Bill Would Allow Online Flight Sharing

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Bill-Would-Allow-Online-Flight-Sharing-225082-1.html

Bill Would Allow Online Flight Sharing

By Russ Niles | October 27, 2015

As a Washington, D.C., court weighs the legality of posting flight sharing
offers online, an Arizona Republican has introduced a bill that would compel
the FAA to accept services like Flytenow. Flytenow, which hosted a website that
allowed pilots to post their planned flights so prospective passengers could
come along and pay a share of the expenses, was told by the FAA that their
website was illegal. It's legal for passengers in private aircraft to pay an
equitable share of the fuel and other expenses on a flight but the FAA said
opening that offer to the masses via a website wasn't legal. Flytenow sued the
FAA and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has heard both
sides of the story and is deliberating. If the Aviation Cost and Expenses
Sharing Act https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3593
gains traction, however, the decision might be moot.

David Schweikert, R-Ariz., introduced the bill a month ago and it's clearly
aimed at the FAA's interpretation of the current rules, which say that
passengers are allowed to chip in for expenses. The summary of the bill is as
follows: "This bill directs the Federal Aviation Administration to issue or
revise regulations to ensure that persons who hold a private pilot certificate
may communicate with the public in cases where operating expenses of the flight
are shared between the pilot and passengers." The FAA contends broadcasting
flight availability Uber-style is an abuse of the rule that allows passengers
to buy up to half the gas. Flytenow says the FAA needs to keep up with the
times. "It's OK for pilots to post a written notice at an airport or a college
campus with 10,000 students, but if they post the same message online, the FAA
says no. Where do you draw the line?" Matt Voska of San Francisco, a private
pilot and a cofounder of Flytenow, told the LA Times
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-commute-20151027-story.html.
"What we are doing is permissible."

On 10/31/2015 12:50 AM, Larry Dighera wrote:

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Bill-Would-Allow-Online-Flight-Sharing-225082-1.html

I like that idea but there should be an hours flown restriction just
to keep PPL's as PPl's

Hello George,

It sort of smacks of Uber, the ride sharing Internet service that is exploiting
a questionable workaround traditional taxi service. I can see where this
flight sharing idea could morph into such a thing, on the one hand.

On the other hand, I see no legal reason to restrict communication between a
pilot announcing that he is planning a flight and those who might care to ride
along and share the operating costs (as opposed to the fixed costs like
insurance, maintenance and inspections, and hangar rent). Of course, the FAA
over here has long prohibited any pilot, not employed under a Part 235 or Part
121 operation from "holding out" his services to the public. Fine line...

It would seem to me, that any pilot desiring to have a passenger accompany him
on any flight would at some point have to make his flight intentions known to
prospective passengers. I guess its the difference between conveying the
opportunity to become a passenger privately through verbal or pen-on-paper
written communication, and employing a "broadcast" medium such as the Internet
or newspaper etc...

If the bill passes, it will likely foster a revival in private general aviation
operations, and reverse the current spiral to oblivion all the government,
military, and monied interests are working hard to precipitate, IMNSHO.

Given our dysfunctional Congress, and the influence of our "fourth branch of
government," lobbyists, my crystal ball doesn't show the bill passing in my
lifetime. But, like quad-copter drones, recreational cannabis sales, and the
alternative taxi system, it could become such a burgeoning onslaught, that
resistance is futile, and government will once again have to accede to the will
of the people.

How do you see it?

Larry


On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 07:07:20 +1200, george152 wrote:

On 10/31/2015 12:50 AM, Larry Dighera wrote:

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Bill-Would-Allow-Online-Flight-Sharing-225082-1.html

I like that idea but there should be an hours flown restriction just
to keep PPL's as PPl's

On 11/1/2015 3:16 AM, Larry Dighera wrote:

Hello George,

It sort of smacks of Uber, the ride sharing Internet service that is exploiting
a questionable workaround traditional taxi service. I can see where this
flight sharing idea could morph into such a thing, on the one hand.

If the bill passes, it will likely foster a revival in private general aviation
operations, and reverse the current spiral to oblivion all the government,
military, and monied interests are working hard to precipitate, IMNSHO.

Given our dysfunctional Congress, and the influence of our "fourth branch of
government," lobbyists, my crystal ball doesn't show the bill passing in my
lifetime. But, like quad-copter drones, recreational cannabis sales, and the
alternative taxi system, it could become such a burgeoning onslaught, that
resistance is futile, and government will once again have to accede to the will
of the people.

How do you see it?

Larry
As a NZ PPL I sometimes went somewhere with a few mates who put a few
bob in the kitty.Nowadays there is very little GA around.
Nowadays the sound of a light aircraft is rare.
This could be the birth of an aviation Renaissance
A couple of us were contemplating getting Chemical Ratings so we could
use (at the time) a PA18 on family farms for spraying and topdressing.
You can do so as a PPL and as we both wore glasses that was our limit.
And you get on an aircraft now and one or both pilots are wearing glasses.
Common sense and only 50 years to late !