Peter wrote:
Under existing platforms, which almost nobody is using, that’s probably true.
The observation that almost nobody is using the existing platforms is probably inaccurate.
Of course, in relation to the population, almost nobody is flying GA in the first place.
But at least two platforms have developed a considerable community over the last flew months. Of course I have no insights into their figures, but the number of flights offered are quite high. From my own observation, local flights get booked easily, while “A to B”-type of flights don’t get as much attention. There’s been a lot of media coverage, too, in mainstream media (i.e. national TV boulevard magazines etc). I alone have been approached by three TV journalists in the previous weeks.
There’s a fly-in of the “Wingly” community in two weeks in Koblenz EDRK and I think a large number of young and enthusiastic pilots will attend (unfortunately, I can’t go).
I went to Aero Expo in Lyon yesterday and discussed cost-sharing (what else?) with a couple of representatives from one of the cost-sharing platforms. They say that a French administrative court is most probably going to render a verdict saying the “consigne opérationnelle” issued last August is illegal, meetings are planned between DGAC and EASA and it is now a matter of a few months before cost sharing becomes legal in France.
They also claimed that the FFA would also change their position in DGACs footsteps, and that most aéroclubs would follow.
A French pilot from Bordeaux raised the issue of the DGAC’s undermining the cost sharing rules with the French “Conseil d’etat” which is the highest administrative jurisdiction in France.
The Conseil d’Etat overturned DGAC’s operational directive restricting cost sharing and states that it has abused its power. The plaintiff was awarded 500€.
I don’t know who that guy in Bordeaux is, but he’s my hero.
What was the actual point being argued there? Presumably France does allow the old style cost sharing, arranged discreetly inside a flying club or between friends. Was it a specific mode of advertising the flight(s)? Referring to post #1 in this thread, the DGAC seemed to object to the websites offering the flights.
A google translate of a bit of the above URL is
1 ° to annul the decision of the Director-General of Civil Aviation of 22 August 2016 on operational declarations relating to co-hijacking operations organized via an Internet platform or any other Means of advertising and taking into account Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008;
I am sure we have done this before but there is a fairly continuous grey area between a commercial flight sharing website and a flying club which has a website and has a “spare seat booking” facility on it.
However the impression I get is that the French club scene management discourages this anyway so the commercial sites might be aimed mainly at standalone owners who operate outside the club scene.
Blocking the DGAC from blocking this is one thing but changing attitudes in club management is going to take much longer.
Peter wrote:
Blocking the DGAC from blocking this is one thing but changing attitudes in club management is going to take much longer.
The French federation (FFA) is on the move too, and will probably change their stance now that the Conseil d’etat overturned the DGAC
Aviathor wrote:
A French pilot from Bordeaux raised the issue of the DGAC’s undermining the cost sharing rules with the French “Conseil d’etat” which is the highest administrative jurisdiction in France.
It is great to read the this part of the verdict:
That, in the absence of any justification for an increased security risk, linked to the development of the “cost-sharing” activity organized via Internet platforms, and therefore the need for an immediate response, the Minister responsible for civil aviation could not in any event legally take the contested measures on the basis of Article 14 (1) of the aforementioned Regulation of 20 February 2008
A bold pilot, the one from Bordeaux. Someone will need to keep their nose very clean for the next several years, I would guess.
He’s going to keep his nose exceedingly clean because, according to locals, the DGAC will find a way to stab you in the back.
Fortunately, in France, it is very hard to bust CAS if you keep your radio turned on – because French ATC rarely uses the word “cleared” for enroute CAS, which makes it impossible to accuse somebody of having busted CAS 
Well, there are always the nuclear prohibited zones…
Peter wrote:
Well, there are always the nuclear prohibited zones…
Been there, got the T-shirt 
