Originally Posted by
happybiker
Cost sharing for PPL holders is permitted by the Regulations of EASA and the CAA who have published a guidance document CAP 1590 and, as discussed previously in this thread, it only applies to the direct operating costs of a flight. The pilot is required to make a contribution to the direct costs. As a result of this accident you imply that the CAA has in someway failed to effectively monitor activities within such operations. Considering that this flight was carried out by a USA registered aircraft from an airport in France I struggle to see how you could reach this conclusion. Regulators, including CAA, do not have unlimited resources and would not routinely monitor GA activities outside of their own State.
Where people are prepared to operate illegal flights that should be carried under an AOC the Regulators are somewhat at a disadvantage because of the need to gather objective evidence that will stand scrutiny in a Court or at an appeal hearing. In such cases the pilot and passengers are highly unlikely to act as witnesses and I would not think that passenger tickets are issued! Post # 842 articulates some of the issues.
It is incumbent on the regulatory authority to monitor and ensure compliance with the regulations with which it is entrusted. This particular incident raises the issue whether the CAA was effective in such measures it had in place to effectively carry out its remit. I believe it is more likely than not, this incident may lead to closer monitoring of private flights in light aircraft operated outside the strictures of AOC by the likes of PPL holders. This will involve seeking to inspect how "actual cost" has been ascertained.
Here is an extract from CAP1590:
5. EASA Ops includes a derogation at Article 6.4(a) that allows a flight that would otherwise be a CAT flight to be flown in accordance with the operating rules for non-commercial flights subject to specific conditions. The conditions are that: The flight is a cost-shared flight by private individuals; The actual direct costs of the flight must be shared between all the occupants of the aircraft, including the pilot, up to a maximum of 6 persons; and Only other-than complex motor-powered aircraft may be used. 6. Article 13 of the ANO also allows cost-sharing for what would other......
Note in particular " only other-than non complex motor-powered aircraft ". Its been some time since I have been around club flying, but if my memory serves me right I would have thought a PA46 would fall under the complex category.
Also it must be noted that the relaxation is by way of derogation, one always needs to be so careful with that sort of permission.