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.
Just received this from AVEMCO. Looks like they'll be at the aviation show, so they can be asked directly, rather than just speculating.
We are excited to be back in Alaska! Be sure to stop by the Avemco Insurance Company booth #89 May 6-8 at the Palmer, Alaska Fairgrounds.
Robyn Miller and Luke Barnette, from our team of aviation insurance specialists, will be available to answer questions and chat with you.
Make sure to pick up a pilot cap and other items while you are there.*
Luke will be speaking about Alaska insurance claim files in his presentation “Birds, Bears, and Bullets – Wild in Alaska”.
Date: Sunday, May 8
Time: 2:00 pm to 2:50 pm
Location: Hoskins Hall – Alaska State Fairgrounds
Attendees will be able to receive WINGS credit for attending this seminar.
We hope to see you there!
Team Avemco
P.S. Even if you can’t make it to the show, take time to read the article Is Your Aviation Insurance Made for Alaska Aviation?
stewartb thanked for this post
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.
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
Narwhal liked this post
They said it should drop under $10k once I get 100 hours in type, I should have close to that by the time I complete the 40 hour flyoff snd get it to AK.Originally Posted by G44
I don’t think Alaska has anything to do with high rates for Carbon Cubs. Their accident history isn’t dominated by AK operators.
According to my insurance people/agent/contacts Alaska has something to do with it, but maybe they're just being nice?
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
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.
Narwhal would be well served to have a conversation with Robyn from Avemco while she’s there. She’s the real deal for insurance info.
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.
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.
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/categor...Super-Cub.html
Several listed on there for over $200k right now.
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."
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.)
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'
My policy is for one year at an issued rate. I have the option to change to not in motion and get a reduction in rate for a reduction in risk, but the rate doesn’t change until the policy gets reissued the following year.
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.
Any updates from anyone on experimental insurance for AK? I'm looking at bringing our bird home around May.
J
Your best bet will be to bundle it with your 180. Declared value may limit your choices. I changed my Cub from hull to liability only but will probably up that to not in motion. A neighbor lost two airplanes in a hangar fire a few days ago and has no coverage for the planes. Tough deal.
Mine dropped from a $30k/year hull premium to $12k/year once I got 100 hours in type. I would expect to pay around 3-5% of your hull value as an annual premium for experimental taildragger insurance in Alaska. I believe I was claiming 300 hours AK time when I got that quote, which is about what I have total in light airplanes and helicopters in the state.
The agent claimed I was "light on Alaska time" when I got the latest quote. I'm going to start counting flight time in and out of ANC while I'm in AK airspace in jets then, should be able to boost it up to at least 1,500 hours AK time conservatively. Takes awhile to fly from Attu to ANC even if I am just sitting there at FL330 with the autopilot on with a 600 knot groundspeed. I can't get anyone to tell me why I couldn't count that time.
I'm going to try go get 200 hours in type before I get more quotes, and claim 1,500 hours of AK time and see what happens. I don't have much interest unless I can get premiums down close to $500/mo.
In the meantime I set aside $15k/year of my own earnings into a treasury direct account holding government I-bonds which I've allocated for self-insurance money. I already have 2 years worth of insurance premium money sitting in there that otherwise would've just been padding the insurers' bottom line.
Last edited by Narwhal; 02-03-2023 at 05:24 PM.
If you think all that is bad, try asking for a quote on floats.....
MTV
Local 135 op self insured his C-185 hull value - floats, wheels, skis - but carried liability. Had a big account then poof! He went CFIT and flew west. Widow got the bundle and disposed of the plane's remains. End of story.
Gary
You're flying an airplane and you're 'in' Alaska - I agree count it. But we all know airline pilots are dangerous in small airplanes... er, wait.
I flew only SLC to ANC and back for two years straight (seriously only one other trip to ATL for recurrent in there) that's what 1.5 to 2 hours each way over AK if coastal route? Mostly 767 some 757. First job was instructor out of Merrill though so don't 'need' the AK time but I may pull it out now if every bit helps with insurance (when I get this Javron cub done).
Been a while (squirrel messing up this thread) but I would have new guys I fly with guess the initial vector ANC Center (or sometimes even departure) gave us for direct to SLC when able climbing up the Turnagain. Most all got it wrong if they had not been there before. I know you know but just seems wrong that 090 heading takes you from ANC to Salt Lake City. Pretty much if you start 090 then drift 10 degrees right every hour you will end up on 110 or so heading you will find SLC. End hijack, wait can you say that here.
I presume Narwhal’s insuring for around $350K? The $10K rate sounds totally reasonable relative to declared value.
Learning great circle navigation used to be taught in international procedures courses. The first part of planning international trips used to be with a string on a globe. While I’m not suggesting we go backwards from computer flight planning, having the basic knowledge from planning with a globe was always quite valuable in understanding generated routes.
Yeah the 12k/year quote was 3.46% of hull value ("sticker price" out the door from CC); I doubt I'm going to get it much lower. That's less as a % than I pay for full coverage on my truck.
Never learned great circle navigation but, as an amateur radio operator who likes to "chase DX", I developed a keen appreciation of where foreign countries are in terms of their great circle azimuth from Arizona. People whose only view of the world is that learned from UTM maps really don't have a clue where anything is or which way to go to get there.
Slight drift - a Great Circle direction generator> https://ns6t.net/azimuth/azimuth.html? Works direct or long path unless the sigs are following the Grey Line
Insurance is everywhere even for radio.
Gary NL7Y
Hey i know this is a year + old but did you ever try Clemens Insurance? Not sure about the AK bit but they had no issue insuring me for my RV7 purchase with zero airplane time, didnt even have a license (im a career helicopter guy though and bought this RV to do my add-on in). So my case was super high risk for insurance and they had a great rate, less than half of Avemco and others and even that will dramatically go down at renewal with a 100+ hours in the machine by that point. They've been awesome and would be worth a call.
Hey be extra careful. We had a military helicopter instructor check pilot type here who got checked out in an Aeronca 7AC. He had a reduction of power issue on take off, so went into automatic helicopter flair out of an autorotation mode of pulling back on the cyclic. The plane stalled and spun in ending his life. Stick forward with a loss of power in an airplane.
NX1PA
I'll say! We have had several like that, and not helicopter pilots. They sense the engine failure and apparently pull back to avoid the inevitable descent.
The two I remember were Cirrusi, and they never made it beyond the airport boundary. We practice engine failures every chance we get - Super Bowl Sunday is an excellent day for such practice.
Maybe where you are but not at KDVT! (KDVT just happens to be in the game TFR and there will be an infestation of business jets before and after the game. All IFR slots filled and no remaining parking according to one recent report.)
Avemco not willing to insure experimental over $200K in value (or do partial insurance or do "liability only" for experimental over $200K in value.). This per discussion today with underwriting team lead.
I had my Cub insured at $200K for a few years but it dawned on me that a $120K accident could result in them taking my plane and handing me $200K. I'd take a big hit. At $120K assessed damage I can rebuild it for a fraction of that, so I flipped it to liability, which Avemco agreed was my best path. They took no exception. I don't see how aircraft value would affect liability? FWIW I'm a long time Avemco customer and still maintain hull on my 180.
I asked the same.
There is no linkage between value and liability in terms of insuring policy - they are choosing to not underwrite liability-only or partial policies for new customers. And, even though I have been a customer in the past, they were not willing to flex their stance on underwriting the experimental.
Note that they were kind and polite about it - seemed like a market survivability choice more than anything, and we left it at a plan for me to contact them again next year to discuss.
Am going with Avemco for Alaska policy of hull on the 180, and liability + "not in motion" coverage of $200K on the experimental PA18.
Perhaps in a few years Avemco will up their max coverage of experimental aircraft to match market values. I think our Legend kit is now almost 20% more $$ than when I purchased in early JAN '22.
Be aware that should you insure for a value which is considerably lower than your investment or market value, an insurance company my choose to total the airplane for a relatively small amount of damage and then sell the salvage. You will end up being short changed.
Not in motion is more about a hangar loss. The hangar insurance won’t cover the airplane. I may do the same. Right now I’m enjoying the <$700 annual liability rate!
Posting Permissions
Thanks: 
Likes: 
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks