posted by
janrinok
on Monday August 18 2014, @03:25AM
from the are-pilots-allowed-to-accept-'gifts'? dept.
from the are-pilots-allowed-to-accept-'gifts'? dept.
There will be no "ZimRide for airplanes", according to an FAA ruling released today that prohibits private pilots from publicly offering seats on their planes in exchange for gas money, including via startups like AirPooler and Flytenow.
The decision strikes a blow to the sharing economy, and comes in response to AirPooler formally requesting a clarification of the gray area it was operating in. Banning this form of planesharing (like ridesharing for aircraft) could keep people safe by preventing them from hopping in with rookie pilots. However, it will also make it more expensive for pilots to fly since they can't share costs, reduce travel options for passengers, and kill off an entire category of startups.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
FAA Bans 'Uber for Planes' Startups
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 21 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Nerdfest on Monday August 18 2014, @03:35AM
In Canada, it's always been illegal for non-commercial pilots to accept *any* money for transportation. The licensing and requirements for commercial aviation are far more strict, and you must have that licencing to charge passengers (to the best of my knowledge).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Username on Monday August 18 2014, @03:53AM
Very wise law, otherwise companies can bypass regulations by hiring non-comericial pilots to fly passengers in smaller aircraft.
They skies are only safe when you have well rested and trained pilots flying well maintained aircraft.
(Score: 2, Informative) by morpheus on Monday August 18 2014, @05:16AM
I am assuming you think that commercial pilots are always well rested and that airplanes flown for air carriers are always well maintained? I assure you, this is not always the case (I speak from personal experience). There are a myriad of rules prohibiting hiring of private pilots to transport passengers for compensation and commercial carriers would not even think about doing that. This ruling is simply closing an apparent loophole whereby a private pilot may share expenses with his/her passengers provided he decided to go to his destination on his own and the passengers simply joined in. The FAA simply stated that it is still compensation and is merely exempted from the `no flying for hire for private pilots' rule. The sticky point here is unlike in the situation when one is splitting expenses with friends to fly somewhere, in the case of these new companies the pilot announces his destination publicly and simply waits for somebody to join in. FAA interprets this as `holding out' thus making it a violation of two important rules: this behavior is no longer exempted for private pilots because it does not fall under the (very specific) exemptions for private pilots concerning compensation, and it puts such operations under the requirements of the laws governing air carriers. So even if the person has a commercial certificate (or ATP) and can receive compensation for flying, he/she would still be violating the rules applicable to air carriers.
(Score: 2, Informative) by frojack on Monday August 18 2014, @06:13AM
Pretty sure it was sarcasm....
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by morgauxo on Monday August 18 2014, @01:32PM
I used to know a recreational pilot here in the US. I thought I remember him being under some kind of rule like that too. The thing was though, airplane fuel is very expensive. Plus one must log a certain number of flight hours to keep their license. He could accept gas money so he was always up for taking passengers. I don't think he could have maintained his license any other way.
(Score: 1) by morpheus on Monday August 18 2014, @03:42PM
Pilot certificates do not expire in the US (unlike flight instructor certificates), so the only reason to have a certain number of hours flown is to maintain currency. Those requirements are rather mild though, unless you really would like to be proficient, not just satisfy the rules. Flying is expensive simply because so few people fly. There is nothing complicated in a modern airplane. A typical car probably has more sophisticated electronics and engine than a typical small airplane does. But cars are mass produced, and airplanes are essentially hand made (a thousand airplanes is a long production run) simply because the demand is so low. This will not change until the manufacturing methods improve so drastically that even custom airplane production is cheap. Another factor is a costly certification process for airplanes, I am not sure what can be changed there.
(Score: 2) by evilviper on Monday August 18 2014, @06:56PM
Always been true in the US, too, with just the tiniest few narrow exceptions. Canada probably has some, too.
The question is, what if you offer to give a flight to somebody you don't know, and in exchange their checked-luggage happens to be a 55-gallon barrel of aviation fuel? That's the grey area this company was trying to exploit, but got (rightly) hammered by the FAA for.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday August 19 2014, @03:36AM
What about the bush pilots who work the NW Territories? Or are they considered "commercial" ??
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @04:47AM
Isn't it somewhat common for private pilots to get a commercial ATP license for discounts on their life insurance? Can they fly people for remuneration then?
(Score: 1) by morpheus on Monday August 18 2014, @05:21AM
One does not need ATP (a very difficult to get certificate), only a commercial certificate (a lower level of certificate) to be able to fly for hire. However, (with few exceptions) he/she would only be able to do this (legally) for an air carrier (an important exception is somebody hiring such a pilot to fly that somebody's airplane). In this case, being able to accept compensation is not enough as such a pilot would also be required (since now he/she is flying his own airplane) an air carrier certificate (which are not totally easy to get, somewhat easier for helicopter operators).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @05:15AM
always and forever
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NCommander on Monday August 18 2014, @06:56AM
A few years ago, in a different life, I was working on getting on my Private Pilots License (PPL) when I lived in Oregon; in the United States, there are four major types of pilot's license: Sports, PPL (most common), Commerical, Airline Transport Pilot, with various hour requirements and medical requirements. I don't have a copy of the FAR|AIM here to look up the exact text, but it is/was legal at least in 2011 for PPL pilots to charge for costs relating to actual operation of an airplane, such as fuel, landing fees, etc; as well as a small minority of exceptions beyond that.
That being said, I do get why the FAA banhammered this. The requirements for a PPL are pretty low, so you get a lot of folks who get to 40 hours and graduate on a Cessna 152 (or similiar), and then get into trouble because they drastically underestimate their abilities, or skud run, etc. At minimium, to take folks who aren't experienced w/ flying should require a minimium of commerical license + IFR certification, combined with at least 10-20 hours of IMC time vs. just using foggles :-/. A big limiter of folks flying is costs, so I can see folks accepting to do rides for passengers covering 50-70% of the costs, and perhaps flying in conditions against their better judgment. A passenger who doesn't have a pilot's license will not know what is or isn't safe to fly in.
Still always moving
(Score: 2, Informative) by ghost on Monday August 18 2014, @02:38PM
1. a PPL cannot accept compensation
2. expense sharing is a form of compensation
3. as an exception, a PPL can share expenses with the passengers under certain narrow conditions. (There are also a couple other exceptions like charity rides or airplane salesman giving demonstration rides not relevant here.)
You and your friend fly out of town to see a baseball game? Acceptable to split expenses. Advertising flights to the general public on the internet? Not so much.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Justin Case on Monday August 18 2014, @11:39AM
I hopped in a cab once and promptly got treated to a half hour of lecturing about Allah and the One True Way, interrupted with constant queries did I agree and was I ready to change my life. It was so bad I gave him a wrong address for my house and walked the last block. I can certainly see why I wouldn't want to "flightshare" and find that guy as my pilot.
But the airlines have become simply awful at customer service. Low paid clerks who know they hold your destiny in their hands get mighty arrogant, like that one who pulled a man's family off their plane a few weeks ago because she didn't like his tweet.
Recently I spent over $20K for a vacation to several destinations in Europe. Most of it was delightful. The airports were hellish. Check-in websites and kiosks that didn't work, long lines to reach attendants who would just send you back to the kiosk, security screeners that would pick on me just because I was American, to get even for the way USA airports treat European visitors (as if that was my fault).
I'd like to travel more, and I have the money to do it, but within the US I'd rather drive than fly. It has become that bad.
(Score: 1) by Justin Case on Monday August 18 2014, @11:44AM
...meant to say I couldn't believe I was paying for that kind of abuse, and handsomely too! Could have paid double for first class, but still have to go through the same airport process.
(Score: 3, Informative) by aiwarrior on Monday August 18 2014, @12:27PM
I have travelled hundreds of hours in low costs around Europe, hell if it weren't for them I would have not visited so many places with so low budget. That said, to have enjoyable experiences you do have to understand their tactics especially in their websites. Just try to refuse everything and remember the steps you did last time. It becomes automatic and a bit like a cash cow captcha. Those knowledgeable pass, those who are not, don't.
A tip, you should never need to check in manually unless you have baggage that can't go in the cabin, if you do, try to not ask for anything other than for the boarding of the luggage. The people in the check in are not workers of the company so they will probably be of little assistance. Remember the web sites have all the options you might want, if you need special treatment then a premium carrier might be more adequate, you will pay though.
Another tip, take food with you (cooked if you like), save yourself money buying a mini Pepsi for 5 euros. You can even ask for a plastic fork in the airside Starbucks of the airport.
Last Tip: don't be in a rush, treat yourself to a book and relax. On magazines The Economist is a great read that will entertain you for almost a full day of reading, my favourite.
Pro Tip: Be the last passenger in, everybody is already sat and you can circulate freely, plus the reserved wing seats can be taken, guaranteeing you the biggest leg room in the whole plane for free. Bonus is in case the plane crashes you are in the structurally stronger part of the plane.
Now go travel and please enjoy yourself.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday August 18 2014, @11:10PM
Yes it is your fault. You live In a democracy, you get the blame.
That said I've flown 17,000 miles this week, and I don't recognise your airport experience. Get yourself a frequent flyer card and it's a breeze, even in coach.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday August 18 2014, @12:07PM
God Forbid we use our resources and energy more efficiently to do what we need to do or get where we need to go. Why, it's an assault on capitalism!!!
Me, I dream of a world where this sort of ride-sharing is the norm, where everyone generates their own energy, grows their own food, manufactures their own items. That's a world where you have no incentive to waste or fight to take what someone else has got, because you have what they have, if you want it. Throw in sea-steading or sky-steading and everyone can even have a place to lay their head.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by evilviper on Monday August 18 2014, @06:49PM
Yeah, it'll be just GREAT when anybody who has just gotten their pilots license can jump into the cockpit of a jumbo jet with zero hours flight-time. Damn those regulations!
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 1) by Wootery on Wednesday August 27 2014, @01:54PM
...did you somehow confuse allowed to take passengers, for a price with allowed to pilot a 747? No-one is suggesting more lenient qualifications for piloting airliners.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday August 18 2014, @11:07PM
Nice view from your house, I'll just print my own.
Oh wait.
Some resources are always limited