MTOW, landing fees and maintenance for runways

In the real world, landing fees are usually structured by weight class of the aircraft. I’d love to see this in action for Airport CEO as well:

  • introduce a maximum takeoff weight for runways in addition to the length being the defining factor
  • Structure the landing/takeoff fees in accordance with the weight of the aircraft. As an example:
    Class 1: light GA (DA-20, Piper Cub, etc.) $200
    Class 2: heavy GA (Cessna 172, Cherokee, Archer, etc.) $300
    Class 3: multi-engine GA (Seneca, King Air, Baron) $500
    Class 4: light commercial (ATR72, B1900, Twotter) $800
    Class 5: medium commercial (B737, A320) $1200
    Class 6: heavy commercial (B747, A380) $1600

And then - for the sake of my sanity - reduce the wear and tear of the surfaces in accordance with the planes that operate on them. 50 takeoffs of a Cessna 182 shouldn’t wear out a runway to the extend that it’s unusable any more. Please decrease the wear and tear and instead increase the amount of money needed for repairs.

What do you think?


Further, the wear n tear can be different for Asphalt and concrete. Concrete runway should have less wear and tear than asphalt. The construction cost & maintenance cost of concrete should be more than asphalt. This will be more interesting and requires managing when and where to use different material.


Yes! There totally should be a difference between the different runway surfaces. And just another note to clarify: in my scenario, upgrades to the runway should be made in two ways: extend the runway, or improve the foundation of the runway.


This topic was automatically closed 31 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.