On offer:
1. A flight to France from England, single engine - any day, date, time, overnight, departure point, destination you require, IFR or VFR.
also on offer;
2. A flight to France from England, single engine - any day, date, time, overnight, departure point, destination you require, IFR or VFR.
One is Wingly (or facebook offer, flyer on the pub notice board, et all), the other is an illegal charter - which one is which ?????
That's the problem, the stable door is now open and the public do not have a clue what they are getting themselves into (I'm not being disrespectful). Even if you can find the line between a cost sharing flight and an illegal charter the temptation to over step is massive - because there is no oversight and 'what's the difference anyway' might be the attitude. However, the deviation from legal (safe, sensible) will continue to get bigger until we have significant, professional and emotional moments, one of which we "might" have had this week.
Like most things regarding EASA / EU I often think, "who dreamt that rule up" and "how do I get to speak to them to tell them they're nuts" - a few years ago I saw first hand what goes on with rule changes in EASA to the business benefit of those who effect/propose them. I was disgusted.
Who woke up one morning and thought, let's allow PPLs with 60-70 hours total time, 3 hours on type, who only have to chip in 1 euro cent or 1p, offer charter flights (that's what they are !!!) across international boundaries and large areas of water. WHO THOUGHT THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE? WHO DREAMT THIS UP? WHO PUSHED THIS THROUGH? WHO SIGNED IT OFF ? IT'S THE EU - WE'LL NEVER KNOW !!
By law EASA has to do an economic impact study on the effect of their rule making - there can be few people in aviation that could not have told them the effect of this rule change on AOCs, flying clubs etc. The "excuse" for this rule making, from the UK side at least, was to "stimulate" GA activity .... doh ..... did they ask anyone in the GA business community???
This rule making is fundamentally flawed - it was set out "categorically" as EQUAL cost sharing between friends and fellow pilots (copies available) - I did not respond to the associated consultation because I did not have a problem with that - as soon as the law was passed we then found ourselves in the present situation with some regulators doing a complete 180 in full support of the current situation - "it's legal" we were told, and as we all know, the second bit of that phrase is, "but that doesn't mean it's safe". It should be remembered that these cost sharing companies effectively employ the PPLs - n.b. if PPLs do not fly the flights and honour the gift vouchers sold by these companies then they have no business - profit out of the flight ? "Commercial pressure" on 60-70 hour PPLs ???
The genie needs to be put back in the bottle - this needs a legal challenge, a judicial review - if the EU allows that kind of thing !!!??!!