Wingly’s response is here local copy
They claim interesting usage stats:
In the UK, 77% of all Wingly flights that have taken place have been A-A flights, 21% being A-B-A excursion flights (such as day trips to have lunch on the isle of wight) and only 2% of the flights have been A-B flights where a pilot advertises a flight they are doing and find passengers that have been willing to go with them.
In France (and I must admit, I thought it was the case everywhere else.) it has always been possible to share costs, as long as it was on equal terms, everyone paying the same. But the people had to be friends or family. In other words you couldn’t advertise and sell flights to complete strangers.
@Capitaine is correct about the discovery flights “vol de decouverte”. These used to come under the title of “baptêmes” before EASA.
Although nowadays the pilot has to have done 25 hours in the course of the year not 30 in order to qualify to do them. The discovery flights must start and finish at the same airfield and must not last more than 20mins (it could be 30 now).
The other restricting factor is that only a fixed percentage (it might be 10%) of the aeroclubs total flying time in any one year can be committed to “vols découverte”.
When EASA or whoever introduced the rule which allowed the Wingly thing, it was very much opposed by the FFA and the DGAC (well much more the FFA.) Eventually a set of terms was agreed between Wingly, the DGAC and the FFA.
It allows the DGAC to not have to continue its derogation from EASA and fall into line.
The FFA have produced a set of requirements as guidelines to aeroclubs on matters such as insurance, advertising (I don’t think its allowed) and how the costs should be shared. Wingly has agreed to this. I do not know the arrangements between private operators and Wingly, but I would have thought that as the DGAC agreed to them, they must meet the same conditions.
The problem is outside of the clubs I don’t know anyone who is doing this sort of cost sharing.
I know from a club point of view the flight starts and goes through the club. In other words the pilot does not advertise on Wingly, it is the club which is approached and they ask the pilot if he would like or be willing to undertake the flight.
Finally.I also don’t know, but Wingly may have a monopoly in France, but that would be very unusual.
I wonder if the UK is following France on this – like this which seems to have been coordinated.
But the UK has no “organised aeroclub network” like France has.
I am surprised Wingly agreed to “no advertising” in France – that’s their whole business model, because repeat customers of Pilot X will just contact him directly and avoid the Wingly commission. But maybe they had no option, given the high degree of central control which could have frustrated their business from other directions. The UK CAA proposal does not include an advertising ban, which is a surprise too because if you really wanted to stop illegal charters that would be the #1 thing.
Being in a club that does (or actually did) a lot of wingly (300 to 500hours a year), there is a lot of confusion between Wingly discovery flights and grey charter in the mind of many, especially club pilots, but there are also very much occasion where it really is. I don’t say it has never been the case, especially at the beginning years (2018 2019), there have been a very marginal part and now I doubt can’t really be done because wingly flights are watched by club managers.
Actually we had a special case last year by a very silly and reckless one that did some in 2019 and also did cheat on registers in order to gain money on it, at a point you cannot imagine. This guy really hurt the club initiative to allow wingly in there, and now DGAC, airport operator and club manager are watching us carefully.
Now wingly pilots (which I am close to, but don’t do it anymore) are ost-racised and not really appreciated by the old guard of pilots, thinking they are taking their plane hours and continue to transport people all over the France, although the reality is that Wingly – In Cannes – are 95% of the time a 30m to 1h flight in the region, between STP and Menton, a pass over LFMN 04L or 22R if traffic allows, and then back to here.
Some longer do a 1.5 hours until LFMQ and back to Cannes by the costal transit. I know very few that does more, and I also have been contacted by private to land people between Milano to Majorqa – Which I cannot obviously do.
The reality I see is that Wingly helps pilots that wants to build hours at a cheaper cost, offer club a high volume of flight and help getting money, and also help even airport to justify GA activity.
The main problem I see is where very young pilots want to do it, and most are not experienced enough to manage a short flight with mostly unknown passengers. But for most of it, they are 95% pleased and some are getting back, whereas some are pissed. Some insists to do the flight although pilots warn against turbulences, and sometimes vomitbag is usefull. not really a security event.
Beside this, there are companies that organise grey charteri n and out the GA terminal, they freely operates in Cannes at a rithm and cashrate that have nothing to do with wingly (much higher I mean) and are not ostracised at all as they make activity on the base, namely Wingly Pro and Openfly (there may be others). these companies provide anyone a list of based planes with hourly rate and if agreed, a list of pilots once they take it, with SR22, malibus, turboprops and even jets. They are operating grey charter like Salla kind of, but they respect the private flight rules (plane and pilots are paid separately and at the initiative of passenger). As they are respecting the private charter rule, they are not worried, whereas DGAC sends letters to clubs letter to warn about this.
It is so dumb to read these letter, looking like hunters are looking for wolves in the woods when wolves are quitely eating sheeps in the sheepyards.
These companies (wingly pro/openfly) also also brokering jets for CAT-operated jet companies which they advertised a lot too.
But all in all, it has a naughty effect on the real cost-sharing initiative of wingly, that I did use to do 50 to 100 hours. Now on our club, wingly and club manager exchange listing of wingly hours done by pilots and review it each month to verify no more cheating. But in the mind of many pilots here – still, wingly pilots are seen as grey charter organisers with club planes which I can see, is not the case. I think – in Cannes at least- we are seeking the wrong guys.
Personally, I have never been involved with Wingly so I don’t know the system. I do however do “vols de découverte” and I have done a few longer flights 1hr or 1h 30 sightseeing tours
All have been organised by the club.
The club here has a fixed price for the discovery flight and the pilot pays nothing.
For the longer flight (and to be honest I don’t know the letter of the law) I just divide the cost that I pay by the number of people aboard including myself and we all pay that share.
I am not a CPL and don’t intend to be so I don’t expect someone else to pay for my flying.
I am happy to share though.
Discovery flights and baptems as such are managed by the club. What wingly provide is that club just monitors the wingly activity and endorse pilots that wants to do it.
After that, the rule is cost sharing in a way that pilot creates a profile with club endorsement (that wingly validate with the club), and plane hourly rate.
They create flight with circuit (kind of flight plan with overfly, but that’s just an ad), and duration. wingly website then publish a price per seat for this flight, that includes plabe rate and wingly part.
When someone want to do a flight, he/she reserves a flight with a date and number of pax. When the flight is done, the pilots that pays the flight hours to the club receive the passenger part from wingly, ruled by the cost sharing law.
Capitaine wrote:
For comparison, Wingly flights in French aéro-clubs are normally done by ‘discovery flight pilots’ who are subject to extra conditions. Personal information and payments are taken by the club, not the pilot
Well France has that on top of NCO AirOps for ‘discovery flight pilots’ nothing to do with DGAC guidance, FFA charts or even AC internal rules but we like to present it that way as pilots left on their own will have difficulty reading notional laws !
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000033052860/
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000043324922
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000043324917
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000037071991
Oh come on Ibra. " Vols decouverte" and "vols d’initiation "are covered under national regulations. Look them up on the DGAC website
The bit I got wrong is that it is 8% not 10% as a proportion of the clubs annual hours as shown in the legifrance links you posted.
gallois wrote:
" Vols decouverte" and "vols d’initiation "are covered under national regulations
It’s what I said 
it’s a national regulation nothing to do with being AC/FFA affiliated or some DGAC guidance…
So here’s why I’m worried about creeping regulation in this area.
The licence I acquired (a JAA PPL, which became an EASA PPL, which became a UK PPL) entitles me, as I understand it, to fly aeroplanes covered by my class/type rating(s) in any circumstances except for commercial operation (i.e. where I, or the operator, are being paid for the flight).
That is really quite straightforward, quite black-and-white, and entirely acceptable. As long as it isn’t commercial I can fly wherever I like, for whatever reason I like, carrying whomever I like.
The CAA’s proposals point the way towards a scenario where this is no longer the case. They point the way to a situation where I can only do certain things which they approve of, and where I might have to keep extra records or file extra paperwork as they consider the carriage of passengers some sort of concession which needs to be closely monitored. Of course, they’ll introduce charges for processing this extra paperwork. They’re already on record as saying that GA doesn’t pay enough in regulatory fees, so small price per passenger form submitted is probably attractive to them – they get a little regulatory cut every time any aircraft with more than one person on board takes to the skies – and will brazenly justify this by saying it’s the cost of the CAA ensuring that person understands the risks.
It’s a direction of travel that shows the CAA behaving like a flight school/club that reluctantly rents you an aircraft to fly some trip. In the same way that aircraft rental is nothing like car rental (it is more akin to ‘pay the money and have a go in the aircraft under some very closely-controlled circumstances’), the CAA are nudging the private licence towards something that allows you by default little more than a solo jaunt around the traffic pattern and requires further admin and cost for anything more.
It’ll be interesting to see what they do. It is a ‘consultation’, but we all know that means they know what they want/plan to do already and are only asking our opinion because someone says they have to. The feedback will be overwhelmingly negative, but that doesn’t usually stop them doing stupid things. The other interesting thing will then be the reaction to any requirements introduced – mass disobedience would seem possible.
