Airline Pilot Central Forums - Blackbird flightsharing raises $10M

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Hangar Talk (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/hangar-talk/)

- - Blackbird flightsharing raises $10M (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/hangar-talk/120612-blackbird-flightsharing-raises-10m.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 2941920)

Those Federal busybodies and their pesky rules! Too many crashes are bad for business, and consumers would migrate elsewhere, so why not let the free market handle safety matters? :rolleyes:

The amount of rules are not directly correlated to the number of crashes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2941927)

The amount of rules are not directly correlated to the number of crashes.

Yes they are. Crashes almost always lead to new rules, or better enforcement of old ones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 2941947)

Yes they are. Crashes almost always lead to new rules, or better enforcement of old ones.

Except that these rules involved here are about protectionism, not safety.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2941972)

Except that these rules involved here are about protectionism, not safety.

I think it's directly relevant to safety... there are already enough shady characters in GA as it is, no need to give them more flexibility to broaden their horizons while covering their trail.

If you already have a 135 cert, you're free to advertise any way you like.

Rules are absolutely related to safety.
121 has far more restrictions than 135 or 91 and has a far better safety record.
You can argue about protection, but really 121 encompasses training, rest, inspections, certification and mechanic training as well as other safety issues.

No, not in this case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2941827)

Yep, leave it to the government to stifle competition, innovation, and the ability for consumers to choose.

Referring to the P91 aspect.
:confused: They don't vet these pilots, they barely interview them, Like its not even an interview. It's like Uber. Potentially complete unstable personalities flying paying people that want to go somewhere. I bet you they don't know what PRIA is.

It's not innovation it's a scam and a middle finger to professional pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawker445 (Post 2943174)

So now you're saying that ever pilot needs a psych exam? :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2943356)

So now you're saying that every pilot needs a psych exam? :rolleyes:

If you say so.

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer View Post
Yep, leave it to the government to stifle competition, innovation, and the ability for consumers to choose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 2941920)

Those Federal busybodies and their pesky rules! Too many crashes are bad for business, and consumers would migrate elsewhere, so why not let the free market handle safety matters? :rolleyes:

In light of the last several weeks this thread arguably takes on new meaning. Lets say people without the means or desire to charter a bizjet and with a strong desire to maintain some social distancing from large groups of people, decide they want to fly somewhere in a small aircraft under a flight sharing service similar to Blackbird. For this argument all participating aircraft are limited to 6 seats and must get 100 hour inspections with commercial/ATP certificated pilots. We've all seen a lot of pushback lately against what many see as onerous government regulations depending on where you stand on an issue and how it affects a person's livelihood. My question is should people be allowed to assess risk and what is acceptable for them? I think this could be an interesting discussion.