Ride sharing service - for GA

[daxwax]

I thought this was a very interesting new service from the US.

Uber for fliers lets anyone catch a ride in a small plane | Springwise (http://www.springwise.com/uber-fliers-lets-catch-ride-small-plane/)

So (here we go.....) if as a pilot you were making the trip anyway and the passenger only paid half the cost would this be legal in the UK?

Is it any different from saying on a forum, "I'm off to x destination - anyone want to come along for the ride? Would appreciate contribution towards costs."

Tin hat on.

Shall I start a separate thread about insurance implications......?

[wb9999]

In the UK (I don't know about the US), definitely 'No'.

You're not allowed to advertise the flight publicly (except for in a flying club premises) - so no Social Media or web advertising (including forums) of spare seats if you want to share costs.

From the ANO regarding cost sharing of private flights:

(a) no more than four persons (including the pilot) are carried;
(b) the proportion which the contribution referred to in paragraph (2)(c) bears to the
direct costs is not more than the proportion which the number of persons carried
on the flight (excluding the pilot) bears to the number of persons carried (including
the pilot);
(c) no information has been published or advertised before the commencement of
the flight other than, in the case of an aircraft operated by a flying club, advertising
wholly within the premises of such a flying club in which case all the persons
carried on such a flight who are aged 18 years or over must be members of that
flying club;

Otherwise, it's a public transport flight.

[Rhino25782]

The "flying club" limitation, as far as I know, is a UK-specific limitation. I have never heard of this anywhere else. I'd be happy (not really) to be proven wrong though - anyone knows anything?

How does this limitation apply?

Does it apply to a pilot with a non-UK license, say, EASA PPL from Germany who is flying in UK and cost sharing after having invited some friends on Facebook?

Does it apply to a pilot with a UK CAA-issued EASA PPL who is flying in, say, Germany and cost sharing after having invited some friends on Facebook?

Can Facebook actually be considered public? Only the pilot's friends can see the invitation - it's as if he'd phoned them all and asked them if they wanted to join, isn't it?

[Whopity]

How does this limitation apply?
It applies to a G registered aircraft wherever it may be. Non G reg aircraft operating in the UK are subject to Art 223.
Is it any different from saying on a forum, "I'm off to x destination - anyone want to come along for the ride?
Yes, it is not wholly within the premises of a flying club therefore; if you carry passengers, invited this way, you cannot cost share with them under the exception granted in Art 267!

[MrAverage]

You almost answered your own questions.

German PPL flying in the UK flies under UK rules, at least when in G-REG, in to or from the UK.

Other EASA Authorities may have different rules.

wb9999 answered your question about facebook already:

"advertising wholly within the premises of such a flying club"

[MrAverage]

Sorry Whopity, you just beat me to it.

Rhino25782

Be very careful with cost sharing!

[mad_jock]

I think I saw somewhere possibly by BEagle that there is a change to go through which turns the British rules on the subject on there head.

It was going to allow PPL's to do air experience flights and the like without an instructor rating for paying punters.

Its in committee stage or something with EASA.

[Good Business Sense]

PPL's to do air experience flights and the like without an instructor rating for paying punters.

There are probably a score or more AOC holders who would immediately dump the AOC in that case ..... interesting though... if that was allowed, it seems that you would need far more licensing to drive a minibus or a taxi than carrying the paying public in an aircraft. A punter would be the "paying public"

Frightening really - after we parked the jet we always thought that the ride to the hotel was the most dangerous part of the day (and it often proved it was) .... would anyone really let their family, dog, relatives or friends jump in to an aircraft with an unknown PPL ???

[mad_jock]

http://www.pprune.org/flying-instructors-examiners/535510-becoming-instructor-advice.html#post8380195


(13) Commission Regulation (EU) 965/2012 allows certain flights such as cost-sharing flights and introductory flights to be performed in accordance with the rules applicable to non-commercial operations of non-complex aircraft. There is, therefore, a need to ensure that the privileges of pilots established in Regulation (EU) 1178/2011 are consistent with this approach.

(14) Therefore, it should be allowed to have flights of those categories identified in Regulation (EU) 965/2012 to be piloted by PPL, SPL, BPL or LAPL holders.

(15) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the Opinion of the European Aviation Safety Agency Committee established by Article 65 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008

(16) Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 should therefore be amended accordingly.



This is it

[Good Business Sense]

Thanks MJ

introductory flights to be performed in accordance with the rules applicable to non-commercial operations

Maybe my English interpretation has gone to zero but the phrase above is a contradiction - how can you take payment from joe public for a "flight" and for it not be a commercial operation ?

However, recently I was bidding for an EU contract based in a country that starts with I and ends in Y (5 letters) and the individual who was administering (in the same way that Rob Roy used to assist the drovers to market) the contract was more than happy to have a private aircraft flown by a PPL serviced by the local Fiat garage ... and he made no secret of it.

... on the same vein - a new EU driver's license called a CPC is now required for commercial driving. As I discussed if with a friend we ended up laughing as we thought about how our EU neighbours will approach that legislation .... but, hey, you don't need anything special to fly the public !!


:}:}:}:):):)

[thing]

However, recently I was bidding for an EU contract based in a country that starts with M and ends in A, five letters

Edited for accuracy...:)

[mad_jock]

It is normal ops in some EASA country's for PPL's to do this sort of flight and for the club to be paid for it I believe.

[Piper.Classique]

Mad jock that is correct for France, yes. 200 hours P1, 30 hours in the last twelve months, medical less than twelve months ago, Instructor approval every year and limited to I think 8 percent of the Club's total activity.

Flight of not more than thirty minutes, 40 Nm max from base, no land aways

[Katamarino]

In the UK (I don't know about the US), definitely 'No'.

You're not allowed to advertise the flight publicly (except for in a flying club premises) - so no Social Media or web advertising (including forums) of spare seats if you want to share costs.

Are you suggesting, then, that the "spare seats" sticky at the top of this very forum is illegal?

[wb9999]

Katamarino, advertising spare seats is fine. But if you want to share costs then no.

[mad_jock]

If the post was plane and pilot available at egxx for cost sharing flight.

Yes it would.

If it was I have two seats available sunday for a burger run from egyy if you fancy coming along.

It would be fine.

People asking if there is any seats going and that they are will to chip in is also fine

[swflyer]

Question.

The ANO states.... the flight has not been publicised in any way except within the premises of a flying club (in which case all the adult persons being carried in the aircraft must be members of that flying club).

It doesn't say the `physical` premises though? So, if you set up a flying club online with a specific membership joining process, even with membership fees if that would make it more formal, then what is stopping you publicising within that `online club`?

In a previous thread, someone raised the issue that the CAA are just worried about people flying as passengers who do not realise the risks but if you had an online club where each member was a PPL (perhaps they had to enter their license number), then surely they would have a tough job in court arguing that they were not aware of the training requirements of a PPL, if it came to that.

I understand the ethos behind the CAA rules of keeping people safe and no one can criticise that, but what is stopping an online club being set up which publicises flight shares amongst registered pilots in an organised fashion rather than in the under the radar way, which I suspect many people are doing right now.

It does seem that at this time of lost airfields and GA in serious decline, that we need to use technology to revitalise our hobby.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The "flying club" limitation
Reads like a relaxation to me, not a limitation.

The limitation is "no advertising". But there's a relaxation for flying clubs.

[Mach Jump]

Cost sharing can now be between up to 6 people, and the 'shares' no longer have to be proportional. Also, the requirement that such flights must only be advertised within a 'Flying Club' has been dropped.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2014093.pdf



MJ:ok:

[swflyer]

That changes everything!

At last we can legally tell our friends, providing we are flying a non-complex aircraft?

I saw this site in America the other day and thought what a great idea. World Aero Club - The global General Aviation network for flight sharing, aero clubs, aviators and pilot information exchange. (http://worldaeroclub.org/)

With that new update this goes from illegal to legal right (providing it's non-complex)?

[Fostex]

It was going to allow PPL's to do air experience flights and the like without an instructor rating for paying puntersThere was an article in a recent Flight Training newspaper that suggested that this was Annex II only. Reading the document ( http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2014093.pdf ) there is no mention of only applying to Annex II.

Currently having a debate about this so would appreciate another opinion. :ok:

If allowed on EASA aircraft it offers a cheap hour building route for PPLs heading to CPL and the option for clubs and schools to not have to fund instructors to fly in a non-instructional role.

[Level Attitude]

offers a cheap hour building route for PPLs heading to CPLI seriously doubt that.
Why would an ATO (or other organisation) allow low hour pilots to conduct Air Experience Flights for the limited (by the regulation) number of their paying customers?

schools to not have to fund instructors to fly in a non-instructional roleInstructors will only be at ATOs. Air Experience (non-Instructional) flights will be so few and far between (as required by the regulation) that it will make no difference.