Here is the new (to me) Ercoupe in its “home” for a while. GED is fairly close to our home and is far enough inland that salt air should not be a problem. I like Ocean City Airport and used to keep my former ‘Coupe in a hangar there – but there is now a very long waiting list for hangars, and I didn’t want to tie down on a ramp so close to the Atlantic Ocean. Here at, Delaware Coastal Airport the airplane is 15 miles from the ocean and will stay a lot cleaner and not be subject to the corrosive salt air.
ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast) billing by Vector and PLANEPASS® for landing fees at General Aviation airports has sparked significant debate.
Picture this:
You’re cruising in your trusty Ercoupe (Cessna, Piper, etc.), enjoying the panoramic view of fluffy clouds and endless blue skies, when suddenly, your wallet starts feeling lighter. Why? Because the ADS-B system, originally a knight in shining armor for aviation safety, has taken on a side gig as a tax collector. With Vector Airport Systems and PlanePass® tracking every move like a nosy neighbor, landing at a general aviation airport now feels like pulling into a toll booth.
Ercoupe with canopy open. “Hold onto your hat!”
Now, don’t get me wrong, I love technology as much as the next pilot. But when my plane’s ADS-B system starts doubling as an accountant without my consent, I start to wonder if it’s time to install curtains in the cockpit. These landing fees feel less like a contribution to aviation safety and more like an impromptu donation to the “Sky Tax Fund.” As pilots, we signed up for the freedom of flight, not a surprise subscription service where you pay per descent!
And let’s not even talk about the paperwork! It’s like Victor and PainPass are trying out for roles in a bureaucratic thriller. Landing fees are tallied with such precision that you’d think they’re calculating the trajectory for a Mars mission. So, while ADS-B was meant to be our guardian angel in the sky, it seems it’s also moonlighting as an overzealous bean counter. Next time I touch down, I might just hand over my credit card alongside my pilot’s license!
What Vector and PlanePass® aspire to do…
ADS-B billing for landing fees at General Aviation airports is revolutionizing the way pilots and airport authorities manage their financial transactions. Traditionally, calculating landing fees has been a manual, time-consuming process prone to errors. However, with the integration of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) technology, airports can now automate this process with precision. By leveraging ADSB data, systems like Vector’s PLANEPASS® provide real-time tracking of aircraft movements, ensuring accurate billing based on actual use rather than estimates or outdated data.
UavioniX ADS-B “tail beacon” unit on 1946 Ercoupe – at an installed cost of $3,000+/- for safety in flight.
From the Vector US website: PLANEPASS® is Vector’s turn-key, automated, full-service, and completely non-contact aircraft fee billing and collection solution.
This technological advancement not only streamlines operations but also enhances transparency and fairness in fee assessment. Pilots and operators using PlanePass®, for example, can access detailed reports of their flight activities and associated costs directly from their devices. This level of insight empowers them to optimize flight plans and budgets more effectively. Meanwhile, airports benefit from reduced administrative burdens and improved revenue assurance. As the aviation industry continues to embrace digital solutions, ADSB billing is poised to set a new standard for efficiency and accuracy in financial transactions at General Aviation airports.
What it really does…
The introduction of ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast) billing for landing fees at General Aviation airports has sparked significant debate. While the ADS-B system was initially designed to enhance safety by providing more accurate and comprehensive surveillance data, its use as a financial tool raises concerns. This shift from safety to revenue generation can potentially undermine trust in aviation technologies, as pilots and operators may perceive it as a vector for additional costs rather than a facilitator of safer skies. This new application may inadvertently create barriers for smaller operators who rely on cost-effective solutions to sustain their operations.
Moreover, relying on ADS-B for financial purposes could lead to a disparity in access to airspace, where operators with deeper pockets might enjoy preferential treatment or enhanced services through programs like PlanePass®. Such developments could skew the playing field, diminishing the egalitarian ethos that has long been a hallmark of general aviation. It risks transforming what should be a universal safety measure into an exclusive tool that caters only to those who can afford it, thereby compromising the original intent of ADS-B deployment.
Furthermore, this monetization could deter participation in the ADS-B program altogether. General Aviation pilots might resist adopting the technology if they perceive it as a vehicle for increased operational expenses rather than a safety enhancement. This resistance could ultimately detract from the broader safety benefits that ADS-B was intended to deliver, undermining its effectiveness as a critical component of modern air traffic management. To maintain the integrity of the system, it’s essential to strike a balance that prioritizes safety while ensuring equitable access and preventing financial exploitation.
Here’s a look at what the pilot sees and uses to operate this 1946 airplane.
Step right up, folks, and feast your eyes on the cockpit of a vintage 1946 Ercoupe aircraft! This flying time capsule is decked out with all the bells and whistles—or should I say dials and gauges—of yesteryear. It’s like stepping into a retro sci-fi movie where the navigation instruments are proudly analog, and digital hasn’t even been born yet.
Picture this: an aged panel that looks like it moonlights as a character in a steampunk novel. It’s got more knobs and switches than a mad scientist’s lab, and each one serves a purpose, or at least seems to. The altimeter ticks away, determined to let you know if you’re soaring above the clouds or just barely skimming the treetops. And let’s not forget the airspeed indicator, which seems to have its own sense of humor—sometimes it feels like it’s mocking you as you crawl through the sky at a snail’s pace.
Now, behold the pièce de résistance: two large steering yokes that could double as the handlebars of a retro motorcycle. These bad boys are front and center, ready to help you navigate the friendly skies—or at least attempt to without getting hopelessly lost. They’re so prominent you’d think they were auditioning for a lead role in an aviation-themed Broadway show.
In this cockpit, every flight is an adventure through history. You’re not just flying; you’re time traveling back to an era when pilots were rugged adventurers and “GPS” was just a random jumble of letters. So, buckle up, adjust those goggles, and enjoy the ride through the whimsical world of vintage aviation!
Vintage 1946 Ercoupe Instrument Panel
List of instruments/gauges/controls: altimeter, artificial horizon, tachometer, asi, airspeed indicator, knots, mph, compass, turn and bank, card compass, clock, oil pressure, ammeter, vacuum gauge, switches, circuit breakers, radio, transponder, throttle, mixture, carburetor heat, yoke, fuel valve, cht, cylinder head temperature, primer
As you gaze at this cockpit, you can’t help but feel a warm sense of history. The gentle hum of the aircraft and the visual feedback from these classic instruments create an immersive experience. It’s a delightful reminder of how far aviation technology has come, while still appreciating the beauty of its roots.
A BFR from times past is a great reminiscence of flying the ‘Coupe.
Last Thursday I learned more about flying my own airplane – during my Biennial Flight Review (BFR). While a Flight Review (shorter, current terminology) is NOT a test with a pass/fail result, the Certified Flight Instructor (CFI) needs to feel confident of the pilot’s competency before endorsing that pilot’s (in this case, my) log book. The FR endorsement enables a pilot to continue flying for two more years.
I scheduled my flight review with an instructor from the airport where I used to base my Ercoupe. I was confident of his capabilities because I had some instruction from him in the past (and he and I both had former careers in public education). He also wanted to experience flying in a 1946 vintage Ercoupe.
My CFI poses with my Ercoupe at the start of my flight review.
I had to fly 110 miles (in a strong headwind) to get to Harford County Airport (0W3) and landed on their (relatively) short 2000′ runway in a strong, gusty crosswind. Unknown to me, the CFI was standing near the runway waiting for one of his students to return after a short XC flight. As I was parking on the ramp he drove up and complimented my landing (which I, fortunately, greased) by saying that it was a great landing and “I should sign your logbook right now.” Kidding, of course – but that did indicate a good start to my Flight Review experience.
We went inside the FBO to the training room and he got me started on the “ground work” while he finished up with his student. (The “ground” portion of the flight review will be another tale.)
So, on with the “air” portion of the review. The ground portion took a bit over an hour and the winds were calming a little – down to 12G17. But it was still a direct crosswind so I suggested we head 25 miles east to Summit Airport (EVY) for the landings because the runway there is twice as long as at Harford County. I felt at ease staying at 0W3 but I knew he wanted to try a couple of landings. We agreed we could cover the air maneuvers on the way to Summit.
The CFI called for his own WX briefing as we get ready for the air portion of my Flight Review.
On the way to Summit we climbed to 2500′ for some stalls (or lack thereof – because it’s an Ercoupe). I demoed a couple of stalls – then gave the plane to the CFI. He was surprised at the lack of a real “break” and the ability to control the plane with full back yoke and no power – just a 1200 fpm downward “mush.” The ease of recovery, by just releasing back pressure and pointing the nose down a bit put us in a respecable glide. After the series of stalls he was surprised that we only used/lost 500 feet of altitude. I remember telling him, “Only in an Ercoupe.”
Landings were also fun. He had observed my “arrival,” the flying of a rectangular pattern and a “greaser” landing in a gusty crosswind situation. That covered my “ground reference and crosswind landings” – so I asked if he was ready to shoot a couple landings. Silly question – he loves to fly – and he loves small planes, especially the FBO’s Citabria – and here was a chance to fly a plane WITHOUT RUDDER PEDALS and LAND IN A CROSSWIND. All I needed to do was “coach” the technique. Fortunately, he trusted me when I told him about touching down in a “crab” – and his first landing was excellent. (But I did see his feet “dancing” just a bit – heh.)
I then demonstrated some Ercoupe idiosyncrasies that allow it to land in a variety of conditions. I culminated with a high approach and s-turning to lose altitude (no flaps and unable to slip) – hit the runway – did a T&G – and headed back to 0W3. The CFI already saw me land on 28 in a crosswind so I had him do the same – with just a bit of coaching.
We flew for only a little over an hour and did nearly all the manuevers in a Private Pilot PTS without having to repeat any. We did NOT cover navigation because the CFI knew I was VERY familiar with the area and had already flown 110 miles to “get here.” I had shown him my DUATS briefing (I’m a DUATS junkie and always take a screen shot of the first screen as a CYA measure.)
So…how did I actually “learn” during this Flight Review when all I had to do was demonstrate proficiency with my aircraft? I had to think through and explain, aloud, many of the maneuvers to the CFI when he was on the controls. Things like steep turns and turns about a point (gorund reference) are straighforward – but stalls, the landing process and takeoffs are all a bit “different.” I had to translate my muscle-memory habits into descriptive language and, thereforre, had to self-analyze what I actually “do” to fly the plane. I figure that taught me a bit more about my own aircraft than what I would otherwise gain from just demonstrating maneuvers.
It was a good flight, a successful Flight Review, we both learned, and it was fun.
