Once again, big money technies pooling money so they can create a non-existant service, take it public, then cash out. It will be interesting to see if this is allowed, how the public will react when these “private” pilots have crashes and passengers are killed. Everyone knows commercial pilots must have far more education and training than a person who is piloting a single, engine, prop plane!
Trish, do you know what you are talking about or do just think that the rest of us like watching you spew hot air? The “service” already exists. Pilots already pool their money to rent planes and the FAA already allows this as long as the pilot in command pays his/her share of the trip and isn’t making money out of it. Airpooler is just an online platform that allows pilots with a plane to find people (mostly other pilots) without one that want to split the cost of a flight. Yes, airline pilots have more education than “a person piloting a single engine prop plane (the commas weren’t needed),” but no one is proposing that Airpooler pilots be given a 747 to fly. They would still fly the same single engine prop planes that they trained for and that the FAA licensed them to fly. I don’t know anything about the people that created Airpooler, so I can’t comment on your “once agains, (good comma use) big money techies…” rant. I suppose that you know a lot about them and their funding structure to feel comfident enough to takes your grievance public, though. It seems to me that people pooling resources to create something that didn’t exist before is the way we get new products, services and jobs in this country. This includes the same internet you now use to pretend being an expert on the aviation industry. By the way, I’m a pilot who has read the regulation and visited the company’s website before commenting.
Being a pilot/mechanic and aviation claims adjuster, I’ll say that the theroy is sound, but in the real world not so much. Once one private pilot crashes his overloaded Cessna 172 and kills 3 people, his insurance company will decline coverage since he was conducting what the FAA deems a commercial endeavor. The fiery wreck will get splashed all over the news as a “airpooler airplane” The attorneys go after the pilot’s estate and airpooler, the public will turn on airpooler, and it’s game over.
Yet another business for the gubmet to over-regulate.
Once again, big money technies pooling money so they can create a non-existant service, take it public, then cash out. It will be interesting to see if this is allowed, how the public will react when these “private” pilots have crashes and passengers are killed. Everyone knows commercial pilots must have far more education and training than a person who is piloting a single, engine, prop plane!
Trish, do you know what you are talking about or do just think that the rest of us like watching you spew hot air? The “service” already exists. Pilots already pool their money to rent planes and the FAA already allows this as long as the pilot in command pays his/her share of the trip and isn’t making money out of it. Airpooler is just an online platform that allows pilots with a plane to find people (mostly other pilots) without one that want to split the cost of a flight. Yes, airline pilots have more education than “a person piloting a single engine prop plane (the commas weren’t needed),” but no one is proposing that Airpooler pilots be given a 747 to fly. They would still fly the same single engine prop planes that they trained for and that the FAA licensed them to fly. I don’t know anything about the people that created Airpooler, so I can’t comment on your “once agains, (good comma use) big money techies…” rant. I suppose that you know a lot about them and their funding structure to feel comfident enough to takes your grievance public, though. It seems to me that people pooling resources to create something that didn’t exist before is the way we get new products, services and jobs in this country. This includes the same internet you now use to pretend being an expert on the aviation industry. By the way, I’m a pilot who has read the regulation and visited the company’s website before commenting.
Being a pilot/mechanic and aviation claims adjuster, I’ll say that the theroy is sound, but in the real world not so much. Once one private pilot crashes his overloaded Cessna 172 and kills 3 people, his insurance company will decline coverage since he was conducting what the FAA deems a commercial endeavor. The fiery wreck will get splashed all over the news as a “airpooler airplane” The attorneys go after the pilot’s estate and airpooler, the public will turn on airpooler, and it’s game over.