4 ms·

Will your project deal with Part 135 flights only or also Part 91? If the latter, how will you avoid Flytenow’s demise[0]? [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/fr

by gbacon 8y ago

Will your project deal with Part 135 flights only or also Part 91? If the latter, how will you avoid Flytenow’s demise[0]? [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=flytenow.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=flytenow.com

dmichulke 8y ago
Very interesting what happened. IANAL and IANAAmerican, so I'm not familiar with the specifics of regulatory stupidity in the US, but from what I see two things don't apply here: 1. We're really the uber and not the ride-sharing uber. 2. We operate in Europe I wonder why flytenow didn't just move their operations to Europe, or Asia. Are you in any way connected to those guys? Would be interesting to hear how they did it (technically) and why they didn't move to some other continent.
- gbacon 8y ago
  I’m an American private pilot unconnected to Flytenow other than being an interested observer in the broad space. U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) — or Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) — Part [91] covers personal flights, FAR Part [135] charter and cargo operations, and, for completeness, FAR Part [121] commercial air carriers. Under Part 91, pilots may accept pro rata share of direct costs from passengers. Flytenow sought to facilitate ride sharing based on this allowable cost sharing, but the FAA determined that advertising planned flights to the general public would be “holding out,” behavior reserved for commercial operators and therefore a no-no. As for why they didn’t move, I suspect the sizes of the general aviation markets in the U.S., Europe, and Asia carried at least some weight. [91]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.91 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.91 [121]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.121 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.121 [135]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.135 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.135

by gbacon 8y ago

dmichulke 8y ago

Very interesting what happened. IANAL and IANAAmerican, so I'm not familiar with the specifics of regulatory stupidity in the US, but from what I see two things don't apply here: 1. We're really the uber and not the ride-sharing uber. 2. We operate in Europe I wonder why flytenow didn't just move their operations to Europe, or Asia. Are you in any way connected to those guys? Would be interesting to hear how they did it (technically) and why they didn't move to some other continent.

gbacon 8y ago
I’m an American private pilot unconnected to Flytenow other than being an interested observer in the broad space. U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) — or Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) — Part [91] covers personal flights, FAR Part [135] charter and cargo operations, and, for completeness, FAR Part [121] commercial air carriers. Under Part 91, pilots may accept pro rata share of direct costs from passengers. Flytenow sought to facilitate ride sharing based on this allowable cost sharing, but the FAA determined that advertising planned flights to the general public would be “holding out,” behavior reserved for commercial operators and therefore a no-no. As for why they didn’t move, I suspect the sizes of the general aviation markets in the U.S., Europe, and Asia carried at least some weight. [91]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.91 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.91 [121]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.121 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.121 [135]: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.135 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.3.135