Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 19
#1885936
sssdu01 wrote:How would this impact on warbird flights ? I thought the rules stated the passenger could pay all the direct running costs ? There are lots of two seat Spitfires that might have to stop passenger flights unless the pilot pays 50% :lol:


They must come under a commercial operation.
#1885938
Sooty25 wrote:
sssdu01 wrote:How would this impact on warbird flights ? I thought the rules stated the passenger could pay all the direct running costs ? There are lots of two seat Spitfires that might have to stop passenger flights unless the pilot pays 50% :lol:


They must come under a commercial operation.


They do. The CAA call it SSAC (Safety Standards & Consent). No cost sharing involved.
#1885944
Cost sharing isnt something I have thought about very much since I got my PPL many years ago.

I have on only a couple of occasions personally accepted money towards flight costs from anyone I have flown with, and it wasnt a pre-arranged thing, but something offered to me after the flight in appreciation, which the participants of the flight insisted upon despite my saying it wasnt required.

However, I have on numerous occasions helped out pilot friends and socialized by doing most of the things @Lefty talks about. Aeroclub life just would not be the same if you have to start thinking about exactitudes of the law when sharing flights or helping friends out with lifts, whether in an aeroplane or in your car, its the same thing.

Regards, SD..
Flyin'Dutch', Sooty25, Dave W and 4 others liked this
#1885965
has his own shareoplane, however when it was not available, he may have asked me to fly him & his wife / family to his holiday home. I would be combining going there for a nice fish lunch - whilst giving my friend a lift to his holiday home - where he might stayfor some days. At some future date, I would again fly there for a nice lunch - and combine that with giving my friend a lift home.


Not sure that’s a brilliant example to use if you are trying to rebut allegations of grey charters..
A4 Pacific, Dusty_B liked this
#1885966
ls8pilot wrote:Of course in the wonderful world of "UK Flavour EASA-land" there is a danger that any heavy handed regulation might (by accident) apply to gliders as well as they are part 21 aircraft...... in a high performance two seater it is not unusual for the P2 to pay the launch fee (given the owner(s) have forked out a 6 figure sum for the aircraft in the first place)..... which would of course become illegal under these rules - totally bonkers :roll:

Just imagine filling out a "Passenger Declaration and Consent Form" before every flight with a syndicate partner in a 2 seater.
#1885970
MattL wrote:
has his own shareoplane, however when it was not available, he may have asked me to fly him & his wife / family to his holiday home. I would be combining going there for a nice fish lunch - whilst giving my friend a lift to his holiday home - where he might stayfor some days. At some future date, I would again fly there for a nice lunch - and combine that with giving my friend a lift home.


Not sure that’s a brilliant example to use if you are trying to rebut allegations of grey charters..


Indeed.

A ‘moderately experienced PPL in a reasonably fast 6 seater’ is precisely the kind of individual who could get themselves into exactly the same predicament as David Ibbotson!

It is precisely this ‘blurring of the lines’ that has invited further scrutiny. That and the fact that people prefer to just ‘turn a blind eye’ when they know of suspicious activity!

We reap what we sow, and here it comes.
Dusty_B liked this
By Lefty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1885974
Why are aircraft so different from giving a friend a lift in a car or on a boat?

I’ve given family and friends lifts in my car, to places that I didn’t need to go, and where they’ve contributed to my out of pocket cost.

I used to regularly drive very long distances to sales conferences or to customer sites all over the country and I gave lifts to my work colleagues. If we were going somewhere especially nice, a wife or girlfriend might hitch a ride, I never said “sorry you don’t really need to come on this trip and I could be accused of running a taxi service”.

I once got a friend to give me and some friends a lift to the Isle of Whight in his cabin cruiser when one of the ferries stopped running.

What is the difference if I give a friend a lift in my plane, or in any other form of transport? I struggle to see any meaningful difference.
#1885977
I think the CAA is trying to have their cake and eat it by proposing both that the pilot should pay the proportionate share, and that there should be commonality of purpose, neither of which are a requirement under current legislation,

Strictly applied, the latter in particular has potential to render illegal many circumstances which the man in the street would regard as perfectly reasonable non-commercial activity.

There is a risk of unintended consequences here, where the hours flown by a significant proportion of pilots, typically those whose finances are perhaps a little stretched, will be reduced to the point where there are actually negative safety and economic effects.

The CAA should be very clear about why they are proposing these steps. By their own admittance there is little evidence of any real safety issue with the current circumstances. I find it disappointing that there appears to be little by way of specific objectives stated nor cost-benefit appraisals applied for any of the proposed changes.
flybymike liked this
#1885979
@Lefty the difference is the risk to third parties unable to assess the risk for themselves. The state doesn’t deem the risk in a shared car to be so different to a commercial operator that it requires regulation; in a light aircraft compared to a commercially operated aircraft the risk is significantly greater such that the state deems that regulation is required to protect those third parties from risks they might unwillingly expose themselves to.

I don’t see the common purpose as being that much of a drama - I don’t think the regulator would ever deem friends sharing a flying experience, members of a flying community / club recovering an aircraft or helping out with maintenance as not having a common purpose. However, someone flying a bunch of strangers to a remote island where they go birdwatching…. It just requires them to expand some examples in some AMC and it wouldn’t be a problem.
Sooty25, A4 Pacific, Cowshed liked this
#1885981
@MattL I'm not so sure the main objective is to protect unwary 3rd parties. TBH it reads as whoever is heading this up has little to zero knowledge of what the problem is, how it works, or what is required to fix it.

Reading the thread it seems to me we are in danger (understandably) of overlooking the stated objective of the CAA?
One of the problems with cost sharing flights is where pilots and passengers of Illegal Commercial Air Transport collude to present illegal flights as legal cost shared flights.

Introducing further legislation restricting the whole of legitimate cost sharing will do nothing to address collusion.

It's the wrong tool for the job!
flybymike liked this
#1885983
There are two old saws that apply here:

1) The system (or regulation) that cannot be abused has yet to be invented.

2) If it ain't broke don't fix it.

The proposals simply complicate matters and are therefore counter productive. The abusers will still abuse and those who interpret the rules sensibly will have additional complexity and difficulty and so helpful and useful activities may be curtailed due to excess caution and/or the dreaded gold plating......
#1885987
Unfortunately there is a military mindset which thinks that if there was a problem, the regulation was insufficient, rather than the enforcement. (For those with a cadet adult staff background think Kayleigh McIntosh; or at least some elements of the Benson Tutor mid-air.) These people then go on to work at the CAA, notoriously.
Rob P, johnm, Highland Park liked this
#1885990
Ok, so let’s take a scenario of a recently qualified PPL, no IMC or IR, renting a Cherokee 6 from Oxford. He needs to build hours for his Modular CPL. He flys 4 people he has never met from his dads business as cost share people to Scotland for a stag do and back. They have to go on Friday night and back Sunday afternoon. He pays £1 each way and his ‘passengers’ pay the other £700+ each way costs.

Do we think that is reasonable and safe activity? Would that be permitted under the current regs? How would greater enforcement of the current regs work?
A4 Pacific liked this
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 19