There is an interesting article in the last US AOPA mag on this topic.
Basically, the FAA has a long standing rule that if any cost sharing is taking place, all people participating have to have a “common purpose” at the destination.
This applies to any Part 91 N-reg worldwide.
The “common purpose” rule has been much discussed. It appears to be almost impossibly strict (it basically implies that the whole contents of the place has to be going to the same football match or whatever, and if one passenger goes off to the pub to get pi*ssed instead then you have violated the rule) and when I speak to US pilots, or just read US forums, cost sharing is simply never mentioned, presumably because either nobody in the USA does it or because they don’t want to talk about it openly.
The above mentioned article refers to a 2011 FAA ruling that you satisfy the common purpose rule if all occupants are going to the same airport (usually they would be, of course, unless you make intermediate stops, or somebody jumps out with a parachute) and the pilot selects the destination.
I thought it was an interesting clarification.
In UK airspace, cost sharing is illegal in an N-reg anyway, because the ANO exemption is valid only for a G-reg. So I never cost share anyway…
I don’t see the issue. This came to recent prominence because of the Air Pooler app looking to match up pilots with potential passengers with money changing hands.
The old maxim if it looks wrong then it probably is fits nicely here.
The common purpose rule has been around almost as long as the FAA. You will always get those who want to break the rules or come up with their own interpretation of common purpose.
But what the FAA have reiterated here is helpful.
I don’t see the issue.
The issue, I think, is that the majority of traditional (say, UK) cost shared flights would be illegal, under some strict interpretation of that rule.
This came to recent prominence because of the Air Pooler app looking to match up pilots with potential passengers with money changing hands.
It has been debated for much longer.
FWIW I can’t see why one cannot advertise cost shared flights. You can now (as of very recently) advertise cost sharing in a G-reg. I can see why the FAA doesn’t like it, because it gets very close to the “holding out” scenario. But then every “seat sharing” website would breach that ruling because 99% of the point of them is to find cost-sharing flying partners 
None of this will ever be criminally enforced in Europe but it could be an insurance issue if you get injured passengers, the pilot didn’t survive to state his side of the story, and the passengers get a much bigger payout by coming up with a slightly modified story.
when I speak to US pilots, or just read US forums, cost sharing is simply never mentioned, presumably because either nobody in the USA does it or because they don’t want to talk about it openly
I’m not connected with US pilots who rent or fly in clubs, but I suppose that’s where you see people interested in that kind of thing – where hourly costs not fixed costs are the driver. Nobody I know is in that position! My impression is that US cost sharing would probably be limited to young people who haven’t been flying that long, who rent and who aren’t pursing flying as a career. That must be at least half a dozen people 
The rest are flying their own, and aren’t much bothered with direct costs – they’re more concerned with hangar rent. Groups taking cross countries would likely be doing it in multiple planes anyway, one pilot per plane. Otherwise why own them?
I have just noticed a “Ride Sharing” section on a US forum (Beechtalk) which has been running since 2011, so this “common purpose” business cannot be enforced that strictly.
There is a website called pilotsharetheride too.
The only cost sharing I do is I fly one leg, my buddy flies the other. This isn’t cost sharing by definition though…..
Oshkosh has a ride sharing bulletin board. I have used it in the past to find others willing to pay a share of the flight.
Coincidentally I was just about to post this question when this popped up.
That FAA rules is extremely restrictive. I think it pretty well kills cost sharing in the USA. At least, pilots posting on US forums almost never discuss the topic.
Maybe they cost share only after the successful conclusion of the trip and only among good friends? But “good friends” are rarely good friends when there is money (a passenger liability payout) to be had…
It’s a good question. As I have written in the other thread (which you reference here), I think the answer is ‘yes’ for the simple reason that FAA regs govern your license and the privileges associated with it.
Peter wrote:
That FAA rules is extremely restrictive. I think it pretty well kills cost sharing in the USA
Actually, I don’t think it does. You can always cost share with a buddy to go skiing or see some event. Essentially it allows everything one would normally call ‘private flying’, taking friends and family, much as you would in a car.
I agree. I think the FAA rule allows cost sharing perfectly well. It just doesn’t allow you to offer pseudo-charter using the cost sharing rule as the European system does.
