7 ms·

US Court of Appeals Takes on Ridesharing in Aviation

56 points by voska 11y ago

smcg 11y ago
Could someone give a quick summary of flightsharing and how this ruling affects it?
- superuser2 11y ago
  Not remotely an expert, but the basic idea is that hobbyist pilots are licensed to fly for their personal entertainment/transportation only. They are not licensed as airlines, so selling tickets at a profit is a definite no-no. But they can take their friends along for the ride and split the cost of fuel. A number of apps/websites have popped up that blur the line between "operating an illegal airline" and "doing the equivalent of a carpool in a Cessna." That's the gray area that needs to be fleshed out.
- lisper 11y ago
  This isn't a ruling, it was a hearing that will eventually lead to a ruling. What this is about is that the FARs prohibit private pilots from flying passengers "for hire" but allow them to "share expenses." There are a number of tests to determine whether a private pilot who takes money from passengers is flying "for hire" or merely "sharing expenses" and one of them is the so-called "holding-out" rule: if you advertise your willingness to take passengers, then you are presumed to be flying for hire and you need (at least) a commercial license. Advertising on Flightshare is considered "holding out" by the FAA. (I'm a private pilot.)
throwaway859876 11y ago
It's an interesting link, and very interesting that these regulations are being litigated after decades of acceptance. The big picture is that the FAA doesn't want the public to confuse the safety record of an airline with somebody flying a puddle-jumper (daily crashes in USA). The flying public just expects to get there without doing a risk evaluation, and puddle-jumpers are far riskier than airlines. When you rideshare with Uber, there is a question of insurance. When you rideshare a single-engine piston plane, there is a question of your life.
- voska 11y ago
  Speaking of crash data - we made a viewer for it. It's pretty hacked together right now, but we'd love to get some feedback on it: https://github.com/flytenow/icarus https://github.com/flytenow/icarus
- SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
  > (daily crashes in USA) I'm sorry, but a quick Google finds less than a dozen in the US this year. I couldn't find a definitive list, but searching "small plane crash 2015" found mostly the same events. A puddle-jumper being flown by a certified commercial pilot shouldn't be a whole lot more dangerous than a commercial flight. But yes, a small aircraft flown by someone who just got their license? You're taking your life into your hands, especially if there's a chance of poor weather.
  - gcb0 11y ago
    to take that commercial license you have to fly hundreds of hours. with and without instructors. guess how much those hours cost. i lost count of how many times I've flown just for the hell of it with friends getting those hours for a few hundred bucks.
    - lifeisstillgood 11y ago
      I think the point is ... With friends. Who almost always return to the same airfield as you both took off from. But this is a fascinatingly grey area. If you were to fly from airfield A to B and back, taking a different passenger each time, how would you characterise the transaction? I can see taking my kids up in an airplane of a friend of a friend, and handing over a hundred or whatever for fuel. But "some guy". Hard to imagine.
      - patch_cable 11y ago
        For a private pilot, unless the passengers share a common purpose for travel with the pilot, money isn't allowed to change hands, even if it is just "for fuel". You would need at least a commercial pilot license for this type of transaction. (A CPL is a lesser license than an airline transport pilot license, which is what you need to work for an airline. The former only requires 100 hours of time.)
lifeisstillgood 11y ago
This is fascinating - it's like Pornography and erotica. I can tell the difference between a ride share and an airline when I see it, but writing it down ... No. I mean, if Uber drivers were forced to state where they were travelling from and to at a certain time, and only if users entered that route was the ride share matched, their model would collapse (ie I see pornography) But do that for aircraft, and ... It's totally indistinguishable from an airline schedule. But yeah. It's not a rideshare, you are floating the rules, get wrists slapped.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  If you feel uncomfortable with your Uber diver, you can tell them to stop, and you can get out of the car. What happens in the sky?
  - Rexxar 11y ago
    Parachute.
    - taivare 11y ago
      The first time I flew , I parachuted out . Six people in an old Piper that rattled like hell . . seemed safer to jump . . later the jump master said their were lose interior panels that caused all that noise an were left to entice jumpers . . out !
      - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
        In college I worked at an FBO where there was a skydiving operation. Lots of old cranks would come in and say "It's crazy to jump out of a perfectly good airplane!" to which I would respond "Boy have we got the airplane for you!" or "Wait 'til you see the plane before you make up your mind."
  - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
    You have to wait for them to stop before you get out. The same is true albeit to a lesser degree for the Uber.
bro-stick 11y ago
This sucks. However, in a few places like Alaska, I think the anti-government sentiment is strong enough that they really don't care what the FAA says. Good luck regulating fur trappers near the Arctic and helpful neighbors with planes.
- thelambentonion 11y ago
  This does NOT suck. General aviation is a fairly risky activity, and usually the pilot (and friends of the pilot) accept that risk when flying. With a service like Flytenow it's possible (in my opinion probable) that 'enthusiasts' don't fully appreciate how much greater the risks are of a short trip in someone's Cessna 172 versus a commercial flight on a 737. I don't believe that the FAA wants, or should be able, to regulate pilots' abilities to share flights with their friends. In my mind, they see Flytenow's business model as one that encourages people to take risks they normally wouldn't and don't completely understand.
- intopieces 11y ago
  And that's fine. Those individuals are well aware of the risks and their numbers are small enough to not warrant the attention of regulation. But for the general public? This is just asking for trouble.

56 points by voska 11y ago

smcg 11y ago

Could someone give a quick summary of flightsharing and how this ruling affects it?

superuser2 11y ago
Not remotely an expert, but the basic idea is that hobbyist pilots are licensed to fly for their personal entertainment/transportation only. They are not licensed as airlines, so selling tickets at a profit is a definite no-no. But they can take their friends along for the ride and split the cost of fuel. A number of apps/websites have popped up that blur the line between "operating an illegal airline" and "doing the equivalent of a carpool in a Cessna." That's the gray area that needs to be fleshed out.
lisper 11y ago
This isn't a ruling, it was a hearing that will eventually lead to a ruling. What this is about is that the FARs prohibit private pilots from flying passengers "for hire" but allow them to "share expenses." There are a number of tests to determine whether a private pilot who takes money from passengers is flying "for hire" or merely "sharing expenses" and one of them is the so-called "holding-out" rule: if you advertise your willingness to take passengers, then you are presumed to be flying for hire and you need (at least) a commercial license. Advertising on Flightshare is considered "holding out" by the FAA. (I'm a private pilot.)

throwaway859876 11y ago

It's an interesting link, and very interesting that these regulations are being litigated after decades of acceptance. The big picture is that the FAA doesn't want the public to confuse the safety record of an airline with somebody flying a puddle-jumper (daily crashes in USA). The flying public just expects to get there without doing a risk evaluation, and puddle-jumpers are far riskier than airlines. When you rideshare with Uber, there is a question of insurance. When you rideshare a single-engine piston plane, there is a question of your life.

voska 11y ago
Speaking of crash data - we made a viewer for it. It's pretty hacked together right now, but we'd love to get some feedback on it: https://github.com/flytenow/icarus https://github.com/flytenow/icarus
SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
> (daily crashes in USA) I'm sorry, but a quick Google finds less than a dozen in the US this year. I couldn't find a definitive list, but searching "small plane crash 2015" found mostly the same events. A puddle-jumper being flown by a certified commercial pilot shouldn't be a whole lot more dangerous than a commercial flight. But yes, a small aircraft flown by someone who just got their license? You're taking your life into your hands, especially if there's a chance of poor weather.
- gcb0 11y ago
  to take that commercial license you have to fly hundreds of hours. with and without instructors. guess how much those hours cost. i lost count of how many times I've flown just for the hell of it with friends getting those hours for a few hundred bucks.
  - lifeisstillgood 11y ago
    I think the point is ... With friends. Who almost always return to the same airfield as you both took off from. But this is a fascinatingly grey area. If you were to fly from airfield A to B and back, taking a different passenger each time, how would you characterise the transaction? I can see taking my kids up in an airplane of a friend of a friend, and handing over a hundred or whatever for fuel. But "some guy". Hard to imagine.
    - patch_cable 11y ago
      For a private pilot, unless the passengers share a common purpose for travel with the pilot, money isn't allowed to change hands, even if it is just "for fuel". You would need at least a commercial pilot license for this type of transaction. (A CPL is a lesser license than an airline transport pilot license, which is what you need to work for an airline. The former only requires 100 hours of time.)

lifeisstillgood 11y ago

This is fascinating - it's like Pornography and erotica. I can tell the difference between a ride share and an airline when I see it, but writing it down ... No. I mean, if Uber drivers were forced to state where they were travelling from and to at a certain time, and only if users entered that route was the ride share matched, their model would collapse (ie I see pornography) But do that for aircraft, and ... It's totally indistinguishable from an airline schedule. But yeah. It's not a rideshare, you are floating the rules, get wrists slapped.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
If you feel uncomfortable with your Uber diver, you can tell them to stop, and you can get out of the car. What happens in the sky?
- Rexxar 11y ago
  Parachute.
  - taivare 11y ago
    The first time I flew , I parachuted out . Six people in an old Piper that rattled like hell . . seemed safer to jump . . later the jump master said their were lose interior panels that caused all that noise an were left to entice jumpers . . out !
    - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
      In college I worked at an FBO where there was a skydiving operation. Lots of old cranks would come in and say "It's crazy to jump out of a perfectly good airplane!" to which I would respond "Boy have we got the airplane for you!" or "Wait 'til you see the plane before you make up your mind."
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  You have to wait for them to stop before you get out. The same is true albeit to a lesser degree for the Uber.

bro-stick 11y ago

This sucks. However, in a few places like Alaska, I think the anti-government sentiment is strong enough that they really don't care what the FAA says. Good luck regulating fur trappers near the Arctic and helpful neighbors with planes.

thelambentonion 11y ago
This does NOT suck. General aviation is a fairly risky activity, and usually the pilot (and friends of the pilot) accept that risk when flying. With a service like Flytenow it's possible (in my opinion probable) that 'enthusiasts' don't fully appreciate how much greater the risks are of a short trip in someone's Cessna 172 versus a commercial flight on a 737. I don't believe that the FAA wants, or should be able, to regulate pilots' abilities to share flights with their friends. In my mind, they see Flytenow's business model as one that encourages people to take risks they normally wouldn't and don't completely understand.
intopieces 11y ago
And that's fine. Those individuals are well aware of the risks and their numbers are small enough to not warrant the attention of regulation. But for the general public? This is just asking for trouble.