It’s not all glamor here at AvBrief. A solid 15 minutes of my precious time was devoted to a Google Meet session this week to sign us up for software to keep track of our encouragingly expanding roster of advertisers. As we grow, making sure our clients get the placement and frequency of the messages they pay for is getting more complex and time-consuming. You have to get that stuff right, and I was assured that my time was well spent in pursuit of that.
The other side of the coin is that the new system generates all the billing, provides convenient methods of payment, and keeps track of how much advertisers owe us (our rates really are quite reasonable, email me to find out more) and when they pay. From there it generates all kinds of reports that I guess will be handy to have and tells the clients how their ads are performing, which is a must. All in all, it was a productive 15 minutes and it will make us a more efficient organization.
It got me thinking, too, about this whole ADS-B billing fracas that could well end up occupying the time of Congress (and it will be a lot more than 15 minutes). The rule about new technology is that, being the clever species we are, people are always finding novel ways to exploit it in ways never imagined by those who created it and the folks for whom it was invented. ADS-B was created and then agonizingly implemented to keep airplanes from trading paint. But since the way it does that is by emitting signals that provide the precise location of aircraft along with who owns them and their make and model, it should have been pretty predictable that the wealth of real-time information would have numerous off-track uses.
In fact, there were some accurate predictions about its less savory applications. Before aviation groups signed on to help smooth the mandatory equipage required to make it work, they made the FAA pinky swear that they wouldn’t use ADS-B data as a primary source of data to violate pilots for a host of transgressions that could be seen as plain as day in the numbers and tracks it emits. They should have gotten that promise in blood. It’s been used numerous times to sanction pilots, and more than once the data has been so horribly misinterpreted that it resulted in ridiculous miscarriages of justice. But I digress.
As certain as the FAA was to break its promise was the fact that someone would figure out how to make money from the information. Flight tracking services like FlightAware and FlightRadar 24 and a hundred others comb ADS-B data from thousands of volunteers who rig up the simple antenna and online connection that feeds the unique radio signatures from each aircraft that passes over to the servers at the tracking companies. FlightAware especially has turned into a massive enterprise under Collins Aerospace that is used in myriad ways by the aviation industry, governments, and the military.
A couple of enterprising entrepreneurs figured out that they could use the tech to take a massive headache away from airport authorities all over the country. Hundreds of airports charge fees on landings, takeoffs, and tiedowns to help keep the doors open with at least the pretense of the facility creating its own revenue. As we all know, most small airports are heavily subsidized by local taxpayers and will never have enough revenue to cover costs. But like parking fees and traffic fines for helping with road construction and maintenance, the universally despised landing fees give some political cover for the often illusory public benefits of keeping the lines painted and grass mowed at the local strip.
Collecting those fees in person is hit and miss. Someone has to be at the airport around the clock or there has to be reliance on the honor system to get those $10 and $15 payments into the kitty. I doubt half of what’s owed makes it into the cookie jar. But by putting an antenna up and hooking it to a computer with some relatively basic software, the round-the clock comings and goings of every aircraft using a runway or apron can be accurately and thoroughly tracked. Since the signals also include ownership information, the systems create invoices, send out the bills, and collect the money. Not only do they take workload away from always-stretched airport staff, they make sure that everyone who owes money gets a bill and everyone who doesn’t pay gets nagged.
How that differs from our spiffy new advertising software or the gas company’s accounts system is baffling to me, but it has become a privacy issue and there’s a movement to get Congress to stop the practice. As did virtually every other aviation news site, we dutifully ran a story on the effort and it got predictable reaction from commenters. No one likes paying landing fees, and making it harder is a popular strategy.
But we also got the following comment from someone at a little airport that’s like hundreds across the country trying to keep the doors open in the face of rising costs and declining use. While I can use the advertising analogy to make the point, here’s a view from the front lines on why, if you’re going to have them, you might as well make the most of them.
“Here’s another perspective. I’m an active pilot and the volunteer manager of a small municipal airport in the rural Northeast. We have 30 based aircraft in private hangars, sell about 10,000 gallons of 100LL per year at competitive market rates, and charge $10 per night for private singles and $15 per night for private twins. We charge landing fees and higher parking fees for the few commercial aircraft that visit.
“This is not a wealthy airport making heaps of money on overpriced fuel and outrageous fees. Quite the opposite. We run on a shoestring budget, have zero employees, and local government puts money INTO the airport just to keep it open and safe.
“Our fees are well posted. Since the airport is largely unattended, payment is on the honor system, with several easy ways to pay. In reality, only about 50% of private GA aircraft and 25% of commercial aircraft pay their fees without being invoiced. I wrote software that collects ADS-B data to track landings and parking duration, and periodically invoice those who haven’t paid. About half of them pay after being billed.
“I’m just trying to keep the airport open and the lights on for pilots like you. The need to collect fees isn’t going away just because a law says airports can’t use ADS-B data to bill. Small airports may go out of business, while larger airports will simply install camera systems to capture tail numbers and bill anyway.
“Maybe the bill we need is one requiring pilots to pay the fees they owe, billed or not. At least then we’d lose fewer small airports.
“Privacy matters. So does keeping airports open. If pilots won’t pay what they owe, no technology ban will save the airports they depend on.“
Well said and thanks for all you do, sir.
“ADS-B was created and then agonizingly implemented to keep airplanes from trading paint.”
No, no it wasn’t, and this is clear if you read the NPRM. ADSB was introduced to turn a four-way stop-sign intersection into one with a stoplight. It doesn’t make the intersection safer, it just allows a lot more traffic through the intersection.
Midairs before ADSB were statistically rare, and they are still statistically rare after.
“Thank you for using the Nxxxxx ADS-B out billing support service evidenced by your recent billing, enclosed please find your invoice for the Nxxxxx $100/use ADS-B alternative user recovery fee. Per agreement at installation, ATC and other acft users are exempted.
Small acft owners are financially constrained we hope this ADS-B cost recovery plan will enhance your user experience.”
Perhaps the term “landing fee” is part of the problem. I think for non-commercial operations, a “parking fee” would be acceptable. That way, simply doing turns in the pattern wouldn’t trigger a fee every time wheels touched the pavement. Using ADS-B, and/or cameras should be fine to assess parking fees, although I’d prefer cameras because it would remove the incentive for pilots to shut off ADS-B prior to landing.
Another perspective.
Coming from the US marine industry to US GA about 15 years ago, I was amazed that no one vigorously charged for landing, parking, FBO facilities, even courtesy cars. And I was amazed that many pilots did everything they could to avoid paying for those things if they could help it. It didn’t take a lot of math to figure that the profit margins on the fuel sales were not paying for all this. The heydays of the 50’s through 70’s when the fuel sales might have covered these services – long gone.
Generally – you can’t TOUCH a marina dock without paying for landing, staying the night, the holding tank pump out etc etc. No one hands out free candy bars and coffee in the office and if you want a car – you rent it. Or pay for a taxi/Uber/Lyft etc. Don’t get me wrong – there are those who try and avoid paying in the marine world too. But it is rigorously policed. Marine has the equivalent of ABS-B – it’s called AIS. I am not aware of anyone using it to generate billing. It’s just a different culture.
There is one big difference in the USA – aviation is subsidized by taxes. Marine is not.
Most GA plane owners and boat owners have a limited pot of money to spend on their avocation each year. A big part of my pot for the plane goes to pay for Annuals and stuff like spark plugs (for example) that cost nearly 10x the price of equivalent parts for my boat; costs that aren’t in my boat “budget”. Therefore, my boat pot of money has more $ available to spend for things like dock fees. Comparing boats to SEL airplanes, from the owner’s point of view, is interesting but it’s also like comparing Beagles to grapefruits. (Not really but you get my point?)
OK, so what you’re saying is we all need to pay our fair share.This will kill GA.
Our fuel taxes are supposed to distribute funds to help subsidize these local airports. Local airports bring commerse into your local town. Should I be charged for every landing, T&G, ramp charge or FBO service charge even though I never parked or used any services? The airport is no different than any other local/county expense to the town.
Should we now have to pay anytime we go to a city/county local park, use of the roads or sidewalks? Some states, like NC that I just left, charged me $500/year for the benefit of owning an airplane, even though I built it in Florida & moved up there. Thankfully I’m back in the free state of Florida where I’m not taxed because I own something.
It is painful for us little guys to own. Annual inspections, hangar rent, fuel costs and property taxes add up, then you get invoiced for touching the wheels on a runway. If they’re going to do that, they need to install a camera system. I suspect that these billing companies aren’t just going to airports with existing fees, but approaching non-fee airports trying to start them. The lack of hardware installation makes it easy for them to scale up. If the biller has an expense, it may slow down the propagation a little.
For a data point, Alabama charges me about $800/year tax to keep my $90,000 Cardinal. Was the North Carolina fee based on value or a flat registration charge?
Mr. Landry, you may not be paying property tax on you airplane or vehicles, but you are paying it on any land you own. You are paying it on the items you buy. Florida is not the cheapest state to live in. The tax rates are heavily subsidized by the tourist taxes levied on those who visit the big amusement parks. How do I know, I have lived here for going on 11 years. Its become too over built. I-75 corridor will look like I-4 corridor before too long and most of FL will be one long strip mall. Hangar rents keep climbing. I plan on leaving in 6 months. America is changing because the work landscape has evolved from the sixties and seventies. Small town America is struggling to keep infrastructure from crumbling as a result of the changing work landscape.
I commented on this yesterday, and I don’t see it here today. I’ll repeat myself, because I think this whole idea is BS. We paid significant money to install this equipment under the promise of separation. Now having the table turned is not right. Find other ways to fund your airport. Have fly ins, do local open houses and charge for parking, there are many ways to increase revenue other than charging fly over/landing fees through ADSB data. I just don’t buy this argument, and I’ve seen it before.
one of our local airports is charging fees through ADSB data for doing practice approaches. I don’t expect that airport will be around much longer, which is the other side of the coin. Pilots will go elsewhere.
At first, I grumbled about landing fees because most of them came from larger airports, not the 2,400′ strip with few working lights and well worn paint. Then I realized that the lack of fees really is killing the smaller fields. Just in the vicinity of Tulsa, there have been 4 different small fields close over the past 50 years. We’ve lost Cotton’s strip, 81st St Airpark, Shell Creek airport, and most recently Harvey Young field. Harvey passed away several years ago and willed the land to a conservatory that eventually had to sell it. These were all grass strips (Harvey had a short, narrow section of asphalt for those modern aircraft with the 3rd wheel on the wrong end.) Now, my kids, grandkids, and great grandkids (in a few years) won’t have the opportunity to visit or use these amazing places. There is a really good chance they could have survived with a bit more money from transient aircraft fees.
The issue is because using ADS-B data for anything other than safety and separation is a slippery slope. If we don’t take a stand here, where will it stop? If a private operator at an airport can use the data to bill me for a “landing”, what else can they start using it for? Overflight fee? Will they start using my cellphone position data to charge a fee for driving into the lot to watch the planes ?
If I park and use their services, happy to pay. Just don’t use the data promised for non-revenue purposes to collect your arbitrary fee.
I don’t think that GA is on life-support yet, but my fear is that the time will come when the family will be called in. At our local airport, which serves a community of approximately 20,000 in an otherwise rural area, an anecdotal and admittedly informal survey shows that nearly 80% of the pilots are approaching retirement or are already on Medicare. We have a handful of youngsters (age < 30) who are on the process of learning to become professional pilots (none are flying only for recreation or for the joy of flight). What does this tell us?
Flying is expensive and not many people can afford it. Regardless of what I say and regardless of what our local EAA chapter tries to convey, we pilots are viewed as having more money than brains by our local community (I’ve been told as much). Our airport manager is excellent and does his best to communicate the value of the airport to our local economy, but it seems that the message falls on (nearly) deaf ears.
What is it going to take to keep us flying? Money, certainly, but in a larger sense, we need to get serious about selling GA to the general public. I’ve read Orwell and I don’t like ‘big brother’ any more than the rest of us… and I certainly don’t like paying more money simply to land and park… airport hamburgers are expensive enough as it is! But I’m posing the question… what is it going to take to keep GA alive? I’m not worried about myself… I’m nearing the end of my flying career (and it’s been a joy!), but what if my 4 year old grandson looks skyward and wishes he could be ‘up there’ with the birds?
Just some musings from an old fart… (as my kids call me, hopefully affectionately)
At our GA airport, most of the traffic is from the kids in the Part 61 flight school (airline feeder) based here, but the 2nd most activity is from retired airline pilots who rent the best hangars. A very few began flying here and then came back after they timed out at 65… an interesting mix of young and formerly-young pilots.
Over the past decade our small airport has become the GA overflow receiver for the neighboring high end resort valley. This has resulted in a significant increase in jet traffic and the attendant pressures from developers, noise complaints, and complexity for the small municipal airport sponsor. Federal funds mostly support capital improvements, with only minimal funds for operations. In order to keep the airport self sustaining the city implemented landing fees for non-based aircraft over 9000 lbs four years ago. If landing fees go away ground lease rates will have to go up and this will put further pressure on the small aircraft owners. Unfortunately AOPA’s stance on this is short sighted and likely driven by a shift in their support from owners of small aircraft to jet operators. This is certainly evident from the changes in their magazine content.
Our local GA airport has no landing fees but operates on a break-even basis ($100k+ profit last year) with revenue from selling gas & hangar/tie-down rentals, both priced about average for our region. Somehow the grass gets mowed regularly, lines get repainted and stuff gets fixed soon after it breaks. The owner (local port authority) is looking at expansion plans that would encourage more traffic but they appear to want to do it without pricing out their current customers. Haven’t seen the business plan but, to me, that means keeping rent reasonable for us and little or no landing fees for transients that want to spend some $ on gas and food/hotels/golf in our area. Time will tell.
Definitely can understand that perspective some. I think one of the big problems is this technology is a big invasion of privacy (constant tracking) but it was sold as being basically mandatory for safety benefits (which it certainly is great for). But then being billed off of it makes it much more skeptical of big brother, even if I would have had to go into the FBO and pay the fees anyway.
the other problem is it I think in some cases has led to an increase of fees and billing because of how easy it is. Seems like I’ve heard of some airports that didn’t have fees now added them.
they also are being used as a deterrent to training. If an airport charges an ADSB based landing fee, you can do touch and go and rack up landing fees real easy with vector billing you for each.
I had seen one small airport I was looking to fly into and ForeFlight comments said they got charged for a low approach over the airport from vector with no easy way to fight the fee. No way should airports be charging for low approaches over them. Plus if in the past an airport had fees and do to safety reasons had to go around (even after touching) the airport wouldn’t have charged you 2 landing fees. But with ADSB auto billing now you will be.
Theres definitely reasonable arguments to make going both ways. But I certainly lean towards saying technology promised to be only for safety should not be auto billing pilots.
I am more disappointed by those who intentionally do not pay at an “honor system” airport. If you know about the fee, use the airport facilities, and leave without paying, shame on you.
Open the door to this and you implicitly approve of a myriad types of government tracking of everything you do. Governments, and that includes the little community government and the airport board associated with it, are always looking for more money. Make it easier for them to assess you and they’ll do it. This is a bad idea.
When I installed ADS-B out, one of the reasons I went UAT with retaining old non-ES xpndr was the to break the link between my squawk and my identity. Accepted being called paranoid to avoid an anticipated “auto-violate” button from ATC, knowing that if it was a legit violation, my sending out own location every second would not be a difficult hurdle to overcome, but it would take initiative, something not always evident in someone who may initiate more “call this number” interactions than typical. Unanticipated bonus since I wasn’t cynical enough is that same initiative will be required to auto-bill…and yes I have seen various levels of web tracker accuracy.
…I’ll be off in the weeds under my foil hat, waiting to pay more for a fuel spec I don’t need.
There’s a distinction that has to be made between a Privately owned airports and Publicly owned airports ! A private airport can charge any type of rate structure it desires, on the other hand public airports are built with 100% public funds, exactly like public highways they are there for the benefit of the public free of additional fees other than the taxes paid relative to their users .
If you utilize anything at a private airport or other private facility of any kind some level of compensation is owed to the private entity such as the profit margin from the fuel pump or other service of value including use of the private runway unless you did buy enough gas or use the restaurant or maintenance shop
If you utilize the public portion of a public airport you have already paid everything that’s due. Now if you partake of the private amenities offered by a FBO you very well might owe them something for their services, But using the runway and parking on the ramp built by taxpayers requires no additional compensation to ANYONE!
The public runway and parking ramp are most comparable to Federal, State and local highway and road infrastructure. Unless you’re proposing that ALL public roads and highways should be Toll roads?
Regarding the ADSB fee debacle as stated in the article it was originally intended to keep aircraft from trading paint period. We were assured this would NEVER be used for enforcement or fees. Congress fixed the enforcement issue ( mostly) . Now it’s the FAA’s turn to fix the fees issue by not broadcasting the identifying information of the aircraft and owners, the only thing that needs to be broadcast to the public is simply that an aircraft is currently in that particular 3 dimensional location and frankly only other flying aircraft are in true need of the location information .
Make the ADSB database just like most of the state DMVs the general public can’t take the license plate number and lookup any ownership information for automobiles!!!!!! Aircraft ought to be the same!!
“…the only thing that needs to be broadcast to the public is simply that an aircraft is currently in that particular 3 dimensional location and frankly only other flying aircraft are in true need of the location information.”
Agreed. Remove “N” numbers and Registration data leaving aircraft type and location in place. If on-board separation is the goal, it’s the only information needed.
“Remove “N” numbers and Registration data leaving aircraft type and location in place. If on-board separation is the goal, it’s the only information needed.”
That’s all well and good at towered airports, but not so much at non-towered airports. At non-towered airports, having the N-number most definitely helps, especially when Cessna 1234 reports 6 miles west when they mean east. Or when two aircraft are close together and I want to match their radio calls to what I see on the traffic display. But even at towered airports, I have used the N-number on the traffic display to correlate their position to know what specific section of the sky to be looking in.
I would agree that registration data is not needed, but I don’t think that is being broadcast anyway. Once you have the N-number of any aircraft, it’s a simple matter to look it up in the FAA database.
> “it was originally intended to keep aircraft from trading paint period.”
No, it really wasn’t. If you check the original NPRM, it was designed to replace the four-way stop signs at an intersection with a stop-light. It makes it so our highest density traffic areas can handle more commercial traffic.
How it was sold to us, though, was for safety. Except that midairs before ADSB were statistically rare, and they are still statistically rare after, so the safety side hasn’t materialized, and can’t (because there was and still is no midair problem to solve).
What you make of that is up to you, but while mandatory ADSB has not demonstrably reduced midairs it has cost you $$$ and now your privacy.
Slight correction: FlightAware is not affiliated with Boeing (you’re probably thinking of ForeFlight, which was recently sold by Boeing). FlightAware is owned by Collins Aerospace and RTX.
While I understand that airports need money to operate, there’s some strange things happening out west where hangar valuations (exceeding $300/sqft) are turning hangars that were once filled with Cubs and Cessnas to be turned into expensive apartments with Cirrus’ (Cirii?) props and jets. Folks that put their blood, sweat, and tears into helping aviation grow are now seeing dollar signs and mismanaged airports and municipalities are somehow not a part of the equation. We’ve got airports out west better suited to handle traffic go quiet while others who have yet to turn on the ADS-B revenue stream become saturated with traffic. At some point, all these airports will be run by bitcoin billionaires who see the dollar signs in these hyper-inflated valuations (and a lack of supply) and slowly milk the aviation community dry. Retirees who can’t afford a 2% increase in hangar leases, let alone those 200% increases reported by AvBrief earlier will soon sell off their airplanes to buyers across the country, only to step back from aviation and watch land developers demolish our precious airports and turn them into shopping malls. I sure hope I’m wrong.
Gotta thank Russ for bringing a different perspective here – one I had not considered.
I’m not for landing fees for small GA specially – but for parking, especially at smaller fields where that revenue actually might matter, the easier it is to both invoice and collect, the more value that fee brings to the airport. And while I hear all those who say “it’s so expensive, I can’t afford the parking fee” – come on. I don’t know of a single airport in my state of California where the ramp parking fee costs more than it does for my car – often at the same airport! $10 for parking, when advertised in advance, is not an issue for any serious aviator. It’s just not. Be honest about that with yourself, please.
That said, I do agree that there is a slipperly-slope issue here, and I’m willing to accept that for some folks, no amount of “commercial use” of ADS-B for fees is tolerable. So, with AI as powerful as it is today, the environment is well-poised for the right company to come along with a camera-based system on the ground, both for operational integrity and yes, for billing for any announced fee, be it parking or landing or other.
In summary, I no longer see ADS-B as the only way for small fields to get what they need for fees, and thus we should formally eliminate this commercial use of the ADS-B system in the name of safety. With the right entrepreneurial spirit, a company can accomplish the same (or better) with cameras, without violating the safety-oriented ethos of ADS-B. If we separate the two issues, and acknowledge that we now have another option, all this heartburn goes away. The argument should not be “I can’t afford the fees” but should be that ADS-B must not be used for fees, period.
Keep ADS-B aligned to its safety mission, and let’s use other perfectly viable means of collecting fees for that mission. They’re separate and need to stay that way.
Many years ago, my landlord in Maine had a honey- box (small wooden shed) where people could take a glass of honey and leave a few dollars behind. Prices posted, the number of glasses disappearing eventually no longer fit the money appearing in the money box.
Scene swap: I remember being able to gas up my airplane at a small field, leave the callsign and my name in a list and a few weeks, or sometimes a month later, a bill would arrive. I always went out of my way to send the money instantly.
While I think ADSB Billing is more a way of a select few providers to cash in on fees, the airports working on a good name, trust or good spirits will eventually go broke.
They say copper wire was invented by two lawyers fighting over a penny, however after 36 years in the aviation world, my assumption has changed… I think these where pilots.
I think this is really a privacy issue. The government is requiring that we use ADSB, which is fine, but then giving the whole world access to that data. This particular billing issue is just one of many downstream “unintended consequences” of doing that.
Have you ever tried to look up someone’s name and address using their vehicle license plate? You can’t. It’s called the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act.
Imagine how people would like it if suddenly that were legal! You’d get doxx’d because some nut thought you cut them off on the freeway, etc., etc., etc.
The answer here is simple – do the same thing for ADSB. Break the link between ADSB identifier and personal identity by making the information non-public. That would end this problem, and many similar future ones sure to follow.
A totally separate issue is how smaller airports are or should be funded. They definitely can use help. FWIW I always pay honor system landing fees.
I just did a fun demonstration about privacy in aviation for my wife, who has no idea about what the fuss is about with ADSB billing.
Came up with a lottery style N-Number. Flightaware. Found type and owners name and address right there. From there it went on to check his airman records. I know he wears glasses. After confirming name and address I learned that the person is active in various clubs and especially a golf club and he used to own a business.
This tells me he is likely rather affluent and I can extract that by his approximate range of activity he is likely older and would perhaps be a fairly simple target for a armed robbery or break-in during absence from home (nice home, very quiet neighborhood, thanks to google street view).
My wifes dry comment after the 4 minute research: Looks like landing fees are this gents last conern. This is INSANE!
“In reality, only about 50% of private GA aircraft and 25% of commercial aircraft pay their fees without being invoiced”.
If anyone wants to know why ADS-B was glommed on to for billing, this is your answer.
Making this about “fees” is having the argument they want you to have.
“These multimillionaires do not want to pay their $10 landing fee when they fly their private jets on ski trips.”
That will be the rebuttal to your concern, and you are going to get nowhere.
This is not about fees. Don’t make it about fees.
The real issue is privacy and proportionality. The general public would be outraged, and rightly so, if their movements, name, home address, and the make and model of their car were openly available across multiple publicly accessible websites. Heads would roll.
The public travels on public roads funded by taxpayers. That does not justify broadcasting individualized tracking data to the world. There is no public safety or governance need for that information to be openly published.
The same principle applies to aircraft. Public infrastructure does not require public exposure of personal movement and data.
If the ADSB level of privacy infringement upsets you, as it rightly should do a little research on Flock Cameras and Geofencing
Lets show a bit more passion, folks!
“….has significant disposable income, enabling them to deeply invest in their passions.
Source the rest of this sentence and Russ will send you a blow-up dishwasher with a kick-start.
🤣
Airports like the one you referenced should be looking at all revenue sources, all rates and charges BEFORE implementing landing fees and using the predatory VECTOR plane pass. Airports should be required to be 100% TRANSPARENT!
I think this is a futile battle. Not because it might be lost in congress, or legal system (the initiative may well win, and congress just even might pass some law banning ASDB data use for this), but it may end up being irrelevant.
Today, technology already exists that makes it possible to automatically snap a photo of a landing aircraft, do some OCR (optical character recognition) to read the N-number from the empennage, look it up in the FAA registry database, compare the fuselage shape with the information about the aircraft, and if it matches (high-wing for a Cessna, etc.), generate the landing fee bill and send it to the owner on record.
Someone will pretty soon develop software, probably using some AI (everything is using AI these days…), and all you’ll need, as an airport owner/manager is a few cheap digital cameras, controlled remotely by that computer, which will then snap photos when they detect motion in the frame that looks like an aircraft landing on their runway. While this solution might be a bit more expensive and complicated to install than ADSB billing (requiring appropriate positioning of these cameras, with available power supply, and a robust WiFi to allow them to send their images to the central computer), it will undoubtedly be cheap enough to make it worthwhile for those who already charge landing fees (and miss out on 50% of that revenue due to non-compliant pilots).
Too bad 49 U.S.C. § 44114 allows aircraft owners to hide their registration info from anyone but the government. So, unless these billing agencies are in cahoots with the federal government, any use of this registration information by private companies would be against federal law, no?
I don’t think any of those are ever billed that way. Anyone can look up a N-number online, and get registration information. Unless the owner requests that info be hidden, it remains fully accessible, not even requiring user registration with the database site — just go to FAA N-Number Inquiry and search for the specific registration.
So, instead of using ADSB data to get the N-number of a landing aircraft, the small private airports, that are open to the public, can set up cheap digital cameras and some software that will essentially capture the painted numbers from the fuselage / empennage and look them up in that database.
Small airports, especially the kind described above, that are ran by volunteers, and are teetering on the bring of existence, thanks to the overbearing community surrounding them, that would love nothing more than to just shut them down and develop a golf course in its place, need to figure out how to get visiting pilots to pay the meagre landing fees, so they can cover the cost of that high-school kid running the snowblower across the runway in February, or repainting the lines in June…
I understand where Russ is coming from on this. But I agree with others that we are talking two separate issues here. Funding vs privacy. Dropping 10 bucks for a tie down isn’t unreasonable. And burning a gallon or two to fly to the next airport to save a buck or so a gallon is stupid when you calculate the realized savings. And then you’ve deprived your home base of some of the very money it needs so you can continue to park your plane there.
But on the privacy issue, the FAA now allows you to request to not show/release your personal information. I submitted my request a few months ago, and within a week it was gone when I looked up my tail number. It now says
“The Registered owner has requested to keep this data private under Title 49 of the United States Code Section 44114.”
And there was separately a move (NPRM?) to block any release of ADSB derived ownership data. This needs to be vigorously supported.
Everyone likes to think because they’ve paid some form of tax (property/sales/income) that everything from the government should be free. I can assure you that our aviation interests is seen as a personal hobby by most taxpayers, and we are bottom of the priorities when cuts come. This is (somewhat sadly) not the ‘50’s. We’re going to have to pay a bit more for this passion in which we partake.
There should be no expectation that a public airport should be self sustaining. The citizens of the city that owns the airport are the beneficiaries of having a gateway not unlike having a freeway close by. Sure, storage fees that are reasonable and fuel flow age fees are expected. Regressive landing fees that discourage flying activities and help push owners to sell airplanes are one more thread to unravel an industry that took 75 years to build.
Private airports need to be vertically integrated and have revenues from all the activities at the airport. Those that are successful stay around and those that aren’t go away. That’s the harsh reality of aviation.
The main “problem” with easy ADS-B billing is EVRY airport will start enacting a tax to land. Our Tax dollars paid for the majority of the airports in the USA and their open use The UK is a nightmare of landing fees that choked GA in that country.
During the early days of ADS-B development, AOPA opposed it for just this reason, although they expected the highwayman to be the U.S. Government. Assured that Congress would never allow “charging for the air we also breathe,” they caved and became a strong supporter.
Anybody know where the ADSB data comes from? In most cases, a $85 raspberry pi. There are many components and steps in the data collection process that can corrupt the data. And none of the ADSB installations are validated. ADSB data collection is NOT a robust system. If I receive a bill from Vector or one of these other billing systems, I’m not paying it. Too many open questions.