Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

Dodgy or legit?

Old 27th Apr 2017, 22:48
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 40
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jonzarno View Post
This has already been widely discussed. Cost sharing is permitted in CAA and EASA land. The only debate here is about the channel that puts pilots and riders in touch with each other:

Is a friend from the flying club OK? (If I meet someone from my flying club in the bar and we agree to fly to L2K together and share the costs, why is that different from the same friend seeing that I'm planning to do the flight on Wingly and deciding to join me?).

A non pilot friend?

A friend of a non pilot friend?

Someone you meet at the pub?

Someone who answers a Wingly or Skyuber post?

As things stand, all of the above are OK PROVIDED:

1. The pilot was going to a destination anyway and all those cost sharing are just "along for the ride".

2. The costs are shared according to CAA / EASA rules

Most of the criticisms of this are based on the possibility that someone MIGHT break the rules. Well, if they do, they should be hauled over the coals for doing so.

But if they have followed the rules, which are quite clear, there should not be any problem.
in reference to your point 1.....
1. The pilot was going to a destination anyway and all those cost sharing are just "along for the ride"

https://en.wingly.io/index.php?page=...b_page=request
JumpJumpJump is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 22:53
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense View Post
The conversion rate is close to zero - survival of most schools is due to the selling of "experience flights" as gifts at Christmas - and that's a fact. Indeed, until recently 40% of people never used their gifts - the percentage has lowered over the last few years .......

and, of course, that is where wingly will do very well, thank you very much !!! They'll pocket the service charge AND the money on unused gifts. Of course, pre wingly, the flying club would have benefited in this way .... generally, to GAs benefit too.
Well I suppose I must have been the difference between "close to zero" and zero!

I still don't see how providing a mechanism for pilots and riders to share costs kills this part of the business. I would have thought it is more likely to grow it as people having done a GA flight using one of these mechanisms might well decide to take a closer look themselves.

As a point of detail: Wingly / Skyuber don't "Pocket the money on unused gifts": they never see that money. Also: are you suggesting that people not cashing in their experience flight vouchers is really good for GA?
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 23:02
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 40
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a point of detail: Wingly / Skyuber don't "Pocket the money on unused gifts": they never see that money. Also: are you suggesting that people not cashing in their experience flight vouchers is really good for GA?
.... from their site....

You will receive the gift card immediately after checkout via mail and via Wingly notifications.
The card is valid for one (1) year, and can be used by any Wingly user until its credit is depleted. This means the card does not necessarily have to be spent on only one flight.
If the price of the flight exceeds the gift’s value, you’ll simply be asked to pay for the difference.
Wingly gift cards are non-refundable. Once bought, the cards could only be used on our platform.

FYI - Flight vouchers do not make their money on flights that are completed, the main bulk of the revenue comes from vouchers that are forfeited due to expiring. Expired vouchers are normally honoured, but only after a reactivation fee is paid, which comes at a price well over inflation.
JumpJumpJump is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 23:26
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jonzarno

Originally Posted by Jonzarno View Post
Well I suppose I must have been the difference between "close to zero" and zero!

I still don't see how providing a mechanism for pilots and riders to share costs kills this part of the business. I would have thought it is more likely to grow it as people having done a GA flight using one of these mechanisms might well decide to take a closer look themselves.

As a point of detail: Wingly / Skyuber don't "Pocket the money on unused gifts": they never see that money. Also: are you suggesting that people not cashing in their experience flight vouchers is really good for GA?
Don't know if you are in this business - for my sins I am.

Why would the wingly method grow the student pilot numbers when trial flights and experience gift vouchers sold by a club don't - that's illogical !

When the public comes around to buying a gift voucher for a ride in an aeroplane they generally look for the cheapest price - wingly is substantially below the prices charged by clubs etc and therefore, wingly has the potential to destroy that income.

You stated categorically that wingly doesn't pocket the money. Are you suggesting that after a year and if the gift voucher has not been used wingly gives the purchaser their money back ? The entire experience industry works in this way.

and, yes it is good for clubs that people don't take up their flights - it's certainly not bad. Ask the flying club you learnt at how they get through the winter cash flow wise.
Good Business Sense is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 23:27
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: holding short of....
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just sharing a thought...
I have been following this thread and is quite interesting to see all the different opinion.

I remember the first days of PPL and how longs were those hours when I was building them... taking people who were splitting the cost with me was something common... but they were someone I knew, or knew someone I already knew. It was like having a bit of O2 in my budget.

Once my Aeroclub (back then) got a C172 stolen, two nice passengers requested to be dropped at a nearby city but all of the sudden there was a mid point unplanned landing in a disused runway with a gun in the head, the pilot was invited to disembark and the nice passengers took the plane. Bye bye... Luckily the pilot walked his way unharmed to a nearby town.

My point is that aside of the legal issue there is another big issue, the safety factor.

I would never take a stranger without proper security screening of himself and the belongings... Is this person carrying a gun, a bag of cash, a bag of illegal drugs? A bag of knives?... Why would you risk your life for something unsafe or dodgy? Why would you take off from an isolated airfield-aeroclub with someone you never met before?

Second, why would you pressure yourself on a get-there-itis situation when you should be focusing only in building hours and gaining experience?.

It is a wonderful thing to help new PPLs build their experience... I like wingly for that, however I expect the CAA or EASA to be a bit more firm.
Airgus is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 23:42
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You stated categorically that wingly doesn't pocket the money
Sorry, but I obviously don't know the detail of the Wingly operation as well as you do: my experience is with Skyuber. If Wingly really are offering "blank cheque" flights for money as I understand you to be implying, then I agree that is wrong and illegal.

The ONLY thing these sites should be offering is the availability of a cost sharing ride on an existing flight. If that is all they do, it is perfectly legitimate; if not, it isn't.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2017, 23:45
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 40
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Airgus View Post
Just sharing a thought...
I have been following this thread and is quite interesting to see all the different opinion.

I remember the first days of PPL and how longs were those hours when I was building them... taking people who were splitting the cost with me was something common... but they were someone I knew, or knew someone I already knew. It was like having a bit of O2 in my budget.

Once my Aeroclub (back then) got a C172 stolen, two nice passengers requested to be dropped at a nearby city but all of the sudden there was a mid point unplanned landing in a disused runway with a gun in the head, the pilot was invited to disembark and the nice passengers took the plane. Bye bye... Luckily the pilot walked his way unharmed to a nearby town.

My point is that aside of the legal issue there is another big issue, the safety factor.

I would never take a stranger without proper security screening of himself and the belongings... Is this person carrying a gun, a bag of cash, a bag of illegal drugs? A bag of knives?... Why would you risk your life for something unsafe or dodgy? Why would you take off from an isolated airfield-aeroclub with someone you never met before?

Second, why would you pressure yourself on a get-there-itis situation when you should be focusing only in building hours and gaining experience?.

It is a wonderful thing to help new PPLs build their experience... I like wingly for that, however I expect the CAA or EASA to be a bit more firm.
This is a concern that I have been holding with the flights that leave the UK to go to the continent

Originally Posted by Jonzarno View Post
Sorry, but I obviously don't know the detail of the Wingly operation as well as you do: my experience is with Skyuber. If Wingly really are offering "blank cheque" flights for money as I understand you to be implying, then I agree that is wrong and illegal.

The ONLY thing these sites should be offering is the availability of a cost sharing ride on an existing flight. If that is all they do, it is perfectly legitimate; if not, it isn't.

no insinuation.... https://en.wingly.io/index.php?page=shop&sub_page=gift
JumpJumpJump is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 07:19
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JumpJumpJump View Post
I hadn't seen that. I agree: it does look to me as if it crosses the line.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 08:31
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 45
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have been arguing against this in reference only to the website wingly. I have now looked at SkyUber and that seems to be much more in line with the cost sharing scenario in its rightful sense.

Wingly however offers sightseeing flights at a time and date to suit and also has the function to request flights where pilots can then take up the offer. This seems to be asking for the rules to be broken.
Prophead is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 10:18
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some things on Wingly, I admit, are a little bit tenuous (possibly not the right word)...

I've just seen this flight request:
Not sure about this as it's my first time but if possible, 4 people or 2, 4 @ max 460kg or 2 @ 230kg Midlands area to Munich area, last 2 weeks of September quote and additionally a quote for same journey but last two weeks of April 2018. Best route possible

This is asking for two quotes for a flight, and that isn't what Wingly is to be used for. However, I believe the majority of the flight requests are OK.

For example,
Flight for one requested with one carry on hold-all (less than 95kg together) from Manchester to anywhere in Kent, as close as possible to the Tonbridge area, ideally Laddingford Aerodome. Departing any time on either the Sunday 7th May or Monday 8th May. Many Thanks!

Now, as a pilot, I may not have any planned flights coming up, and I don't particularly want to post a flight on Wingly as I have nowhere to go, but I do have family in Kent, and I live in Manchester. Now that I've seen that someone else wants to go, maybe I could plan a trip to see my family, and take this person along too as they're willing to split costs. Makes perfect sense.
tobster911 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 12:34
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tobster911 View Post
For example,
Flight for one requested with one carry on hold-all (less than 95kg together) from Manchester to anywhere in Kent, as close as possible to the Tonbridge area, ideally Laddingford Aerodome. Departing any time on either the Sunday 7th May or Monday 8th May. Many Thanks!

Now, as a pilot, I may not have any planned flights coming up, and I don't particularly want to post a flight on Wingly as I have nowhere to go, but I do have family in Kent, and I live in Manchester. Now that I've seen that someone else wants to go, maybe I could plan a trip to see my family, and take this person along too as they're willing to split costs. Makes perfect sense.
But you see? This request is problematic already... OK, you have a legitimate reason to wish to fly to Kent. Fine. BUT - a low hour PPL attempting to go into Laddingford? THAT is the first step to an accident waiting to happen. Laddingford isn't an aerodrome, it is an airstrip. Airstrips have all sorts of dangers waiting to catch out the inexperienced pilot. Be it high power lines on final, a substantial amount of sink / wind shear on short final due to local topography...etc... High trees at the end of the runway... Dogs running on the runway... Noise sensitive areas to avoid... etc.. This may make what appeared from the comfort of your chair to be a suitable airstrip such as Laddingford with 750m grass, which originally seemed perfectly within your C152/172/PA28 performance charts, become completely un-usable and actually quite dangerous!

I am pretty sure that it states clearly on the charts that Laddingford must be used by experienced pilots only, due to all these issues.

I am not against these services, I understand their purpose, but I think that their legality is occasionally on the dubious side. Be very wary!

(my 2 cents)
alex90 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 12:46
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good point, the only place I vaguely know in Kent is Rochford (and it is very vague). I'd never be comfortable flying with a passenger to a place I don't know. I see what you mean though, there's a great deal of blurred lines when it comes to what is legal and what isn't when using this kind of service.
tobster911 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 14:51
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whilst I can see there's a place for the pilots to advertise and offer up seats on a flight they have already planned or have in mind surely once pax start asking for someone to take them from defined point A to defined point B wingly are acting as a de facto provider/facilitator of an air taxi or charter service?
wiggy is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 17:28
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess that the information age is changing everything, including how people perceive "compensating" a private flight. The notion of a couple of people meeting in the airport coffee shop, and deciding that one may fly with the other, and compensate the flight seemed okay with everyone - it's "innocent". The regulator (who acts on behalf of society) agreed, and ruled to allow it.

Now, in the information age, the opportunity for mass communication enables immense variation on this historically simple theme, and grossly exploits the original intent. And then some new pilots think it's okay. It's not.

wingly is substantially below the prices charged by clubs etc and therefore, wingly has the potential to destroy that income.
Yeah, 'cause it is eroding the compensation to the club, mostly in the role of their properly qualified and licensed pilots (principally instructors). New renting PPL's, who are trying to "build time", are actually undermining their colleagues who have earned the right to charge for their piloting services. Established pilots who own and fly their own aircraft, and choose to participate in these schemes also erode the jobs of flying club and air taxi operators.

It is our duty as GA industry participants to help our colleagues, who earn their living providing these services to the public, to steer the public to these qualified service providers, rather than undercutting them. If you want to be an air taxi pilot, wonderful! Get hired as one!

Or, there won't be any flying clubs for your flight training, who have survived the loss of public service revenue 'cause of these schemes. These Winlgy scheme people do not care about us! They are just posing to get in the middle, the effect of which will be bad for all of us!
9 lives is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 20:34
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tobster911 View Post
Some things on Wingly, I admit, are a little bit tenuous (possibly not the right word)...

I've just seen this flight request:
Not sure about this as it's my first time but if possible, 4 people or 2, 4 @ max 460kg or 2 @ 230kg Midlands area to Munich area, last 2 weeks of September quote and additionally a quote for same journey but last two weeks of April 2018. Best route possible

This is asking for two quotes for a flight, and that isn't what Wingly is to be used for. However, I believe the majority of the flight requests are OK.

For example,
Flight for one requested with one carry on hold-all (less than 95kg together) from Manchester to anywhere in Kent, as close as possible to the Tonbridge area, ideally Laddingford Aerodome. Departing any time on either the Sunday 7th May or Monday 8th May. Many Thanks!

Now, as a pilot, I may not have any planned flights coming up, and I don't particularly want to post a flight on Wingly as I have nowhere to go, but I do have family in Kent, and I live in Manchester. Now that I've seen that someone else wants to go, maybe I could plan a trip to see my family, and take this person along too as they're willing to split costs. Makes perfect sense.
So one day in the average charter operator with an AOC the phone rings or an email is received asking for a "QUOTE" from the midlands to Munich - the commercial man/woman gets a price together checks the aircraft availability and sends the QUOTE back to the customer ..... customer gets a better price from wingly .... world's gone mad.
Good Business Sense is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2017, 22:36
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense View Post
So one day in the average charter operator with an AOC the phone rings or an email is received asking for a "QUOTE" from the midlands to Munich - the commercial man/woman gets a price together checks the aircraft availability and sends the QUOTE back to the customer ..... customer gets a better price from wingly .... world's gone mad.
I'm afraid that really isn't "Good Business Sense"!

I find it difficult to imagine a potential charter customer who can afford several thousand pounds to charter an aircraft from the Midlands to Munich, presumably a turboprop or a business jet, choosing to save money by doing the trip with a low hours pilot in a Cessna 152. And that is even if they are travelling alone, although anyone chartering an aircraft will also likely have several companions on the trip.

If they really want to save money, it would be cheaper to fly commercial on a low cost airline.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2017, 08:02
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jonzarno View Post
I'm afraid that really isn't "Good Business Sense"!

I find it difficult to imagine a potential charter customer who can afford several thousand pounds to charter an aircraft from the Midlands to Munich, presumably a turboprop or a business jet, choosing to save money by doing the trip with a low hours pilot in a Cessna 152. And that is even if they are travelling alone, although anyone chartering an aircraft will also likely have several companions on the trip.

If they really want to save money, it would be cheaper to fly commercial on a low cost airline.
The locations might not be a good example (taken from a previous poster) but the point still stands - after all, to stand it on its head, there are AIRCRAFT OWNERS signing up to wingly
Good Business Sense is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2017, 08:43
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there are AIRCRAFT OWNERS signing up to wingly
Sure: I am an aircraft owner and used to offer flights on Skyüber. All I can say is that I never saw the slightest indication of the problem that you describe.

Just because someone can choose to break the law by abusing one of these platforms is no reason to deny those people who want to use them legitimately. If someone does break the law by trying to run a commercial operation in the way that you suggest, the authorities should, and would, come down on them like a ton of bricks. I doubt it would take them very long to find out and do so.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2017, 08:49
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think Wingly would ever 'harm' the income from flight schools. If you want a trial flight, where you yourself can take the controls of a real plane, then you're going to book through the flight school. If you want to go on a quick jaunt around the local area, and are happy to just do some sightseeing, then you pay half the price and go up with Wingly. You may then decide you enjoyed that flight, so you book a proper trial flight and get hooked, then complete your training with that school.

The way I see it potentially happening is that Mr Passenger wants to see if he's comfortable in a light aircraft without it costing him £200 (rough price for an hour's trial flight). Instead, he spends £50 on Wingly and decides he loves it. He then goes on to purchase lessons, which he never would have done if he didn't get the Wingly flight.

I agree with Jonzarno, there could be a few people out of the hundreds or thousands that use it, that decide to break the law. In this instance, as suggested, the authorities would find out and act appropriately. If, however, the majority of people use it as they should (which they will/do), then where's the problem? It's almost like saying nobody should own a car that can go above 70mph, as it facilitates them breaking the law on a motorway... Just because a few people do, doesn't mean that nobody should be able to own a car with a 150mph top speed...
tobster911 is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2017, 10:46
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sure: I am an aircraft owner and used to offer flights on Skyüber. All I can say is that I never saw the slightest indication of the problem that you describe.
How exactly would you see it - do you run an AOC chartering aircraft .... mind you, I guess you do now !
Good Business Sense is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.