Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, Gig 601XL Builder wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net posted:

Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, BT posted:

As long as the total of reimbursements are less than 50% of the
cost of the flight, it doesn't conflict with the FARs. OTOH, if
someone has a bug up their posterior and wants to hassle you, they
don't have to be right or interpret the FARs correctly.

Neil

As long as their total contribution is not more than their pro rata
share of the cost of the flight.
50% if there is only one person going with you.. but the example
was three others.

Reading of 61.113 (c) is pretty clear:

(c) A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the
operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the
expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental
fees.

So, the 50% figure *is* the "pro rata share" that the private pilot
must pay *for the flight*. It doesn't matter how many contributors
there are.

Neil

WHAT! If there are 4 the pro rata share of $100=$25. If there are 100
the pro rata share is $1.

pro ra·ta (pro ra't?, rä'-, rat'?)
adv.
In proportion, according to a factor that can be calculated exactly.

Your generalized application of the term "pro rata" does not account
for the 50% requirement. For example, one could easily "calculate
exactly" 20% of the cost of a flight, but if that is all a private
pilot pays, then the FAA is likely to consider the other 80% paid
compensation.

As long as the private pilot must pay 50% of the cost of the flight,
the sum of all other contributions can't exceed that amount. Now, if
someone can support the notion that the private pilot doesn't have to
pay 50% of the cost of a flight except under the remaining 61.113
guidelines, that is a different matter. However, such a notion would
make 61.113 (c) moot, so it seems a pretty remote possibility to me.

Neil
Who will continue to pay 50% of the cost of the flight.

I just went back a reread all of 61.113. No where can I find the phrase
"greater than 50%" or even 50%. 61.113 (c) as written above is the only part
of the regulation that discusses splitting of costs of flight among the
passengers of a PPL piloted aircraft.

Since there is no definition of "pro rata" in the FAR definition section we
must assume that pro rata is meant to be the common usage which means, as
I've written above, In proportion, according to a factor that can be
calculated exactly. In this case the factor that can be calculated exactly
is the number of passengers.

Now in the case of a plane rented wet it is easy (Rental price + airport
fees)/pax. If on the other hand I'm in my plane and I know the cost of
flying includes things like overhaul and maintenance prepaids I have to
deduct those before I do the math as the regulation specifically says that I
can only pro rata the fuel, oil, airport expenditures and rental fee.

I'm curious where you get the 51% rule?