Air experience vs Trial lesson

[Whopity]

I am unclear what the current situation is with EASA, and pax on training flights

The only significant difference is in Part NCO

NCO.OP.180 Simulated situations in flight
(a) The pilot-in-command shall, when carrying passengers or cargo, not simulate:
(1) situations that require the application of abnormal or emergency procedures; or
(2) flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).
(b) Notwithstanding (a), when training flights are conducted by an approved training organisation, such situations may be simulated with student pilots on-board.

[Pittsextra]

Quote:
Any profit made from the flights are kept within the organisation
So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc., as surely these companies are profiting also?

So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc.
If they are operated as 'introductory flights' under NCO.GEN.103, they are illegal and, probably, uninsured.

aren't we confusing introductory flights with an FI v PPL here?

[Whopity]

aren't we confusing introductory flights with an FI v PPL here?

There are 3 separate areas:
1. Flying Lessons flown by a FI of which Ex3 is Air Experience
2. Introductory Flights conducted in accordance with NCO.GEN.103 which includes specific requirements of the operator and;
3. Cost sharing which allows licence holders to share costs with passengers

All quite different, but confused by the CAA issuing an IN that groups Introductory Flights and Cost Sharing together. Some organisations have incorrectly assumed that Introductory Flights and "Trial Lessons" are the same thing.

With no enforcement action, nothing will happen until the first accident occurs and the CAA is found negligent again.

[Homsap]

Or more likely the pilot will get blamed, because as we know the CAA can never be wrong!

[Whopity]

because as we know the CAA can never be wrong!

Try reading the Shoreham report!