really don't know. It could be perfectly legal, and still cost an arm and a leg and a house and a plane to defend yourself.
 
Well said Jon.

Have always had good (enough) experiences with Airnav. Nothing is perfect and those that insist on it are making pretty big messes of many things that are just plain fine right now.......... :loco:

Glad to see so many have so much time on their hands. I'd rather be, and am, flying! :thumbsup:
 
gprellwitz said:
Actually, Jon points out one of the problems of this as a volunteer effort. If Atlntic or someone were to threaten to sue, who would be liable? Who would pay for defense? What laws and regulations cover the publishing of information like that? I really don't know. It could be perfectly legal, and still cost an arm and a leg and a house and a plane to defend yourself.
Click to expand...
Well I guess this suggests that the site be "owned" by an llc not an individual.

As I see it if we want to make a user oriented site we could make all the data available for download so if a suit costs more to defend than the site is worth anyone who has downloaded the data can create a new one.

I think it is a good idea to make a site like this as public driven and lawsuit proof as possible.

Joe
 
gprellwitz said:
Actually, Jon points out one of the problems of this as a volunteer effort. If Atlntic or someone were to threaten to sue, who would be liable? Who would pay for defense? What laws and regulations cover the publishing of information like that? I really don't know. It could be perfectly legal, and still cost an arm and a leg and a house and a plane to defend yourself.
Click to expand...

Like Joe said. LLC, and if need be, LLC folds up, and all the "assets" get 'sold' to a new LLC. Let Atlantic, or Signarape, keep suing. The information will just get shuffled through LLCs. Figure it would take what, a year to get everything resolved. Just to make a point I'd kick out the $250 each year to keep revolving LLCs if it will be a pain in the ass to the bullies. I wouldn't even bother defending.
 
Bah.

Create a basic holding entity if you like. Make sure it does not have assets.
 
I like Airnav and have gotten good info out of it. I try to leave comments when I can but editing can hurt for sure. The blade cuts both ways too. I know of FBOs who have had nasty comments posted by competetors that are totally unreasonable. I guess its more like a Car & Driver Magazine than a Consumer Reports since they do take ads. The guy created a good product.
 
Adam. Your posts are gay. WTF?










:D:cheerswine:
 
smigaldi said:
I stopped doing it in AirNav because if you say anything remotely critical the admins there will delete it.
Click to expand...

I wrote a complaint about an FBO in Davenport, IA that tried to charge me $25 fee for parking for 3 hours! They didn't even touch the plane! My comments were deleted because the lineman thought I was a twin, I was flying an RV-10! :loco: This should have been even more reason to leave negative comments, but AirNav is their sand box and they can do what they want.

That being the only probelm I have had with Air Nav management I use the site all the time. It has a nice link to NOTAMS, flight planning, charts, ect.
 
Last edited:
I like Airnav and have posted comments both positive and negative and have not had my comments deleted. Maybe it's the content of your post?

As far as a comparable site, sure, go for it!
 
mikea said:
Ummmm nobody is "entering data" other than the users. As we discussed, the airport data comes from the FAA. The sectional inserts are public data. All that is required in "entering" that data was automated a decade ago.

The fuel prices and comments, mostly gone now, and even the pictures came from users who provided it voluntarily.

Just like a certain hamburger site, you don't get to ask the community to voluntarily provide the data and then mark at as copyrighted, put it in a book, and charge the community to see it, or worse, as airnav did, and delete any data, including the user comments, on a facility that doesn't pay to be listed.

The only thing the "paid employees" need to do is manage letting the facility show up or not based on subscription receivables and delete any negative comments on payers, along with taking the commissions on the added "features" like travel booking. NONE OF THAT "work" SERVES THE COMMUNITY that did the work of providing the data.

Being that we have several volunteers here, we will have a new site that will do all the "entering" of the same public data and invite users to provide input again, only promise that the information will always be there at no charge.

You'll have no need to be embarrassed.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that 100LL actually phones FBOs to get honest fuel prices. Airnav suffered from people phoning in dishonest higher prices for their competitors. They also suffered from dishonest negative comments from competitors.
 
100LL sends me email reminders. If I don't respond, they call. I pay extra at Airnav for a "guaranteed price" tag. No one can change my price but me. Requires a password login. If I don't update monthly, they also remind me. I always update when the price changes but sometimes go a long time with no price change.
 
smigaldi said:
I stopped doing it in AirNav because if you say anything remotely critical the admins there will delete it. I put up a comment about that had some good and some not so good about an FBO. The not so good was that their tie downs were poor and required me to dig out a lot of dirt to get to the tie down hook and I mentioned that anyone should be prepared to do a little digging. I got a note from their admin that my comment was being removed as it did not confirm to their policy for "site sponsors" IOW some pigs pay to be more equal and not have accurate info listed.
Click to expand...

I am the founder of AirNav. Once in a while I read or hear something like this and it just makes my stomach turn.

It is absolutely NOT TRUE that we will delete anything critical or negative. Absolutely not. Having said that, AirNav comments are not an "anything goes" forum. We have a policy on comments that all comments must adhere to. Much like POA does, but with slightly different rules. The policy is posted on our site, in the open for anyone to read. Comments that violate the policy are not posted. Sometimes comments will get posted and are later removed when they are later found to be violating the policy. But there is nothing in the policy that refers to positive or negative comments, or that anything critical gets removed, or that "site sponsors" can influence the comments. Nothing. In fact, if you browse AirNav you will find quite a few negative comments, some of them on the pages of some of AirNav's biggest customers.

So now smigaldi thinks he can come here on POA and say that AirNav admins delete anything remotely critical. I am going to present our side and let you decide. Scott wrote about an FBO, and I quote: "I did pay over $5/gal for fuel and still had to pay for parking". That FBO was not charging $5, and up until that point had never charged $5 or higher. The FBO GUARANTEES their price posted on AirNav, was updating the price regularly, and claimed to never have sold fuel above $5. We asked Scott for a receipt so we could even get him a refund of the overcharge. Scott could not produce a receipt or any evidence that he has been charged over $5. We then asked for just an N-number and a date so that the FBO could look up their own records. No response from Scott to that one.

One of our rules on comments is that "Factual statements in comments must be truthful". Every evidence we had pointed to the fact that the price had never been $5. The comment was deleted due to the factual statement by Scott that he had paid over $5/gallon, which was plainly not true. Perhaps Scott made some math error and no longer had the original receipt to recheck his math. But in the end the fact is, the factual statement was not truthful, and that is why the comment had to be removed. Not because of any influence by a "site sponsor", as Scott alleges.

We at AirNav put a lot of work into these comments, and do our best to make sure they are the best trustworthy information for the aviation community. We may not always get it 100% right, but we try hard. Commercial interests are not part of the equation when dealing with comments. Some FBO customers don't feel the same way and we have lost some accounts for not acquiescing to an advertiser's desire to control comments.

So there. I had to say it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top