Airports must run smoothly around the clock each and every day to allow aircraft to come and go with ease. From the biggest airports in the world to the small strip down the street, managers at each are essential to ensuring safe, consistent, and smooth operations around the clock.

Airport managers do everything from ensuring that taxiways and runways are clear of objects and debris to verifying that terminal areas are clean, navigational aids are functioning, and all regulations are complied with.

How to Become an Airport Manager

Airport managers are often required to have a degree in aviation management or an equivalent field. However, some managers instead have relevant experience managing FBOs, which themselves provide services to small transient aircraft such as training flights and business aircraft. Other airport managers come from federal jobs with the FAA.

Many airport managers are Accredited Airport Executives (AAE). To become one, applicants must take a multiple-choice exam; complete a research project or advanced degree; and complete an interview. Enrollees in the training program must, among other requirements, have already worked at a public use airport for at least one year and have a four-year college degree or equivalent public airport management experience.

Working in management at a smaller airport may be a good steppingstone for those who eventually want to graduate to larger operations. Though on a smaller scale, managing a smaller airport may give the opportunity to handle a wider array of tasks, from airfield painting and cleaning to regulatory issues and working directly with the FAA.

A major benefit of FBO employment is that FBOs are often the main managing organization of smaller public-use airports, giving prospective candidates airport employment opportunities with a relatively easy point of entry.

Other leadership roles at bigger airports, such as leading a certain department or company at the airport, may help make the transition to full-on airport management easier. Such would make it easier to build connections with people in higher positions to seek mentorship, recommendations, and promotions.

How Much Do Airport Managers Earn

The salary of an airport manager can vary depending on location and the size of the airport managed. However, the average salary for an airport manager in the United States is $46,280, with a range from about $30,000 to nearly $70,000. Managers of larger airports, and airport systems, may make over $100,000.

Airport salaries can vary widely across the country. Many airports are taxpayer-funded, so employee salaries come out of a government budget. However, some airports are entirely self-sustaining and make money from facility fees, concessions, fuel sales, and flight instruction to fund themselves.

Airport management is a high-quality career for aviation enthusiasts and those uninterested in flying or airline operations. Airport operations tend to be quite unique on a day-to-day basis, offering consistent challenges and opportunities for growth. Working for an airport can be an effective method of growing your passion for aviation and earning a high income over time.

Looking for pilot jobs? FindaPilot.com posts new openings every day. Get a 20% discount on any plan. Just use the promo code AG20 when purchasing a plan. You’ll get a 20% discount on your first three months as a member.

This article first appeared on AirlineGeeks.com.

The post What Are the Best Jobs in Airport Management? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to airport officials, when an airport does any kind of development or expansion, it is required to replace developments with wetlands and conservancy areas where staffers manage invasive species. The airport purchased the property in 2011. It is a popular open space for hiking and getting back to nature as it has a short hiking trail.

It is a balancing act, notes Luke Bettis, landside operations supervisor for KATW, as they add plants to the conservancy then have to protect them from hostile weeds such as phragmites and buckthorn. “We spent about $2,500 on trees for the conservancy back in spring. If we use chemicals such as herbicides for the invasive species of plants, we could have killed or heavily damaged the trees.” Bettis also needed to find a cost effective way to manage onsite vegetation.

Bettis considered the idea of renting goats as gardeners. However, in addition to eating grass and non-native species the goats would also chow down on the newly planted trees, as goats are known for being non-discriminatory when it comes to feeding. They are also a high-spirited animal with no regard to fences or property lines, which could potentially create a new set of problems.

Bettis continued to look for options, and a social media post led him to Wooly Green Grazers, a sheep-based organic brush removal service located a few miles away. The sheep have a more discriminating palate, says Roxie Emunson, who owns Wooly Green Grazers with her husband Daniel. It is a new business for them—he recently retired from the U.S. Marine Corps. She grew up in Oklahoma and raised sheep in 4-H.

“Finally in 2020, with it being his last duty station, we bought our first two ewes and started. By the time we were ready to move to Wisconsin, we had four ewes and three rams.”

Before the sheep could be deployed, the Emunsons make sure there is no milkweed in the area as that is toxic for sheep. Once that threat was mitigated, the sheep were deployed. For the better part of a month, the flock, consisting of Old English Southdown and a few crossbreeds, bivouacked and chowed down on the approved conservancy vegetation. They selflessly consumed hostile phragmites, buckthorn, and blades of grass, 24/7 . They were kept contained—and people and predators kept out—by electric fences.

“These are smaller sheep breed, not those big ones. They are sometimes called babydolls and no larger than 26 inches tall. They are petite sheep,” Emunson  explained. The portable sheep pen was moved weekly, and there were signs up to warn people not to disturb the sheep because they were working.

Remote surveillance in the form of a trail camera was also set up. “There was one particular sheep that kept coming in for a close-up. We named her Farrah. She liked to be on camera,” Emunson says.

Wisconsin has been experiencing a drought of late, and that proved beneficial since the land in question is considered wetland, but it was dry enough that the sheep did not have any traction issues as they accomplished their munching mission.

According to Bettis, the cost for sheep transport and setting up the fence was approximately $1,500, about $1,000 less than traditional methods—and best of all the newly-planted trees were kept safe.

There is talk about bringing the sheep back for future missions.

“It’s good for the environment, and it’s good for our souls because it’s almost therapeutic to watch them,” Emunson said. “My husband likes to say that we like raising and grazing!”

You can find Wooly Green Grazers on Facebook.

The post Sheep Thrills at Appleton Airport appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Aircraft owners have a lot of strong opinions, but one of the most consistent is the frustration over the lack of hangar space at airports all over the U.S.

In every FBO and field that I’ve visited over the past year, I ask if there is any available hangar space. In all cases, the airport managers have mentioned a hangar waiting list that has dozens of names deep, while outside tiedown space is universally available.

While having hangar space is more expensive, there are many advantages to having an airplane stored in a hangar over being tied down on the ramp. Among them are security, keeping the airplane out of the elements, having a place for storage of tools and maintenance items, and just peace of mind.

My questions are not born out of an immediate desire to find new hangar space, but more of an intellectual curiosity in trying to understand how big of an issue the lack of hangar space really is. In fact, I’m mostly interested in the problem from an economic point of view.

If there is massive demand for hangar space, why hasn’t some innovative entrepreneur or tech disrupter attempted to solve this problem?

Too Much Red Tape?

As I’ve dug into the problem, I’ve learned a lot of the challenge has to do with the difficulty in dealing with airports. Most airports are owned and run by local governments, which means any decision will require some type of public oversight. That oversight extends to any decision that the airport would make that’s different from what’s already been approved. If the airport wants to develop land that it owns or spend any money on capital improvements, it must get approval from the local government.

Because of the way democracies work, this requires public hearings and filings for public records. The reality is that it’s a lot of work and requires a lot of back-door politics. The process can take months or even years.

The NIMBY Principle?

The other reality is that most people outside the aviation community view general aviation airports as a nuisance and have a “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) approach to airport expansion. The perception for many is that the local airport is to serve millionaires and their luxury “millionaire class aircraft.”

What people often miss is that the vast majority of GA airports cater to small, single-engine aircraft. Turboprops and jets are only about 10 percent of the total national fleet. Strictly experimental aircraft—as a category—is larger than the combined fleet numbers of the “millionaire class” aircraft.

When dealing with the public, it is hard for local politicians to be viewed as catering to the rich. This means any project around the airport that is controversial is likely to be met with a lot of hesitation among airport and public officials. If the airport is requesting expansion or development and the area is already confined or close to non-aviation structures, it is likely to receive some pushback. Those opposed to the airport’s expansion plans will try to suggest that local politicians are just catering to the rich.

Different Issues

Other concerns like heightened safety, emission, and noise concerns are far more grounded in fact. Most airplanes are relatively noisy and produce carbon emissions, regardless of their size. There is also a higher chance of an accident happening near an airport. Except for aviation enthusiasts, most people given the choice between living near an airport or not would choose the latter.

Combine this with how many local airports are financially structured and you get the sense that there isn’t a lot of money for additional development. Generally, airports generate revenue from taxes, fees, and maybe profit from fuel and concessions. Those fees are set by committee or government rules and often fixed through policy or law. In many cases, the airport keeps the revenues it generates.

But in some cases, the revenue is not kept by the airport, but rather remitted to the government to be used for other purposes. The airport, however, receives funding for operations from the budget. This makes it difficult for an airport to make the kind of investments needed to support expanded services like more hangars.

Where Are the Private Investors?

So, if the airport isn’t able to make the investment, then why aren’t private investors taking advantage of that opportunity? This is where it gets tricky. A number of airports that I spoke with said they had land available for construction should someone want to build a hangar. On the surface, that seems like an opening for a real estate investor. After all, industrial real estate is one of the hottest investments in the world right now.

A developer could go and buy up land around the airport and throw a bunch of hangars around the country and make a fortune—an aviation version of the game of Monopoly. But, many airports actually disincentivize investment by structuring hangar construction as land leases. Effectively, it means that a builder can develop the space, lease it from the airport authority, and after 20 years, the investment goes back to the airport. This makes it incredibly difficult for developers to finance and discourages a lot of investors from trying.

While all of this is frustrating for airplane owners, it also holds the general aviation industry back. Airplanes are expensive. For most owners, their airplane is the most expensive thing they own outside their homes. They’ve spent a lot of money and the last thing they want to do is leave it outside, exposed to the elements and other hazards.

What we really need is a venture-backed startup to find a way to solve all these issues and challenge the airport authorities the way Uber challenged the taxi industry. Unfortunately, short of building a network of private airports across the country, that doesn’t appear likely.

The post Why Aren’t More Hangars Being Built? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.