Insurance

[papapatoto]

I have heard the term “flying naked” Is insurance not a requirement as an aircraft owner?

[Echo]

Not if you own it.  Not wise ifyou fly with any passengers that are NOT family.  "it" happens.

[redbaron1982]

2 hours ago, Echo said:

Not if you own it.  Not wise ifyou fly with any passengers that are NOT family.  "it" happens.

I think is not wise under any circumstances... Gear up landing, off field landing and damage to third party to property etc. 

[Greg Ellis]

While not a requirement, the company I rent my hangar from require it so in one way it is a requirement for me if I wish to have the hangar I have.

[MikeOH]

Also remember that you are buying more than loss/damage coverage with your premium...you are buying LAWYERS to defend you!!

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, Greg Ellis said:

While not a requirement, the company I rent my hangar from require it so in one way it is a requirement for me if I wish to have the hangar I have.

You can buy just Liability insurance which I believe covers third parties, of course if you gear up, it’s on you.

I fly my 140 “naked” and flew my Maule also naked. I flew the Maule that way because insurance for a Maule is very high, seems many think buying a bush plane makes them a Bush pilot and many wreck them, I’ve been told a Husky’s insurance is even higher than a Maule for the same reason.

I don’t insure the 140 because dollar for dollar it’s twice as expensive as the Mooney, and I’m based on grass and I think only two companies will quote s retract on grass so my Mooney insurance isn’t low despite my time and ratings and no claim history.

I’m just thankful we are allowed to fly naked.

Neighbor built an Experimental helicopter and he said when he inquired about getting it insured they laughed.

[RobertGary1]

3 hours ago, Echo said:

Not if you own it.  Not wise ifyou fly with any passengers that are NOT family.  "it" happens.

Unless you want to keep it at an airport. 

[RobertGary1]

29 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

You can buy just Liability insurance which I believe covers third parties, of course if you gear up, it’s on you.

I fly my 140 “naked” and flew my Maule also naked. I flew the Maule that way because insurance for a Maule is very high, seems many think buying a bush plane makes them a Bush pilot and many wreck them, I’ve been told a Husky’s insurance is even higher than a Maule for the same reason.

I don’t insure the 140 because dollar for dollar it’s twice as expensive as the Mooney, and I’m based on grass and I think only two companies will quote s retract on grass so my Mooney insurance isn’t low despite my time and ratings and no claim history.

I’m just thankful we are allowed to fly naked.

Neighbor built an Experimental helicopter and he said when he inquired about getting it insured they laughed.

Yea even in commercial helicopters the hulls are only partially insured.  makes no sense to pay for a new machine every 4 years in premiums . 

[hubcap]

My airport requires you to have liability insurance in order to rent a hangar.

[midlifeflyer]

There is no requirement for hull insurance just like there's no requirement for auto comprehensive/collodion coverage.

But "flying naked" generally refers to liability.

There is no federal requirement for aircraft liability insurance. There are a few states which do require it.  There are airports which require it of based aircraft, sometimes requiring to be named as an additional insured. Banks aren't too worried about your liability, but they will insist on hull if the aircraft secures the loan.

[A64Pilot]

7 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

To be clear - you talk about buying liability insurance and also flying "naked" re: 140 and Maule

• It sounds like you have liability insurance to cover any damage you might cause to others but have dropped any hull insurance so that cost of potential repair/replacement comes out of your pocket.  

I have no insurance on the 140, and didn’t on the Maule either. Only real reason I do on the Mooney is because of the gear, in my opinion the likelihood of gear failure is greater than I’m willing to take on myself. I had NO insurance on the Maule or 140.

I was just pointing out that you can buy just liability if you feel the need, you don’t have to go full bore with insurance

I kept both in a brand new T hangar in SW Georgia, not all of the US is like I assume larger cities. 

I did insure our boat though as it’s value was about the same as most GA aircraft and better Marina’s if you stayed long term required you to name them on your insurance, but mostly because the insurance cost was a good value in my opinion.

However even though I kept it in Fl where there are boat eating hurricanes and had a million dollar liability for fuel spills etc it’s insurance was less than an aircraft, well less but I’ve heard many insurance companies are getting out of boats and won’t quote. I know why, the reason is the Charter fleets of privately owned Catamarans in the Caribbean that are leased back to the big charter companies, they don’t do anything really for the boats when the inevitable hurricane blows through, it’s not their boat after all, just let them pile up on the beach, the attitude is “that’s what insurance is for” The Charter companies know there will be a fresh crop of boats next year when they convince people that they can get a free Cat by having others pay for it in Charter.

In fact I found out when I increased the boats insured value significantly because the cost only went up a little that the biggest cost of the insurance was the million dollar liability, not the hull value, which makes sense.

I’m not against insurance, but believe there is a number to where it costs more than it’s worth, everything has a value.

I rarely go anywhere in the 140, the likelihood of me damaging someone else’s property with it is pretty much nil.

The truth is I believe that we are killing insurance, by not protecting our property, I wince every year when the hurricane is approaching Florida when I see the line of cars on I-95 evacuating and the tie downs at the airport full of aircraft tied down loosely with rotted ropes. It seems many want to “sell” the airplane to the insurance company or why else would they just abandon it to the hurricane?

I would like to see an insurance policy that cost less but had limitations, like no named storm etc. I don’t need that, because I’m putting the car in the hangar and evacuating in the Mooney, there are lots full of new cars for sale, but no Mooney’s.

[A64Pilot]

Required insurance in my opinion is a rip off, only benefits insurance companies.

For example in Fl the average Auto insurance cost is $112 a month, for that you get $10,000 liability coverage, but the law requires you to have it.

So average Joe that works at McDonalds or Home Depot or wherever pays $1,344 per yr and gets $10K coverage for liability.

https://www.flhsmv.gov/insurance/

I say don’t bother, 10K is nothing, our Tesla is in the shop for hail damage, $14,000 to repair it, medical wise 10K probably won’t even pay for the ambulance ride.

Having gone on this insurance rant I admit to carrying it for our cars, the largest part is the rather large to me liability I carry. Why? because with all the injury lawyer ads I think I’m about 1,000 times more likely to be sued for an auto accident than anything I do in my 140. I carry the max liability USAA will write.

[GeeBee]

Liability coverage is cheap. Buy lots.

 

[A64Pilot]

16 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Liability coverage is cheap. Buy lots.

 

My auto insurance, my airplane and house insurance are all about the same, combine all three and to me it’s not cheap. House value is five times the airplane and auto is so high due to liability I’m assuming.

But of course with insurance you’re betting against yourself, you are losing money, if you’re not then the insurance company is, and that wont happen long before they drop you or raise rates. That’s why I say that WE are to blame for high rates, but what concerns me is the decreasing number of insurers, there are only two that will write me on a grass strip, two isn’t much competition.

[GeeBee]

16 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

My auto insurance, my airplane and house insurance are all about the same, combine all three and to me it’s not cheap. House value is five times the airplane and auto is so high due to liability I’m assuming.

But of course with insurance you’re betting against yourself, you are losing money, if you’re not then the insurance company is, and that wont happen long before they drop you or raise rates. That’s why I say that WE are to blame for high rates, but what concerns me is the decreasing number of insurers, there are only two that will write me on a grass strip, two isn’t much competition.

If you are buying over 500K liability for auto and house individually you are wasting money. Buy 500K liability then buy  multi-millions more in umbrella coverage. Dollar per dollar umbrella coverage is cheaper than risk specific when you aggregate them. I buy 500K liability for auto, home and marine and overlay it with 5 million umbrella. Much cheaper to do it that way. Interestingly is airplane liability is cheap enough not to put it under  the umbrella primarily because umbrella underwriters do not understand aviation, so they over price it.

You are assuming wrong on auto. Collision and comp are waaaay more than liability. Believe it or not, on my Mercedes the comp is more than the collision. 3000 dollar windshields make it so.

[Pinecone]

2 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Required insurance in my opinion is a rip off, only benefits insurance companies.

For example in Fl the average Auto insurance cost is $112 a month, for that you get $10,000 liability coverage, but the law requires you to have it.

So average Joe that works at McDonalds or Home Depot or wherever pays $1,344 per yr and gets $10K coverage for liability.

https://www.flhsmv.gov/insurance/

I say don’t bother, 10K is nothing, our Tesla is in the shop for hail damage, $14,000 to repair it, medical wise 10K probably won’t even pay for the ambulance ride.

Having gone on this insurance rant I admit to carrying it for our cars, the largest part is the rather large to me liability I carry. Why? because with all the injury lawyer ads I think I’m about 1,000 times more likely to be sued for an auto accident than anything I do in my 140. I carry the max liability USAA will write.

The thing is, increasing the liability is typically a small upcharge.  I thing when I raised mine from something like 200K to 1M, it was under $5.  PER 6 MONTHS.

[midlifeflyer]

3 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Liability coverage is cheap. Buy lots.

 

That's a good point. My impression is that the standard $1 Million/ $200,000 per seat is cheap but once you start getting into the "smooth" categories, it starts heading up. Not as high as hull, but still significant. 

.Anyone have any numbers they care to share on that?

The other interesting thing is that premium also signals how the underwriters view the liability exposure. Assuming my overall impression is correct, we are most likely to damage the airplane, less likely (by a lot) to damage a passenger, and not that likely to damage people or property on the ground. 

[A64Pilot]

Thing is I tried to get a high liability that covered everything, whatever that’s called but two things blocked it, first we have high performance Auto’s, second I used to pay for my Son’s Auto insurance under my name and he has two accidents on record, I no longer do that but apparently it takes a couple of years for that to drop off.

The high performance Auto thing isn’t going to change though. As much as I enjoyed a Prius and think they are a wonderful every day grocery getter, I still enjoy driving a sport car occasionally.

I bought life insurance for the first time a few months ago and along with my age 64 and me being a pilot it wasn’t cheap. Except for the Military SGLI I had never carried life insurance as I was un-insurable until recently.

[A64Pilot]

22 hours ago, Pinecone said:

The thing is, increasing the liability is typically a small upcharge.  I thing when I raised mine from something like 200K to 1M, it was under $5.  PER 6 MONTHS.

While I don’t have numbers to back it up, but the majority of people only carry what the law requires, then add in that most people don’t have significant assets, and while this is my opinion but I think those that don’t are over represented in txting / DUI / dangerous driving types of accidents.

In other words it’s my bet that the vast majority of the time all you could get from being a victim is the min required $10,000, and frankly is $10,000 even worth going after, how much of that does the Lawyer get?

People with limited assets are what Lawyers refer to as judgement proof, no doubt you would win but as there is nothing to get no Lawyer is taking the case on consignment, so you pay thousands to get a judgement you can hang on the wall, because that’s all you could get.

And yet we require the Pizza delivery guy to pay more per month than their utility bill for what amounts to a worthless amount of insurance.

I say drop the insurance requirement and if you have the means and are concerned, buy uninsured motorist coverage, I bet most have it whether they realize it or not.

 

[LANCECASPER]

23 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

I say drop the insurance requirement and if you have the means and are concerned, buy uninsured motorist coverage, I bet most have it whether they realize it or not.

If states drop the requirement for liability insurance, you can rest assured that your relatively low present cost of Uninsured and Underinsured Motorists coverage will rise exponentially to cover all of the claims.

So then the ones who are insured will be paying double premiums - to cover their own liability and everyone elses' liability, which will cause fewer people to be insured, which will cause UIM premiums to rise further, etc, etc.

I am not big on being "required" to do things, but requiring liability insurance on automobiles has kept premiums relatively stable for responsible drivers for decades now.

[Pinecone]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

Thing is I tried to get a high liability that covered everything, whatever that’s called but two things blocked it, first we have high performance Auto’s, second I used to pay for my Son’s Auto insurance under my name and he has two accidents on record, I no longer do that but apparently it takes a couple of years for that to drop off.

The high performance Auto thing isn’t going to change though. As much as I enjoyed a Prius and think they are a wonderful every day grocery getter, I still enjoy driving a sport car occasionally.

I bought life insurance for the first time a few months ago and along with my age 64 and me being a pilot it wasn’t cheap. Except for the Military SGLI I had never carried life insurance as I was un-insurable until recently.

I had 3 BMW M cars in the house when I bumped my liability up to 1 million with USAA.  And they require your unlying liability coverage limits to be at 1 million in order to purchase an umbrella policy (which specifically excludes aviation).

[Pinecone]

27 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

If states drop the requirement for liability insurance, you can rest assured that your relatively low present cost of Uninsured and Underinsured Motorists coverage will rise exponentially to cover all of the claims.

So then the ones who are insured will be paying double premiums - to cover their own liability and everyone elses' liability, which will cause fewer people to be insured, which will cause UIM premiums to rise further, etc, etc.

I am not big on being "required" to do things, but requiring liability insurance on automobiles has kept premiums relatively stable for responsible drivers for decades now.

I just wish that the required limits would be realistic for today.   Yes, 40 years ago you could get a reasonable car under $10,000. But now?  NOT POSSIBLE.

[A64Pilot]

57 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

If states drop the requirement for liability insurance, you can rest assured that your relatively low present cost of Uninsured and Underinsured Motorists coverage will rise exponentially to cover all of the claims.

So then the ones who are insured will be paying double premiums - to cover their own liability and everyone elses' liability, which will cause fewer people to be insured, which will cause UIM premiums to rise further, etc, etc.

I am not big on being "required" to do things, but requiring liability insurance on automobiles has kept premiums relatively stable for responsible drivers for decades now.

It’s just 10K, what would that cost us? I already have under / uninsured coverage it came with my policy, I bet most of us do. In today’s prices that 10K is a drop in the bucket, insignificant and I bet in reality it’s eaten up by Lawyers anyway

The problem as I see it is it cost people who can’t really afford it $120 a month. It seems pretty apparent to me that the insurance industry got a law passed that really doesn’t help people much, but makes them large profits. If it were $100,000 and cost $120 then I’d have a different opinion

Think about what your insurance bill would be if every 10K of coverage cost $120 a month? One mil div by 10,000 is 100, 100 x 120 is 12,000, so your one mil coverage at that rate would cost you $12,000 a month, $144,000 a year, Who profits there? Think that required insurance just might be a little overpriced?

Insurance is about odds, Yes my aircraft are paid for, I view them as toys and don’t finance toys. Now back in the day when I could write them off was different.

I’m sure it happens, but I’ve never seen nor heard of a small aircraft accident that had to pay for damages to property, not where I live and fly. My largest exposure would be I’d have to put down on a golf course in the Villages, except for the villages I don’t fly over large populated areas.  Note, I don’t expect to be the idiot who taxis into a tied down airplane. So far as recovery, it would take me a couple hours max to disassemble a 140 and put it on a flatbed trailer. Over the years we have had to recover a couple of airplanes in the neighborhood, we get together and do it, last one was a Searay who the pilot landed on a nearby lake, with the gear down, local boat towed it to close to shore where we put it on a trailer. There was some noise about the EPA and fuel, but I don’t think that went anywhere.

So while I would miss them I could afford to scrap them, as I said I’m not willing to accept the odds on the landing gear, so I do insure the Mooney, especially since the spring can’t be had. Everything except the actuator I’m comfortable with inspecting.

I don’t believe the little 10K required insurance amount has done anything at all for those who desire more, it’s obviously a rip off because what you buy over the required amount is priced at less than 1/10 as much.

What does this have to do with aircraft? Just that I’m happy that we aren’t forced by law to buy aircraft insurance. Why aren’t we required? Simple, we are such a small population that the cost of lobbying for the law wouldn’t be covered by the small amount of insurance sold, yeah I believe required auto insurance was bought and paid for by the insurance industry by bribing Congress, and unfortunately it cost those who can least afford it the most, I think it should be repealed.

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, Pinecone said:

I had 3 BMW M cars in the house when I bumped my liability up to 1 million with USAA.  And they require your unlying liability coverage limits to be at 1 million in order to purchase an umbrella policy (which specifically excludes aviation).

All I know is they turned me down, and I or my Wife haven’t had an accident in decades, I don’t think an at fault one in thirty years, but my Son has had a couple, none that hurt anyone, but he was on my policy then so they count, I’ll try again in a year or so.

USAA. isn’t what it used to be, it’s just another insurance agency now as they essentially let anyone in.

[Aerodon]

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=aab2be79-b528-45de-be04-aafcaa8543b6

The nearly new M600 is probably a $3m plane, and the remains are on the salvage circuit now, so the owner is probably getting a new one.   If you read the NTSB report, the P51 pilot's friends threw him under the bus by saying he always taxied too fast and never did S turns.

The M600 insurance company is probably going to pay the owner quite quickly, but they are not in the habit of stopping there.  Let's just imagine this P51 pilot had no liability insurance (or not enough) as a lot of warbird owners tend to do.  I think he needs to worry about a claim.

 

Aerodon