Bill introduced to stop airports from using ADSB to bill pilots

It wouldn’t be surprising at all if Vector has been contacting airports and convincing them to impose landing fees when before they hadn’t ever been considered.
That’s the big problem with adsb. It’s way too easy to start charging. Zero effort for the airport. Free money for providing no service. Honestly, you’d be foolish not to do it.

We need this bill.
 
Don't land at airports with crazy fees. Its not like red light cameras, where you can't avoid a red light camera on your way home from work.
 
a flaw in the plan to use ADS-B for charges: the ADS-B messages lack authentication. The message protocol doesn't prevent false ids... kind of like caller id.
 
I still don't get how they would compel payment. What's to stop you from ignoring any bills sent to you?

The airport authority theoretically could place a lien against the aircraft for unpaid services. That doesn’t solve for ‘enforcement’ if ignored, but it does provide a tactic for collecting unpaid fees.
 
Don't land at airports with crazy fees.
If you're going to avoid airports that have crazy fees, you need to let MANAGEMENT know. Doesn't do any good to tell the summer help at the desk. So get their email or send Snail Mail to those that look at their revenue. And if you're sending it to the FBO, Ramp Fees may be their fault, but they don't have control over Landing Fees. But they sure can make a stink if they have documented proof they are loosing business because of the Landing Fees.
 
I still don't get how they would compel payment.
Just like any other invoice you don't pay. They can send it to a Collection Agency who may eventually take you to court. And if you also kept ignoring the Collection notices, when they do go to court and you don't show up, they ask the judge to just collect the money from your account. Yes, that's pushing it for a few landing fees... Unless you keep going back to the same places and you've run up a pretty big balance. Also, if you keep going to the same airports, one day you may come out from lunch and find the airport has put a lock on your landing gear.
 
If you're going to avoid airports that have crazy fees, you need to let MANAGEMENT know. Doesn't do any good to tell the summer help at the desk. So get their email or send Snail Mail to those that look at their revenue. And if you're sending it to the FBO, Ramp Fees may be their fault, but they don't have control over Landing Fees. But they sure can make a stink if they have documented proof they are loosing business because of the Landing Fees.

Many of these airports don’t care about losing business. The land is more valuable as apartments, nice new bug houses, etc.

Montauk airport will be gone for new condos.
 
Montauk airport will be gone for new condos.
Montauk is a little different as it really only makes it's money during the summer months. So sure, ***** about them as much as any other resort type establishment. If those kind of airports are the ones you have a problem with, there's not much to say.
 
F
It wouldn’t be surprising at all if Vector has been contacting airports and convincing them to impose landing fees when before they hadn’t ever been considered.
From what I've seen of municipal airport bureaucracy, I would guess that is exactly right! In fact, the sales pitch from Vector to port commissioners' practically writes itself.
 
Don't land at airports with crazy fees. Its not like red light cameras, where you can't avoid a red light camera on your way home from work.

Many existing cases of mistaken or potential fraudulent billing from Vector, who sells their service to numerous $$ airports. One example above.

Are you ready to spend hours trying to unwind for-profit incentivized billing and collection screwups to your N-number?
 
Many existing cases of mistaken or potential fraudulent billing from Vector,
VERY unlikely it is fraudulent. Sure, dumb error as they're cranking out massive invoices with very little cross checking. Probably not unlike thousands of other businesses out there. If you get a bogus charge, notify them. I have not heard of anyone having an issue shooting them an email or calling.

And yes it's a pain and if they started really messing up and sending me one a week or something, I'd probably send them an invoice for my time to make a point. :cool: But I don't see it as any different than calling your credit card company when there is a charge you didn't make on your card... And THAT probably is fraud! But either way, it gets taken away and you never pay it.

And I'm curious.... Ever get on a road that was marked "Toll" and wondered why you had to pay??? :p (Sorry, I couldn't resist and all in fun. :D)
 
VERY unlikely it is fraudulent. Sure, dumb error as they're cranking out massive invoices with very little cross checking. Probably not unlike thousands of other businesses out there. If you get a bogus charge, notify them. I have not heard of anyone having an issue shooting them an email or calling.

And yes it's a pain and if they started really messing up and sending me one a week or something, I'd probably send them an invoice for my time to make a point. :cool: But I don't see it as any different than calling your credit card company when there is a charge you didn't make on your card... And THAT probably is fraud! But either way, it gets taken away and you never pay it.

And I'm curious.... Ever get on a road that was marked "Toll" and wondered why you had to pay??? :p (Sorry, I couldn't resist and all in fun. :D)
The motivation for revenue has pushed Vector very close to the edge in the past, if not over it. I’d at least call it aggressive sloppiness in their algorithm coding.


There’s a profit motive for companies to use ADS-B data, and that seems to be the case with Vector, which claims on its website to differentiate itself from the competition by being able to “detect and ID more aircraft than any other system available by using more technologies than any other system.” These include, says Vector, flight tracking radar, ground-based imagery and flight plan tracking data….​
So while Vector doesn’t say that it uses ADS-B, their mention of flight tracking radar and flight plan tracking data suggest that they might. ​
​
We reached out to Vector for comment, and company president Pete Coleton directly addressed the flight in question, writing that, “In the case of the fee charged to Wendy Lessig, it appears as though her flight pattern and profile was very similar to what an aircraft performing a touch & go operation would look like and this caused our system to produce a billable activity in error.” Coleton continued that, “I understand she was able to contact our live PlanePass billing team and the error was quickly corrected. I already have my team looking into this case to identify a system refinement and plan to follow up with Wendy.”​
​
We reached out to the company again asking specifically if it in part tracks planes via ADS-B. On her flight, Lessig contacted Bridgeport Tower, so they had her plane’s N-number, but it’s unclear how that data would have been shared by BDR controllers with Vector Airport Systems. Raw primary radar returns wouldn’t have the N-number of a VFR aircraft unless it were an ADS-B target. Lessig’s PA-12 does indeed have ADS-B, she told Plane & Pilot.​


Vector has been collecting landing fees at certain airports for some time using cameras that capture your tail number by sending a bill in the mail to the address for the registration​
​
- If you don't pay, you'll get letters from them threatening a Iien against your aircraft.​
​
- Whether liens have actually happened and they have real legal ability to obtain them is unclear to me (I have zero legal expertise here).​
​
- Regardless, they market 99+% collection rate in promoting their service to airports, so people are sufficiently intimidated into paying up.​
​
- They are increasingly using ads-b data to supplement their data gathering.​
​
- Apparently they access unfiltered ads-b data from the FAA that identifies folks who enroll in the PIA program (the level of privacy above LADD).​
​
- Folks have gotten bills based on ads-b data without ever touching wheels at the field (e.g. low approaches) or simply by transiting the airspace above. ​
​
- The number of airports with these systems is rapidly growing - it's an appealing revenue engine for airport managers, municipalities, etc. including for smaller/nontowered fields that have enough operations to make it worth the expense of the company installing their systems. This makes is so much easier for fields where it was previously impractical to impose landing fees to rake in new revenue.​
 
Good luck ... remember how it worked out for SSN?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1139.jpeg
    IMG_1139.jpeg
    351.7 KB · Views: 16
The motivation for revenue has pushed Vector very close to the edge in the past, if not over it.
Sorry, still don't buy the fraudulent part. Sure, they need to do work on their billing. But even what you posted showed they quickly reversed the incorrect charge as soon as they were notified.

Basically a young company that is having growing pains. Not the first, won't be the last.
 
I still don't get how they would compel payment. What's to stop you from ignoring any bills sent to

That’s the big problem with adsb. It’s way too easy to start charging. Zero effort for the airport. Free money for providing no service. Honestly, you’d be foolish not to do it.

We need this bill.
Whether Vector makes it easier or not doesn't change the fact that an airport you are using charges a fee for you to use it and, knowing the airport has a fee, instead of avoiding the airport you’re scheming to avoid paying to use the airport.
 
Whether Vector makes it easier or not doesn't change the fact that an airport you are using charges a fee for you to use it and, knowing the airport has a fee, instead of avoiding the airport you’re scheming to avoid paying to use the airport.
It's fairly common to not have any way of knowing there is a fee until the bill shows up.

Not to mention that prior notice or not, it's still inherently evil to charge a fee when literally no service is provided. IE: a go-around.
 
Whether Vector makes it easier or not doesn't change the fact that an airport you are using charges a fee for you to use it and, knowing the airport has a fee, instead of avoiding the airport you’re scheming to avoid paying to use the airport.
It's fairly common to not have any way of knowing there is a fee until the bill shows up.

Not to mention that prior notice or not, it's still inherently evil to charge a fee when literally no service is provided. IE: a go-around.

I’m struggling to think of an airport I have ever flown into where I could not have learned the landing fee prior to landing by calling the airport, but maybe they exist. Separately, your point about go-arounds is solid but, again, imho your choice to use the airport or not. Regardless, the spirit of the argument here is that we should not be subject to landing fees and we should be able to refuse to pay them
 
You've apparently not done a lot of flying into random larger airports. I've been lied to many times about fees, on websites, the phone, and even in person.
 
You've apparently not done a lot of flying into random larger airports. I've been lied to many times about fees, on websites, the phone, and even in person.

Get the address of the person that denied the existence of the fee and forward the bill (if it comes) to them.
 
Nah. . not at all. This year only been to smaller airports like KILG, KISM, KMVY, and KBED for the vector airports. Also fly in to KTEB, KBNA, KIAD, KMDW, KYIP, KJAX, KPDK, KOKC, KTUL and several others. All small and not very large airports. So I must not be familiar with the ones that you've been lied to. Maybe I need to up my game and fly in to some larger airports and expand my horizons. . .

and to be clear on the fees - almost every one of the FBO's has a sign that says or the staff will tell you that you'll be getting another bill from a 3rd party (usually vector) that will bill you directly and not through them. Its usually around a $3/1000 pounds type of landing fee.
How the hell is a sign in the FBO going to help me avoid the fee?
 
Same. I have always found them. I have never been surprised by a landing fee that I didnt know was coming.
I generally don't even bother to look. If I'm going to an airport... I'm going to that airport.

The times I do look is if I'm going to a "vacation" type airport. A lot of them charge a $10 landing fee, but then you might run across places like Montauk Airport (KMTP) that has a $40 landing fee and $45 overnight parking AND a $25 T&G fee. I thought there was also one up in the San Juan Islands (WA) that had a $25 landing fee, but for singles I'm only seeing a couple airports with $10 fees. But even with the fees, if I was going to any of these places, I'd probably eat the fee, so again I might not even bother looking.

And one other note about Vector and Montauk. There's a note that they use cameras, no reference to ADS-B. They easily could have changed by now, but it sounds like they bill you if they've got you on camera. Which is what I suggest anyone notifying Vector of an error in billing, just add into your email... "If you think I am in error and my plane did land at Kxxx, please forward me the picture of my aircraft on the ground." That should resolve any questions.
 
Clearly tells you one is coming and you wont be surprised. But the chart supplement indicates whether there is a landing fee or not. For most - its not that difficult to determine what it is.. . If you choose to be ignorant about it - well thats on you. As someone else also said - they also havent had an issue determining whether there was landing fees or finding them. So if it can be found and you arent finding it - perhaps it's your flight planning that is failing you and not the lack of existence of said information. . .

By the time you read the sign, you've already been charged the fee. I think that is what @Salty is saying.
 
How the hell is a sign in the FBO going to help me avoid the fee?
It's not and it is not the point of the sign. The sign is there to tell you "BTW... If you didn't bother looking to see if this airport has landing fees before you flew in, it does. So don't call up and yell at us when you get a bill in the mail." :D
 
absolutely. . but he is conveniently leaving off of where landing fee existence is OFFICIALLY documented, and his lack of flight planning to check it. You can argue all day that you didnt know about it beforehand and justify it because well, you didnt look very hard at finding it. . .
Works in theory, but I've run into situations where you call and are quoted one thing, then when you show up get hit with something else. I've been told about the ramp fee, but got hit with an extra security fee or landing fee from the airport, not the FBO.

Fee transparency is a major problem at some airports. There is no one stop answer to address them all.

Its also telling that Vector won't publish a list of airports that are its customers. They don't want you to know.
 
"It's fairly common to not have any way of knowing there is a fee until the bill shows up."

absolutely. . but he is conveniently leaving off of where landing fee existence is OFFICIALLY documented, and his lack of flight planning to check it. You can argue all day that you didnt know about it beforehand and justify it because well, you didnt look very hard at finding it BEFORE you landed. . . I made the comment because
By lack of flight planning you mean flying there ahead of time and reading all the signs? Seriously, you guys seem to be in a different wordl
 
absolutely. . but he is conveniently leaving off of where landing fee existence is OFFICIALLY documented, and his lack of flight planning to check it. You can argue all day that you didnt know about it beforehand and justify it because well, you didnt look very hard at finding it BEFORE you landed. . . I made the comment in response that he says its common to not have any way of knowing until the bill shows up.
Interesting. I just looked up in the "OFFICIAL" Chart supplement at the last few airports I got landing fees at. None are listed as having fees, but I still got them. Guess official ain't official.
 
By the time you read the sign, you've already been charged the fee. I think that is what @Salty is saying.
Yes, that's what he's saying.... But sorry, it's on Salty or anyone else that flies into an airport to research if there are landing fees or not. They've been around for DECADES at large and small airports alike. Now I'll give you that with new technology it makes it a lot easier to bill for those landing fees. HOWEVER, consider that a lot of smaller airports are running on a very tight margin, so they need every penny they can bring in. So if a company like Vector is smart enough to come up with a product that makes it feasible to start billing for landing fees when it was too expensive to have a staff member sitting there writing down N# and then processing each bill, that's what business is all about.

So sure, I'd prefer the various municipalities to bump up the local taxes a bit so that I didn't pay the landing fee and the revenue came from someone else. But I don't think that's going to fly in these days. You can't even get people to fund schools, so I can't see them funding the local airport. (Big airports are a different story and it is ALL about revenue, not fighting costs.)
 
Seriously - this took like 15 seconds. If this is your idea of lack of transparency because you cant find it. . . then I get it how he cant find it.

That lists the clients that vector bills for.

As for asking - calling makes it quite easy. Just ask for landing, ramp, overnight, and security fees. You can also inquie anything else. I've occasionally had ramp fees misquoted by the FBO, and most have honored it since I have recorded what they actually told me. But its never been an issue.

I can tell you, that list is very much new. It was only a couple of months ago someone on this board started creating their own excel file to track Vector clients because Vector wouldn't disclose it. I wonder if this is their attempt at transparency to keep Congress from shutting them down.
 
dont [sic] know and dont[sic] care. . but it does seem to point out and confirm that people fail to do the most basic and mundate [sic] of searches to find information which is unavailable.
 
Back
Top