I see this misunderstanding a lot among non-aviation people. I don't have to tell anyone what I'm doing when I fly. I can go to the airport, right now, and fly my airplane pretty much wherever I like. I don't have to file a flight plan (provided I'm flying visually - non-instrument). I can take off and fly pretty much wherever I like. I can take whatever route I prefer, provided I keep in contact via radio with the relative controllers of the various airspaces I might pass through and keep an eye out for other airplanes.
If I'm flying instrument, I do have to file a flight plan and stick to a planned route (or communicate changes to my route). And unless I'm just up doing practice around the local area, I always file a flight plan even if I am going VFR. My personal rule is over 50 nautical miles or into a class C airspace or above (basically, the area around most decent-sized airports), I file a flight plan. It's free, keeps me safe and keeps ATC happy.
There are some other ICAO rules when your start crossing ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone - the distance from shore where you must be identified). I have never personally encountered this so I would have to brush up on the appropriate procedure before doing it. But there is still nothing stopping me from doing it provided I follow the rules.
Flying is quite free and liberating. Not so much as driving, but more than most people seem to realize. It's up to me as a pilot to exercise good judgement in not getting myself and others killed.
Quite a lot of aviation regulations are designed to protect people from killing themselves and their passengers. For example, the requirements for carrying lifejackets/rafts, survival gear, etc. depending on where you're flying.
Also, as pointed out in other comments, there are requirements for flying this route (IFR, HF radio, liferafts, etc.), which are probably sufficient to protect pilots from themselves. Yet, even if you follow all the rules and wear a survival suit (which I don't think is required), it's still a highly risky endeavour.
Absolutely, yes. No one would argue that this is not a massive risk. It's risky, and there are lots of regulations that make it safer.
But just because it's risky doesn't mean it should be illegal, which is what OP seems to be implying. It's a risk, but ferry pilots do a lot of smart things to mitigate that risk.
Aviation in general is a risk, which is why we have massive tomes of rules [0] that make it safe. And even if you follow every rule to the letter, bad things can still sometimes happen that are completely out of your control. Weather could go south in a hurry, or you could have a mechanical issue and lose an engine. How you deal with those issues will decide whether you live or die.
It's risky, but it's not illegal. With a properly trained pilot and a properly maintained airplane, those risks can be controlled. Part of being a good pilot is about minimizing risk wherever you can and being ready for anything that can possibly happen in the sky.
FWIW, I would not even dream of doing a flight that long over water, and I have massive amounts of respect for those who do. Hell, I never fly further from shore than I could glide if I lost my engine. The thought of being alone in a Cessna over the North Atlantic without being able to see the shore scares the hell out of me.
[0] http://www.amazon.com/FAR-AIM-2015-Regulations-Aeronautical/...
Depends on where and how high over the Atlantic you want to do it. If you pick a spot on the North Atlantic tracks, then other people's safety is at risk (and if you fly one of those tracks without coordinating it with ATC, you're going to have a bad time when you land).
Given the time involved in gaining a pilots license and cost of aircraft, it seems that the adage 'Caveat Emptor' works just fine for oceanic air crossings.
But again, I thought that something similar already existed. Today I learned, that it doesn't.
Exactly like you could do in your car.
Those were never meant to be (and did not become) permanent.
https://www.copanational.org/CC-42.cfm
You also have to follow the usual rules about having liferafts on board, etc.
...and more importantly, what could they do if they noticed? It's not like you can "pull over" a plane in the air and suspend the pilot's license immediately, unlike with someone on the road.
There is ICAO and there are rules concerning the filing of passenger manifests and radio contact to break ADIZ (air defense identification zone), but what purpose would it serve to ban international or blue-water flying?
For the most part, the light airplanes being discussed aren't anywhere near the trans-oceanic airliners as the lights will be at FL250 (25,000') or below and usually below 18,000'. Bicycle or scooter on a highway is a completely different concern, IMO.
Some airliners have active traffic systems (most do not), but the real reason it's safe is that all the airliner and jet traffic is cruising well above where the piston-engine aircraft are flying. (The pistons will also be on high-frequency radios, making periodic position calls to Oceanic control, but those are more for the safety of that aircraft and less for traffic de-conflicting.)