Insurance

[arborite]

I assume all these quotes include the $1,000,000 liability coverage with $100k per seat limit, right? or is this just for hull coverage?

[Nev]

Mine includes NZ$2m liability. I'll amend to add that.

[jaredyates]

Just thinking out loud here, should I move this thread to the members only section if we are going to talk about liability limits?

[Sir Newton]

It is common to run liability only 2 million combined.

[Bcone1381]

I started wondering to myself .... could training be connected with insurance?

Lets say a group of owners....maybe form some type of insurance club.... could get together and self insure. A part of membership might be training, and and annual proficiency requirements. Basically, training specific to the aircraft type with the goal of lowering accident rates, combined with proficency requirements, and then a group insurance cost that would be lower because the group has risk of lower claims. It might even include an aircraft inspection with the purpose of flagging issues that might elevate risk. Gear alignment? Fuel system install?

If one could partner with Mark G to agree to provide parts like wings, then even more cost control might exist. As the fleet grows, a growth area for the factory might be replacement wings and parts that have a very high level of completion. A wing built to completion at the factory would be cool.

[Bissetg]

Good comment Brooks perhaps it could be in the Stop bending Bearhawks thread too?

[Pbruce]

I’ve had mixed luck with COPA in Canada. We insured a partnership and then one year they just said “no” after no claims. We could not talk to the u dear-writer about why not. I couldn’t get builder insurance there at all so I went to EAA and that experience was frankly, outrageous. All they do is tell you how badly we need it and that they can provide it Then they refer you to an insurance broker or maybe directly to the underwriter (I’m not sure exactly). Then they take their cut or their referral fee and leave you to it. Some of the rates are preposterous and when shown, they do nothing about it.

For example, I had to disclose all kinds of info about my flying experience and intended use, all of which are totally irrelevant while building, I’m a professional with 25K hours. So what? I was trying to buy BUILDER insurance. They actually quoted me 2.5% of hull value annually (about $4k cdn) for builder insurance. I showed them comparisons to US rates and all they said was “different market”. Well, that may be, but if so, it’s a safer, less risky one in general because the demographic is generally more heavily concentrated in the middle-income strata with fewer on the wealthier or poorer ends if the spectrum and everybody generally paying a higher tax burden for benefits like fire and police. This is not a political comment, just an assessment of how the insurance company chosen by EAA Canada is flying in an opposite direction from the actuarial data. I’m really steamed about this. At the moment, I’m without the insurance because it’s simply too expensive for the risks covered. Realistically, those would be fire, vandalism/theft and flood. If anyone has found reasonable rates in Canada, I’d love to hear about it.

[Archull]

I just was given a sticker shock on insurance for a 22' Bearhawk Patrol I am looking to purchase. Granted I am low time, still finishing my PPL. Currently flying a Piper PA16 clipper I purchased this last year. Just about all of my time is tailwheel, the guy teaching me has over 40,000 hrs, most of it tailwheel (he owns 2 crop dusting companies & a flight school) and he is also on my insurance. My Piper Clipper with a $65k hull coverage is costing me $2,650/yr and I just got the quote on the Patrol with a $135k hull coverage and they wanted $13,600/yr for insurance. I was surprised at the large price jump.

[jaredyates]

That is abnormally high. Do you feel like your broker is getting enough underwriters to quote it?

[Utah-Jay]

I just was given a sticker shock on insurance for a 22' Bearhawk Patrol I am looking to purchase. Granted I am low time, still finishing my PPL. Currently flying a Piper PA16 clipper I purchased this last year. Just about all of my time is tailwheel, the guy teaching me has over 40,000 hrs, most of it tailwheel (he owns 2 crop dusting companies & a flight school) and he is also on my insurance. My Piper Clipper with a $65k hull coverage is costing me $2,650/yr and I just got the quote on the Patrol with a $135k hull coverage and they wanted $13,600/yr for insurance. I was surprised at the large price jump.

You need to change insurance agents

[Archull]

That is abnormally high. Do you feel like your broker is getting enough underwriters to quote it?

He was telling me that he was having trouble finding an underwriter to write a policy on the plane, especially without prior type certification and who is currently still getting their PPL. My piper clipper was 1/5th of the price annually as this plane, granted I know that the hull value is twice the price but that is a 500% increase in premium.

[Archull]

You need to change insurance agents

He has always been the cheapest that I have priced prior to this quote. He was having trouble finding an underwriter who would write the policy at all. He said he often writes experimental policies however most tend to be Vans RV's. My buddy has his RV9 with the same agent and is only paying $1500 per year with a hull value of $160k and he has his son on the policy as well, he is a new pilot with under 100hrs. Don't know, I am going to call around tomorrow to find alternatives. I was more or less curious to see who everyone here is using.

[gregc]

I have found that I need to shop around for multiple quotes every year. Currently I am using Acrisure (EAA) but I have used BWI and Avemco and others in the past. It's not clear to me why there is such a large amount of variation but I often get quotes that differ by 3X for the same coverage.

[alaskabearhawk]

Avemco quoted me $16k/yr for hull insurance. I’m paying $1800/yr for liability only.

[Nev]

Quite a few guys in NZ insure through Trafford UK, online. I believe they have a good history where claims have occurred and reasonable premiums, though I haven't personally insured with them yet. https://www.traffords-insurance.co.uk/aviation

I'm currently insurered with AON and paying around USD$1900 per annum (including tax), for cover of USD$190,000. This has a USD$11,000 excess (deductible) which lowers the premium significantly, so I'm essentially self insuring that portion. It means that I'm insuring for a large claim, but self insuring for a small one. It also gives me pause for thought before each flight/landing !

[Battson]

He was telling me that he was having trouble finding an underwriter to write a policy on the plane, especially without prior type certification and who is currently still getting their PPL. My piper clipper was 1/5th of the price annually as this plane, granted I know that the hull value is twice the price but that is a 500% increase in premium.

I have heard this is a firm policy for some underwriters. It sounds like some underwriters won't insure at all, if you have no pilot's license or no time on type / type rating. Although these policies do change from time to time. When friends have tried to get quotes, they have been declined outright by a number of companies, and other quotes have been expensive.

To get around this, one of my friends is flying uninsured until they get some time up, a couple of others are flying with very expensive premiums through a more risk-hungry underwriter. It depends on how you like to manage risk.

[zkelley2]

My most recent quote was $8500/yr. $135k hull. I declined.

In the insurance premiums I have saved since I finished the airplane, I can buy a whole new kit.

[Bcone1381]

I'm curious about something, and ask you to answer this question. If a list of common errors plus industry best operating practices were developed, then folded into an insurance product at a considerable savings, would you agree to operate within those limits?

I'm thinking like
-annual recurrent training
-always tie down when laying over for more than a few hours.
-no off airport flying
-no floats.
-no operations below 500' except traffic pattern work.
-maybe some crosswind limits too.

[zkelley2]

So no flying then? I can't see the point of owning an aircraft under those terms. The last 4 anyways.

Honestly if that seams reasonable, you have the wrong aircraft.

[gregc]

“ would you agree to operate within those limits?” - short answer, no.

[Nev]

No. The majority of my flying is off airport. If insurance becomes too expensive I would continue without it. No problem with annual recurrent flying.

[arborite]

A quick search on the NTSB website for Bearhawk shows seven recorded accidents. (There are likely more that are registered under a different name) Five are some sort of loss of control during landing at an airport. Most are very low time aircraft, well under 100 hrs total time. The other two are the well discussed inflight structural ones.

just speculating, but there are likely more unreported accidents where the owner repaired on their own. Ground loops are not rare in the tailwheel world. Landing incidents tend to be at/near the top of most tailwheel aircraft reports. Insurance reflects that, especially for high hull value planes with very low total time.

An insurance carrier might be interested in type specific training specifically on the landing and rollout phase of flight. Perhaps some initial qualifying training followed by requirement for a minimum number of landings every xxx days to maintain currency, similar to instrument approach currency, with dual required to become current again. Several other complex types (Cirrus, Aerostar, MU2) created this type of specific training to address their high accident rate issues. I am not aware of any tail dragger program. the carbon cub folks are paying dearly for their insurance, likely a reflection of insurance claims on the type. It might be worth discussing with them to see if there is anything in the works.

I’m a very average stick and rudder flyer, lots of total hours but only about 300 in tailwheel planes. To say I’m still learning is an understatement. My landing skills quickly erode after even a few weeks of inactivity. I’m trying to get as much experience as I can before my LSA is finished. A typical sortie in the Cub or 140 is a local flight to nearby strips with lots and lots of landings. I’ve considered switching to a Luscombe 8A/E to more closely simulate the responsive controls and relatively narrow main gear track of the Bearhawk. Would be interested in others’ thoughts on best trainers.

[zkelley2]

Type specific training with regards to takeoff and landings goes a really long ways to prevent accidents. I'm honestly surprised insurance companies don't require this as is.

[jaredyates]

I wish more folks offered it!

[svyolo]

For full coverage, the two companies I got quotes from required 20 hours dual in type. But they wanted 8k, so I wasn't going down that road anyway. <900 a year, just liability - usually required to rent a hangar.