Experimental Insurance in Alaska
- Thread starter Narwhal
- Start date
bob turner
Registered User
My Decathlon hull premium is under a grand. Could be that Cubs get beat up more often?
I note above that flight instruction is not excluded. Flight instruction is the most difficult to get covered - and most expensive. You sre lucky.
I note above that flight instruction is not excluded. Flight instruction is the most difficult to get covered - and most expensive. You sre lucky.
G44
MEMBER
SW Michigan
Ya but both can burn up in a hangar fire. The underwriter has taken this into account.
Someone told me that CFI insurance is almost impossible to get in Alaska now.....
Anyway, I got rejected again by Avemco at 350k declared value, I tried a third time with 250k and got a little further, at least this time they sent me an extra experimental questionnaire asking about time in the specific airplane and modifications. I'm still waiting to hear back from Falcon. Northwest Insurance Group in Hillsboro, OR said they were not licensed to provide coverage in Alaska and accordingly would not sell to a plane based there.
Anyway, I got rejected again by Avemco at 350k declared value, I tried a third time with 250k and got a little further, at least this time they sent me an extra experimental questionnaire asking about time in the specific airplane and modifications. I'm still waiting to hear back from Falcon. Northwest Insurance Group in Hillsboro, OR said they were not licensed to provide coverage in Alaska and accordingly would not sell to a plane based there.
Well, things have certainly not improved.
As I'm researching my trip through Canada I discover that liability insurance is required. Believe it or not no one will even cover that. Avemco was downright rude about it and told me they were not interested in less than friendly terms (I guess they weren't amused when I tried to get subsequent hull quotes by incrementally lowering the hull value). BWI said no. Falcon said no. Again to liability only. Also, no one will offer a reason. Since the Alaska Airmen were able to insure their pilots, I have to assume it is lack of tailwheel time. Can't be time in type alone, because those guys had 0, maybe they persuaded their carrier to count PA18.
So now I have no way to legally get the airplane back to Alaska, other than hope that the 40 hours I get during my fly-off will be sufficient for someone to at least offer liability for the ferry. Technically, it seems that the insurance is required even for Canada overflight.
First world problems I guess. Again no accident history. 700+ hours Alaska time. Too much tricycle I guess but I'm renting a Citabria as much as I can.
As I'm researching my trip through Canada I discover that liability insurance is required. Believe it or not no one will even cover that. Avemco was downright rude about it and told me they were not interested in less than friendly terms (I guess they weren't amused when I tried to get subsequent hull quotes by incrementally lowering the hull value). BWI said no. Falcon said no. Again to liability only. Also, no one will offer a reason. Since the Alaska Airmen were able to insure their pilots, I have to assume it is lack of tailwheel time. Can't be time in type alone, because those guys had 0, maybe they persuaded their carrier to count PA18.
So now I have no way to legally get the airplane back to Alaska, other than hope that the 40 hours I get during my fly-off will be sufficient for someone to at least offer liability for the ferry. Technically, it seems that the insurance is required even for Canada overflight.
First world problems I guess. Again no accident history. 700+ hours Alaska time. Too much tricycle I guess but I'm renting a Citabria as much as I can.
frequent_flyer
Registered User
Arizona, USA
I had attempted to get an FX-3 quote from Avemco. They were not rude but refused to quote and refused to provide any reason other than "underwriting policy".
Starr Indemnity and Liability Company is known to provide hull and liability coverage for the FX-3. Perhaps try contacting them directly and asking if they can suggest an agent licensed to do business in Alaska.
I was able to get coverage with only one hour in type and a briefing from a factory pilot. I actually had 2 hours in type when I took delivery. I did have PA-18 time and time in several other tail wheel types with over 500 hours tail wheel. It was the PA-18 time that I think finally convinced them to cover me without needing 5 hours or more in type.
Two more FX-3 suffered substantial damage in landing accidents just this year. I suspect that it may be even more difficult to find FX-3 coverage soon. The sad thing is that it's one of the best behaved tail wheel aircraft I have flown.
Thanks frequent_flyer! I filled out Starr's email form.
bob turner
Registered User
Yeah, me too. E-mailed with a VP. No luck. I am almost out of the CFI business.
A friend put together a nice J-5 from scraps. A beautiful restoration. I have 7000 tailwheel hours, but only two in the J-5.
His broker said without 50 hours in type (make & model) nobody would issue me a Waiver of Subrogation.
That is a change - within the last five years I have been issued waivers in the SR 77 and the ZPF-7, two very different airplanes from Cub-type.
He said part of it was my advanced age.
The solution may be to just add hull to my SAFE policy. Really expensive! Not worth it for the limited instruction I do.
A friend put together a nice J-5 from scraps. A beautiful restoration. I have 7000 tailwheel hours, but only two in the J-5.
His broker said without 50 hours in type (make & model) nobody would issue me a Waiver of Subrogation.
That is a change - within the last five years I have been issued waivers in the SR 77 and the ZPF-7, two very different airplanes from Cub-type.
He said part of it was my advanced age.
The solution may be to just add hull to my SAFE policy. Really expensive! Not worth it for the limited instruction I do.
courierguy
MEMBER
Inkom, Idaho
I was greatly surprised to find that when I asked for a liability quote on my homebuilt, after I told the agent my age, about my 400' strip, hours, and where and how I fly, they came back with a quote so low I jumped on it. Avemco.
bob turner
Registered User
Don’t get me wrong - Avemco is the lowest premium for the max coverage for my non-instructional flying. They are not at all interested in insuring flight instruction, although they do have a couple of variants that cover some instructional activities.
It may be that I will be seriously limited in the future as to instruction given. Maybe it is time . . . Most folks do not even live this long, let alone be able to jump in a Cub or Stearman - both of which I shall do in the next four hours.
It may be that I will be seriously limited in the future as to instruction given. Maybe it is time . . . Most folks do not even live this long, let alone be able to jump in a Cub or Stearman - both of which I shall do in the next four hours.
55-PA18A
SPONSOR
Dillingham, Alaska
Just received this from AVEMCO. Looks like they'll be at the aviation show, so they can be asked directly, rather than just speculating.
|
I did finally get a quote through Falcon/Starr. $32,000/year for hull and $3,000/year liability only. At least I can fly through Canada legally with the liability only. I am grateful that I can get anything at this point. Looking through all the cub accidents in AK last year is pretty sobering, knowing that for everything in there were probably 2-3 more claims not in the NTSB database.
G44
MEMBER
SW Michigan
Wow! I figured it would be expensive but 32k. I guess that is what they need to charge considering all the accidents up in Ak, been that way for 50 years or more. At least you can get liability and get her home. Did they give you any indication the cost of hull coverage when you get a year or two of flying and ownership under your belt?
Kurt
Kurt
According to my insurance people/agent/contacts Alaska has something to do with it, but maybe they're just being nice?
mvivion
SPONSOR
Bozeman,MT
Alaska rates will always be higher for this type aircraft. True off airport ops are very common in AK, and not nearly as common in lower 48 Ops. Secondly, cost of recovery in AK is typically MUCH higher than in lower 48.
Combine those, and the fact that helicopters often become necessary in AK recovery, and that’s a large part of the difference, at least. How much of that is real? Dunno, but I’ll tell you that a significant “oops” in the Brooks Range, or NW Alaska, or any one of many places in Alaska gets really expensive, really fast.
Break one down here, not so much. But the difference in numbers of true off airport ops is very high as well.
MTV
bob turner
Registered User
I have no knowledge, but as a guess, aren't CCs operated by a different group? In Alaska, the Super Cub seems to get the job done, and my impression is that if you have $300 grand for a new Cub you are not really a bush pilot, and are getting ready to play one on TV.
frequent_flyer
Registered User
Arizona, USA
It is very unlikely that you will see my FX-3 or me on YouTube. I have never claimed to be a bush pilot and don't even know if there is a well accepted definition of the term. I just like to take my FX-3 to places I can't take my PA-28 (well I could take it to those places but getting the wreckage out would be expensive).
My FX-3 is an expensive toy not a work truck. I have no problem with that.
aeroaddict
MEMBER
Boise ID area
Ouch! As a CC owner with legacy death gear, I do fly 'off road' here in Idaho. Definitely not Alaska, but we do have numerous areas to 'play' around in. Mine isn't $300K and I built it (yes it was a kit, EX2).
Back to the original question; insurance the first year was insane. Flew the wings off the first year and reduced the cost by over half for the second year.
Back to the original question; insurance the first year was insane. Flew the wings off the first year and reduced the cost by over half for the second year.
Have you looked at prices on good condition PA-18's lately? $300k isn't too far off for some of them.
https://www.barnstormers.com/category-21196-Piper--PA-18-Super-Cub.html
Several listed on there for over $200k right now.
bob turner
Registered User
I didn't mean to disparage rich guys who want to land off-airport. I was just suggesting that maybe some of the CC insurance payouts were causing insurers to take another look. A hull premium of $33k per year might indicate that one out of every 15 or so is having a serious insured incident every year.
I am also guessing that Alaska operators of PA-18s might be self-insuring. Counting liability, that kind of insurance premium is around $100/day, even on days when you are down for maintenance. That gets passed on to customers -
Take my comments with a grain of salt - I have no idea how folks make money with lightplanes. I see $10,000 annuals that take two months, fuel over $7/gal, engines and props with a half-year lead time, hangar rents exceeding a grand a month - baffling how we keep flying these things at all. I am above all not a "businessman."
I am also guessing that Alaska operators of PA-18s might be self-insuring. Counting liability, that kind of insurance premium is around $100/day, even on days when you are down for maintenance. That gets passed on to customers -
Take my comments with a grain of salt - I have no idea how folks make money with lightplanes. I see $10,000 annuals that take two months, fuel over $7/gal, engines and props with a half-year lead time, hangar rents exceeding a grand a month - baffling how we keep flying these things at all. I am above all not a "businessman."
bob turner
Registered User
And speaking of Super Cub values, a buddy is considering selling - low time 160, good cover and interior, extended wingtips (ugh) decent radio - always hangared and flown regularly. I thought $120 was stretching it - wrong again?
I wonder Is it required to pay that high premium for the whole year if 100 hours was flown off in two months? I wonder if the premium might be immediately adjusted when the rate reducing milestone is reached? (Some folks have flown 100 hours in a month.)
aeroaddict
MEMBER
Boise ID area
Good question, and I didn't ask my insurance. So maybe the Op might suggest this to a potential insurer to see if there is a break point in hours flown where rates could be reduced.
Signed,
One of the 'Rich Guys'
Signed,
One of the 'Rich Guys'
I've asked that directly to BWI at least, and they wouldn't give a definitive answer. Every policy is a combination of factors of which time in type is just 1, according to them. They probably don't want to share all the factors (like age) for fear of some kind of discrimination suit. It's their right to offer insurance or not, as long as the government doesn't require their product I have no issue with the way they conduct their business.
They did offer that people with 50 hours in type are usually a lot more insurable than those without that. The premium formulations are all some kind of secret sauce that they don't want to share. I'm not complaining, just sharing facts of what I've learned. I knew when I ordered the airplane that insurance was going to be a stretch, which is why I've been renting Citabrias and Super Cubs when I can afford to, sometimes solo, sometimes with instructors, and am up to about 100 hours tailwheel, most of that in the last year. In the end none of that time seemed to matter much though, although it will definitely make me safer for when I have to fly uninsured.
Additionally I'm not really a rich guy, especially not by Alaska standards. I don't own a home or have any children despite a relatively advanced age. I sacrificed/delayed that stuff for the plane I wanted and a hangar. Stupid? Maybe, but it's a free country I guess.
I would love to go to the Airman's show and speak with Avemco if for no other reason than to learn, but I am working all day, every day this month including weekends to make time for my airplane's fly-off and delivery next month.
Similar threads
