All
← Back to Squawk list
Pilots banned from acting like Uber drivers in the sky
"You're going to Napa in your Cessna? Me too! If you let me hop in, I'll pay my share of the gas!" That arrangement is legal, but the FAA has declared that connecting brave passengers with amateur pilots for a fee is definitely a no-no. (techcrunch.com) More...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
A simple solution to the problem: instead of advertising flights on airtaxi.com, take the website down and request that potential passengers send an email to whatever@airtaxi.com - auto reply to passenger would include a list of available flights. Result - no advertising since the passenger is directly requesting a schedule. Done.
Good MC but beware. .....don't use the word "schedule" it's a government trigger word.
I was thinking of flying to Vegas this weekend - but only if I have a few "friends"
who want to share the "time" together - Thinking of leaving tommorow at 8 am planning on
returning in 2 days. Call me if you "think" youd like to ride along. 909-123-4567 :)
who want to share the "time" together - Thinking of leaving tommorow at 8 am planning on
returning in 2 days. Call me if you "think" youd like to ride along. 909-123-4567 :)
why is this something the government should make decisions about? Surely I choose the risk I want to take?
Quoted from the linked article:
The core part of the ruling from the FAA states “We conclude that, with regard to pilots using the AirPooler website, all four elements of common carriage are present. By posting specific flights to the AirPooler website, a pilot participating in the AirPooler service would be holding out to transport persons or property from place to place for compensation or hire. Although the pilots participating in the AirPooler website have chosen the destination, they are holding out to the public to transport passengers for compensation in the form of a reduction of the operating expenses, they would have paid for the flight.”
The core part of the ruling from the FAA states “We conclude that, with regard to pilots using the AirPooler website, all four elements of common carriage are present. By posting specific flights to the AirPooler website, a pilot participating in the AirPooler service would be holding out to transport persons or property from place to place for compensation or hire. Although the pilots participating in the AirPooler website have chosen the destination, they are holding out to the public to transport passengers for compensation in the form of a reduction of the operating expenses, they would have paid for the flight.”
[This poster has been suspended.]
[This comment was deleted.]
The FAA clearly stated that the idea of "ride sharing" an airplane is not illegal. Advertising it on a website that charges a fee and that "match makes" is.
Instead of telling people to understand the regs, maybe try reading the ruling first and even moreso, read the posts above the one you're responding to since it directly quotes exactly what the FAA has a problem with in regards to AirPooler and other similar sites.
Instead of telling people to understand the regs, maybe try reading the ruling first and even moreso, read the posts above the one you're responding to since it directly quotes exactly what the FAA has a problem with in regards to AirPooler and other similar sites.
yep and well said.
I was always uncomfortable with the 3 x 5" cards that said "Flying to San Diego Saturday, seeking one to share expenses," but not with those that said "Going Antiquing in Phoenix. If you'd like to join me, lets split the costs."
The solution lies in legislation because the FAA has proved hidebound and unable to even name control towers in an expeditious manner. My representative in Congress is a real mover and shaker, she managed to get three (count 'em 3) Post Offices named during this session.