If you are sticking to straight Canon lenses, I would stick to the f/4, save yourself the money on the IS and the f/2.8 if you prefer to stick to ground shots. Even on the f/4, you will still get crisp and clean shots for day aerial work. Most aerial/plane photographers are doing day shots with good light and a fair amount of warning time to worry about lighting/position when at an airport. At under $649 US, it is a bargain too.
I spent the extra on a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II because I knew that I would be looking at a FF + extender in the next two years, my shots would be focused on fast action and some early morning/night action shots without a tripod. I haven't regretted it, the lens is as sharp as a razor and it performs at every level. The weight was a significant deterrent for me, but aside from a sore neck, I don't find the weight on my APS-C 450D to be unreasonable for the quality I get.
I agree with the others though, the range isn't good enough, even on an APS-C for solid and very compact looking aerial work. I would look at the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS, if you are not planning on upgrading the body at any point in the next three years to a FF or getting an extender. The crop would equate to a 480mm on an APS-C 500D. It has good range, has a newer design, the 67mm filters are cheaper, it is a solid performer and it is lighter and much smaller (good for travel!) than its 100-400mm companion. The drawbacks are good to look at though if you are planning on upgrades. I will probably pick it up as a general and much lighter alternative for non-technical shots and daily walk around to my 70-200.