Parker_Woodruff

Different companies look at it differently but yes typically they’ll look the other way when there is little/no payment (some don’t even consider if it’s less than $10K paid). The other side of it is we many times have to report all accidents and incidents whether or not insurance was involved. Basically, your submission will get flagged but then we send a note to underwriting and they usually let things go with no penalty. After all, you’re fulfilling your obligation to let them know of anything that may give rise to a claim.

It depends. Sometimes if they have a similar model experience, the insurance company will just specifically approve a CFI. Other times, they might require the CFI go fly the plane solo for an hour and then give instruction. I've had to do this twice recently. Go fly the E solo because I only had C time but obviously know how to run an IO-360 from the F and J models. Or fly the Acclaim solo for an hour (that was fun) because I had plenty of Ovation time, but not Acclaim time.

If we are talking a $225,000 SR-22 and a $225,000 M20R, rates aren’t that far off .

Seems like the rates are running about the same these days.

Ok, we all want to know what’s going on. I now have two clients with missing engines today. 2 different carriers.

And I'll add to my note above regarding turning it in to the insurance company... Insurance policies require that you advise the insurance company of any situation that could give rise to a claim within a reasonable period of time. So if the situation drags past a few weeks, they should be involved since they could be the ones eating the loss and have every right to recover damages from those responsible. And again, they're on the hook for the expenses in investigating, making demands of the shipping company, etc.

For all of the above recommending an attorney - that can work, but the other way is to send it to your insurance company. They're really good at subrogating, it takes a lot of the hassle out of your hands, and you get back to flying on your terms.

Probably $3000-$3500. The cost of switching airplanes will more than eclipse the first year's insurance hit. Especially if sales taxes are involved...

Assuming a $100K airplane...It's doable but look for $4500-$6000 for your first year. Year two with a good amount of RG time for all pilots involved should be $3K or less. 6 months ago I probably could have done this for $3500. Parker@airspeedinsurance.com 214-295-5055

Needs a new prop

Seth, can you remind me why your cowling has the different opening on the top left side?

You’d never make the saved premium back that you’d have to spend for a field approved conversion like that. And there is no fixed gear M20E in the underwriting tables...so you might not even get a better rate. Just be with the right insurance company at age 68 and re-evaluate with your broker at age 74.

Yes but sometimes it’s easier to get than a policy including physical damage

If their renewal application doesn't ask if you've received an IPC in the last 12 months, make sure to let them know. Also, confirm with them they checked that box in USAIG's quoting system before binding your renewal.

If you're talking about from a rating perspective, it depends on the insurance company. Regardless of insurance... - Annual IPC for instrument rated pilots (USAIG offers a discount for this) - Starr gives discounts for completing a complete phase of the WINGS program within the previous 12 months. - Annual instrument training for VFR-only pilots - Fly with a CFI who knows your make/model once or twice per year. - Fly a good amount of hours per year. When I worked for an insurance carrier they let us use the company airplane (C182) but they wanted us to fly at least 90 hours per year.

Non-instrument rated pilot on your policy brings less carriers willing to quote. Your $1MM smooth with Old Republic was likely due to a good broker calling in a favor for you.

come back next year with 100 RG and I bet you're in the low $2000s or better.

USAIG is different than AIG. AIG - American International Group USAIG - United States Aircraft Insurance Group. Which involves Berkshire Hathaway.

Every one of the airports listed, with the exception of Chuckanut, WA (assuming BLI was the airport) has either a high density altitude or a shorter runway (~3600 is the longest runway other than BLI or SAF). I wonder if there is some tense maneuvering going on at these shorter runways.

Yep, and USAIG didn't play the huge race to the bottom in rates. I would guess they lost a lot of market share in that time, but no one has been truly surprised by any of their moves. As an agent, I can't tell you how much I appreciate the way they conduct business. When I start the workday, I pretty much always know what to expect from them. They've been doing this for about 100 years, so I guess they have a good idea of what works...

My first hand experience is that the RV-8A is the most common homebuilt I've insured at Airspeed. Never flown in one. It seems with pilot time above 500 hours, they are in the low-mid $1000s per year to insure for $100K Hull. Tailwheel version is more, of course.

I didn't think we would be seeing this so quickly with pistons, but it was definitely expected with turbines (Starr wants 1986 or newer for turbines now). I need to check on the piston side, but this might just apply to piston twins.

I guess you just have to set a number somewhere. For some carriers, it's 70, others 75, others 80.

First, it's not just about the gear. It's about RG aircraft typically being faster and less forgiving in the event of pilot error. If reflexes aren't as good in autos at higher ages, then that would certainly trend with aircraft, even if pilots are the cream of the crop. I don't think there is enough data compiled to make an actual aviation specific case. Aviation doesn't have the numbers to really get actuarial like auto insurers can. It sure seems like there a disproportionate number of losses in the older pilot segment, but proving it would be difficult. When I worked for a major carrier, losses were coded based on the type of loss: Tow bar left attached before startup, gear up, mechanical failure, etc. But the software used in claims, to my understanding, did not include reporting on the age of the pilot involved in the claim due to software limitations (2010s underwriting software connected to 1980s claims management software). I'll throw my point of concern about moving pilots out of their Mooneys at older age: If the insurance carrier wants to force that issue (and it's a valid concern, IMO), they should also force the issue of training even in the Piper Warrior, C172/182, etc. If an older pilot has been flying his M20C for 30 years, he's all of a sudden going to have a new sight picture, among other things to learn. While the speeds and complexity has been reduced, we have added a new sight picture and feel which carries risk in itself.. Just as we'd want 10 hours dual for a pilot transitioning to an M20C from a C172, I think training in a less complex aircraft is just as important because you've taken someone out of the environment where they're comfortable, they know where the switches are, they know the sight picture, etc.

Take someone who had been with the same insurance company for 18 years and for no other reason than price was switched because a "better deal" was had...and that person was switched to a carrier that non-renews people at a certain age...the previous carrier would have kept renewing as long as the Insured stayed a customer...