FAA bans plane sharing platforms

Let’s keep this polite, guys.

How are these numbers defined?

Are they for example pilots with valid medicals? The UK figure I recall for that is about 20k. But such a figure will under-state pilots flying on FAA papers (unless somebody does a lot of legwork on faa.gov which is far too much effort) so countries with a large N-reg community will be under-stating their # of pilots.

Peter, I don’t think there’s any way to arrive at a firm figure for active pilots in any country. The orders of magnitude, however, should be roughly correct. Btw, I think you serioulsy underestimate the French pilot population. Having lived there for years, there are more than you think.

Re the FAA position: nothing new here, they have been pretty consistent in their interpretation of the FARs. IOW, no cost sharing unless common purpose, which is highly unlikely in the case of an online ride-sharing platform.

so countries with a large N-reg community will be under-stating their # of pilots.

…which will obviously change in eight months time (at least if talking about “active” pilots).

Otherwise, I agree. My gut feeling is that the UK has a bit more private pilots than France and the higher number of pilots with FAA certificates is probably a factor.

Anyway, would be nice to know where the above stated numbers come from.

which will obviously change in eight months time (at least if talking about “active” pilots).

You will be able to continue flying Annex 2 G-reg machines on any ICAO PPL, indefinitely, VFR, worldwide (where Annex 2 is permitted by the local airspace owner).

There are various stats on caa.co.uk. The one statistic they avoid publishing openly is what % of PPL holders give up and how quickly they give up. You can guess at it but not reliably. Anyway, it doesn’t matter since we agree on the rough numbers.

We don’t rent a lot after training, so cost sharing by my observation and FWIW tends to be taking flights in each other’s planes. No discussion of expenses.

Private ownership reduces both the practical need for cost sharing and any eventual “problems” regarding cost sharing. In my opinion there are no problems related to it though, other than those that may occur if the rules are broken or misused. Those problems are independent of the number of seats in the aircraft. So, either it should be allowed, or it should be banned. What EASA is doing with the max 6 seats is a typical bureaucratic nonsense solution. They don’t like it, but they won’t ban it, so they pick a random number to set a “limit”, for no other reason than to have a “limit”. Few private pilots fly with more than 6 seats, but if anything, the few times (if any) cost sharing would be practical, are when travelling to some place in a larger aircraft with several others.

So let’s check the facts. France has (2013) 26979 privat pilots, the UK about 28000 (2005), and Germany 69520 (2013). So I guess you are right, not.

Looks like random numbers to me, all of them. According to http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/DONNEES_FEDERALES_2012-2013_tome_II-2.pdf
There are 40643 private pilots in France. A steady decline from more than 50000 in 1990. In addition there are 10397 glider pilots and more than 17000 microlight pilots (increasing from 5000 in 1990).

You will be able to continue flying Annex 2 G-reg machines on any ICAO PPL, indefinitely, VFR, worldwide (where Annex 2 is permitted by the local airspace owner).

Sure, but that’s a case of catch 22. Didn’t we just recently talk about GA burying itself by flying mostly 30-40 year old heaps of trash which don’t attract anyone outside the active pilots world? Well, if many pilots really changed to flying Annex-2 (next to microlights and homebuilts, that’s mostly stuff like Piper Pacers, Piper Cubs, Cessna 140s, Austers, very old Bonanzas plus even more exotic stuff), then ´we’re talking 60 year old vintage stuff and GA will be stuck even a bit more. These aircraft also usually don’t travel much; they’re used for local bimbling only.

There are 40643 private pilots in France. A steady decline from more than 50000 in 1990. In addition there are 10397 glider pilots and more than 17000 microlight pilots (increasing from 5000 in 1990).

Interesting doc. Knowing how the French state works, I’m pretty sure the figures are accurate. What it does show, is the steady decline in GA. Flight hours down from 836 248 in 1990 to 550 319 in 2013, PPLs obtained pretty much halved during that time (2826 to 1420).

What it also shows is the shift – which I believe to be Europe-wide – from ‘classic’ (now EASA) a/c to ultralights.

Peter,
Regarding active French pilots, it seems you’re suffering from a mild case of confirmation bias (“I don’t see a lot of French pilots on forums, I don’t see a lot of planes when flying above FL065 in France, I don’t see many planes travelling around where I travel to in France, hence there aren’t many active travelling French pilots”).
I think the forum thing is explained by language, and there are a few active French language languages.
On the second point, I agree that French traffic tends to stay low; when I ask them why, they answer “what’s the point of flying at fl100 and having the same view as in an airliner?”, which is quite a good point. Most of the French pilots I talk to in aeroclubs think the flight is the point of the trip, not the destination, which is quite different from most of the flying you and I do. Also bear in mind that a lot of your flying is done in one of the densest flying environments in the world.
On the fact that you don’t see many French people travelling at the airports you fly to, that may be because most of them are largish IFR platforms. There are MANY small aerodromes in France, and when I go there I see a lot of traffic. I’m based at Cuers for the summer, and in the evenings it’s as busy as White Waltham on a nice Saturday afternoon.
Finally, there are 2 fairly good French language pilot monthlies which would be the equivalent of Pilot or Flyer; I see more articles in them related to serious touring as in the UK papers, which is another indication.

if many pilots really changed to flying Annex-2 (next to microlights and homebuilts, that’s mostly stuff like Piper Pacers, Piper Cubs, Cessna 140s, Austers, very old Bonanzas plus even more exotic stuff), then ´we’re talking 60 year old vintage stuff and GA will be stuck even a bit more. These aircraft also usually don’t travel much; they’re used for local bimbling only.

Since when are Piper Pacers, Cubs, 140s, or any Bonanza anything but fully certified aircraft suitable for practical use? I’ll tell my friend who built-up, sold and ferried a Pacer up to Alaska a while ago (for serious utilitarian use) or another friend who flies his Pacer all over the country. Maybe the guy I know who flies his J-3 from California to Lock Haven Pennsylvania and back every so often needs to know something.

Actually old planes are more practical in many ways than new stuff. Chatting with one of the local US Bücker Jungmann owners the other day it was interesting to hear him describe the reaction of a Swiss visitor upon hearing that he flies his Bücker 150 hrs a year. That one is not a particularly practical plane but its fun so he flies it three hours a week anyway