| Comments from AirNav users |
|---|
Comments are submitted by their authors and do not reflect the opinion of AirNav, LLC. All comments must adhere to AirNav's Policy on Comments.
AirNav's standard comment retention period is 3 years.
- From Mike Lopez
on 12-Sep-2007
-
Hi everyone! 3SQ is the only airport I will ever call home in STL. This place has been my home airport since I started flying at age 15. They taught me everything I know about aviation and safety! I have worked line-service and spent many weekends at the round table. Friendly workers and pilots and always something to learn. I’m currently finishing flight school flying OH-58D KW helicopters for the army. 3SQ thanks for everything; I wouldn’t be where I am without all of ya! Have a great holiday if I don't get a chance to visit this winter! Fly safe. (Greatest FBO in STL)
- From Greg Kirchhofer
on 04-Aug-2007
-
Received excellent service after landing RWY 9. As others said the FBO is a friendly group of people who helped us with local directions. As soon as I pulled in the line service workers were there to help move our plane to parking. Borrowed funnel to add oil from friendly folks in maintenance hangar. Excellent facilities inside FBO. RWY 9 is very bad, bumpy with horizontal asphalt patches across width.
- From Tim Keen
on 26-Jun-2007
-
Like others have said, don't blame FBO for runway. Land is privately owned. FBO is a great, friendly group, they have excellent line service, and fuel prices are cheaper than anyone else around unless you pump your own (3SQ has full service). Don't understand complaint about grass runways. Nearby land is in a flood zone, and the grass floods easily after a rain. So, closing a soggy runway is for your safety.
- From Chris Nesin
on 09-Mar-2007
-
Unfriendly towards anyone using the grass runways. Always making up rules to not allow the use of them, Issuing closures over the radio. With gas costing so much and the paved runway so bad, I'm not sure why anyone would stop there. Avoid, use 1H0 or KSET.
- From Steve Krause
on 04-Nov-2006
-
This is the "Cheers" of FBOs (without adult beverages, except at the monthly staff bash). Dennis and his team have created a fun community of aviation characters "where everybody knows your name." Ignore the bumpy runway. Put some quarters in the coffee machine, eat a donut or bagel somebody probably brought in on the day you visit, and get to know these guys.
- From Charles Robertson
on 22-May-2006
-
You shouldn't blame the FBO for the airport. The city (who leases the land) has been trying to improve it for years, but the landowner will neither sell them the land nor give them a long enough lease to get FAA grant money. He's holding out to sell the airport to developers as part of a much larger parcel.
- From Paul Weismann
on 03-Apr-2006
-
Great staff (in my limited experience), but airport is in terrible condition for an operation of that scale. Surprisingly poor condition of aircraft. Management is not customer friendly, and fuel prices are much higher than other airports (15% higher we found). Runway and taxiways are appalling and lighting is barely visible even from close range at night. We found a birds nest in our engine compartment and wet oil all over the inside of the cowling, unflyable aircraft reserved 2 months in advance. If you have to rent an aircraft or buy fuel, I recommend finding another operation. These guys are too focused on money to take care of their airport or aircraft.
Response from Dennis Bampton, St. Charles Flying Service
I have kept an airplane at St. Charles Airport for the past 34 years, and I think it important that people understand it is a Privately Owned airport open to the public, but not supported by any municipal entity. The operator of the airport can't get the owner of the facility to spend any money on the airport, thus its condition. To keep the airport viable, the operator of the business has just recently filled the cracks and painted new striping on the runway at a total cost of $12,800. With no assistance from owner or municipality. The runway is in poor condition, but considering the cost to overlay the runway at $188,000 I understand the operators resistance to spend those kinds of dollars. The runway is not dangerous, it is just a bit rough and the service we get there off sets the condition of the runway.
|
|
