The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure adopted an amendment to H.R. 4441, the Aviation Innovation, Reform, and Reauthorization (AIRR) Act, that would protect the rights of private pilots to use the Internet to connect with people who want to share costs for a flight.
The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC), would clarify the FAA rules that shut down flight-sharing websites like Flytenow.com.
The full House will likely take up the bill within a month.
Using an Internet-based platform, Flytenow, and other flight sharing companies, connect travelers looking for an affordable mode of transportation to private pilots wishing to share travel plans and trip expenses.
Expense-sharing pilots and passengers have been able to connect with one another using a wide variety of platforms since the beginning of general aviation, including email, telephone, word of mouth, and other common forms of communication. For example, pilots have traditionally posted their planned flights on local airport bulletin boards, or in other community spaces, so that a passerby interested in joining the flight can contact the pilot and share the flight costs in accordance with longstanding FAA rules and regulations.
Flight sharing companies like Flytenow took this just one step further, creating websites that allow pilots to connect with those looking to share expenses.
The FAA, however, has determined that using the Internet to communicate is commercial advertising, and as a result, stopped flight sharing operations.
The proposed legislation would clarify that private pilots are free to communicate with their passengers using any form of communication they desire in order to facilitate flight sharing.
We need to take hat is good in the bill and put it all together in a standalone bill that leaves out ATC privatization!
.
By the way, I am not against companies bidding to provide certain services and products. That is the way it is done now. But I am against the idea of setting up an organization that is not directly overseen by FAA and Congress and that would be likely to act in its own interests (the airlines) instead of the interests of the nation in maintaining at least some of what was once a vibrant GA industry.
Here goes the old saying : The FAA is not happy until you are not happy.
It is crazy we have come to the point where if you want the FAA to do anything you have to legislate it. Being able to share flights on the internet is just common sense.
Privatizing ATC is an interesting case. Lockheed-Martin running FSS has not turned out bad but that is different than ATC
As far as how privatization of FSS has turned out I have limited experience since I only fly occaionally in the Lower 48. But I have made several trips there and have sampled the private version of FSS. On long cross country flying trips I have used the Lockheed-Martin FSS and found it to be a greatly reduced and non user friendly service compared to the past flight service. I live in Alaska where we still have FSS run by the government and in comparison the private for profit version in the Lower 48 seems to be designed so pilots won’t use it. For example after being pinned down seven days by Super Storm Sandy in NY state, I had to INSIST three times I wanted to file a flight plan with FSS. There was a TFR in Cleveland, Ohio that I would be flying near and with embedded thunder storms there was a possibility I might be diverted and inadvertently stray into the outer edge of the TFR. With a flight plan and squawk code I could enter the outer part of the TFR if I needed to to avoid the worse to the weather. The Lockheed-Martin FSS briefer tried to convince me that I didn’t need a flight plan since the TFR would be over by the time I flew past Cleveland on my way to Michigan. I said WRONG, since any delay with the Vice President’s departure could put me on the ramp face down with an FBI agent putting hand cuffs on me. Besides the weather leaving central NY was very marginal and flying without a flight plan was not a safe idea. Later that evening as I flew towards my destination I asked permission to fly thru Kalamazoo Tower’s airspace. The women controller was pleasant and cooperative. She give me a new squawk code and permission. Since I was within a few minutes of ending my flight in good weather, I asked her if she could close my flight plan. She said she would have to call on the telephone to do that and to stand by. She returned and confirmed my flight plan was closed. As I was putting my plane in a hangar at a small airport in rural Michigan, the state police called my brother (I gave his number in my flight plan as a contact) to say I was over due and that I had not closed my flight plan. I called Lockheed-Martin FSS and was told that Kalamazoo could not close my flight plan unless they did so by telephone and that my flight plan was not closed. Even though Lockheed has made some great airplanes, the for profit way they run their FSS is a disaster from my experience. Thus unless I am crossing the boarder or flying close to a TFR, I do not file flight plans in the Lower 48 since doing so is more trouble than they are worth. Lockheed-Martin makes more profit if pilots do not add to their work load and do not file flight plans so the company comes out ahead. They have no incentive to provide a good or safe product. When flying thru Canada I have seen the degradation of their FSS as they centralize their FSS. They used to have the best FSS system, but they seem to be trying to catch up with the US in reducing its quality and thus the need to staff it.
Most of the briefings I have received over the phone or in the air through FSS have been great. I have had trouble with filling.
Everyone, Please read the entire proposed bill. The main sponsor of the bill will do anything to get passed so his “Airline buddies and airline employed Girl-friend ” can control the Air Traffic Control system (ATC) and do what’s only good for the airlines instead of the whole flying public.
That’s why they are adding the medical reform, shared flights even after the FAA won that segment in court and anything else to get it passed.
This is not a good bill for anyone except the airlines.
The privatization of ATC is a bad idea. Again, please read the bill and make up your own mind. Please write your legislative representatives’.