Slashdot Mirror
How The FAA Shot Down 'Uber For Planes' (fee.org)
SonicSpike quotes a report from the Foundation for Economic Education that first appeared at Forbes: Imagine traveling from Boston to Martha's Vineyard in under an hour and for less than $70. Believe it or not, this option was available from Flytenow's website or app, by looking for a general aviation pilot who was making that trip, and then splitting the cost with that pilot and whoever else was sharing the flight. Entrepreneurs were bringing private air travel to the masses until Flytenow's leadership met with members of the Federal Aviation Administration to ensure that they were complying with all laws and regulations. Instead of embracing this service, the FAA used tortuous logic to ban Flytenow and other online flight-sharing websites because it considered these to be "common carriers" (such as Delta Airlines). Private pilots cannot possibly comply with the myriad regulations that apply to the large airlines. In what follows, Flytenow founders Alan Guichard and Matt Voska explain why the federal government should make the FAA allow flight sharing to get off the ground.
Those regulations are in place for a reason. Your Uber ride can be an unlicensed, uninsured deathtrap as it is: dropping out of the sky and killing innocents because you were too lazy to follow FAA regulations is an entirely new level of stupidity.
He does the U.S. mail run to McCartney
He regularly takes sight-seeing tourists with him on the run, since it is allowed under their contract.
There are absolutely no regulation requirements for the travelers.
Pilots like my father are, of course, subject to all FAA regulations including medical, regular license renewal, insurance requirements, etc...
All of this information is available to anyone who asks, that would include Uber
In fact, there is far more oversight on a private pilot than on a cab driver. There is no way for Uber to know immediately if a driver with a suspended license gets into a car and picks up a fair.
In the case of nearly all private pilots, however, the moment they leave the runway they are on someone's radar. If they haven't filed a flight plan, the FAA will know within minutes.
There is absolutely no reason for this except airline influence. It's a convenience technology that should be covered by existing regulations, nothing more. Like Expedia for private pilots.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
The fatality rate for general aviation is 82 times that for commercial flight. Are these people utterly insane?
There are several facets to this issue. First, I'm a licensed private pilot. The regulations for private pilot are rather different than for ATP (Airline Transport Pilot), so the phrase "Private pilots cannot comply with the regulations of the large airlines" is somewhat misleading.
Now, the question comes to be: Is this pilot doing a "For Hire" service. This really is the crux of the issue. If the pilot *truly* is going somewhere and you want to go with them and split the cost of the trip, this is perfectly legal. However once you (the pilot) cross the line of going places because someone wants to go somewhere, that would be a For-Hire service. This gets a little gray because the pilot can't charge the cost of the trip, but must "share" expenses, legally. This can get somewhat hard to prove. However, if you are a pilot that does for-hire transport, then you must have a commercial license (not ATP), which again has some different regulatory requirements (pilot performance, medical, etc) than a private pilot.
I think I'm on board with the FAA on this one. Uber drivers are for-hire, really - I don't think anyone could rightfully say you're just hitching a ride. "Uber for planes" is the same thing.
that's why i'm becoming a private pilot, so I can take my family and I and avoid all that.
the plane i use flys slower than a 737 (about 1/4 the speed), but there I park 8' from the airplane, we don't have to get there early, and there is no security line/etc.
there's also no worry about being late and missing my flight. the plane will leave when we're all there and i'm satisfied it's a safe trip to take.
Pilots will generally tell you that for about 500 miles or less, private flying will beat commercial door to door. That's a rule of thumb, but gives you an idea. It depends how far your home is from your departure airports and how far your destination is from a GA airport and the commercially served airport.
It would never be cheaper to fly myself, but it can be cheaper to fly my family of 4. So let's say I want to go to Kallspel, MT. I could get a $200 ticket, but would need one for each family member ($800) or I could fly my private plane (say 5 hours each way at $80/hr) = the same money, but not TSA theater, no getting there early, etc.
In order to carry a passenger for hire and make a profit you have to have your commercial ticket. Period.
Private pilots ride sharing, not matter the circumstances, are not allowed to make a profit. Period.
So their only reason for doing something like this is to cut their expenses. It would make no sense for a private pilot to start making daily runs to Chicago if they only broke even on expenses and actually lost money considering their time. And not many people are about to trade a nice comfy seat traveling at 5000 MPH for a cramped, drafty, noisy cockpit unless there is no service available or they are just a fan of small planes.
So the FAA's reason's are flawed. No one will start flying others around for profit...that's illegal. Many people DO make regular runs in their aircraft and allowing this service would have the benefit of boosting general aviation.
I suspect this is more about taking away a $250 fare from the airlines.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I am a private pilot and the only tortured thing here is how the service tried to get around "holding out" and "compensation". Obviously the FAA doesn't see it this way. If you are a private pilot you're held to a lower standard - of training, medically, during the examination, and for the aircraft - than a commercial pilot. Which is held to a much lower standard than an airline pilot. It's not really that safe, either - the GA fatal accident rate is comparable to motorcycles, and that doesn't include a bunch of PPL cowboys feeling pressured to go in marginal conditions, which this service would surely promote. Would you jump on the back of a random motorcycle with an unknown driver?
A bunch of people have said that you can't be paid to fly. It's worse than that - you can't receive any benefit in exchange for your flying. All you can do is offset your losses. The safest thing is to pay your own way, then everything's legal. If you split costs with your buddy and he buys you a steak dinner, the FAA will kick your ass. Yes, this has happened. So too did they punish the guy who ferried his bar-owning friend's customers to the bar "as a favor" when the charter flight fell through. Even though they couldn't find any direct compensation, they still won on the theory that "there's no way someone is out $2k without at least a quid pro quo, and in any case think of the passengers who were expecting a charter flight to commercial standards"
Most people are used to licenses - rights - that can't be easily taken away. Like your drivers' license - that's a court case if they want it. Being a pilot means you have a certificate and it can be taken away much more easily (i.e., no courts involved) if the FAA feels it is appropriate. And they have no trouble convincing the oversight (the NTSB administrative law judges are the highest you can go) that their interpretation of the "holding out" rules is the correct one.
Flytenow didn't shut down because the FAA said "no", at least not directly. They shut down because once the FAA publishes an opinion of how they see the regulations and intend to enforce them, you'd be stupid as hell to fly if they said "we think this is against the rules and will prosecute people for doing it". It'll stick, too, barring "arbitrary and capricious".
If you can find an example of people "lawyering" with the FAA and succeeding, I'd like to see it. There's plenty of examples of people thinking they've found a loophole and are smarter than the FAA lawyers - but they all forget that the FAA isn't bound by the letter of the regulations (they're not laws!) and that they're allowed to punish people for what they meant to say so long as it's reasonable regardless of whether it's explicitly written down. The FAA's intent is very clear - you can go camping with your buddy and split the costs, but you can't be a charter service. If they think you're basically being a charter service, they'll burn you regardless of how you try to wiggle out of it.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.