Insurance for student pilot on experimental aircraft

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
11,102
Location
CT, USA
That makes perfect sense. The thing I see a bit differently, and it's not right or wrong:
If I have hull insurance, I am, in effect, paying to replace my plane (through my premiums, over time). And, clearly, paying much more than that (somebody is paying for those big skyscrapers, salaries, advertisements, and dividends). Actuarially, and figuring the opportunity cost of my spent hull insurance premiums, I'd be way behind.
My preference would be to buy less airplane because, for me, the marginal utility of more airplane is not worth the marginal cost of that additional up front out-of-pocket expenditure plus the hull premiums. To many others, the additional marginal cost is well worth it.
Insurance is really just legalized gambling. You're betting you're going to crash, the insurance company is betting you won't, and as always the odds favor the house.

The plane I have now is the first I've ever had hull. If it was uninsured and I lost it, I'd be back to ultralights... nothing inherently wrong with that, but I'm enjoying this different aspect of flying at the moment.
 

flyby50

Active Member
Supporting Member
Joined
May 4, 2022
Messages
25
Location
Arizona
Is aircraft insurance the same as auto insurance lets say you have a prop strike it which totals out the aircraft do they pay you the least amount of money they are able to find what a dealer would pay you for it.
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
11,102
Location
CT, USA
Is aircraft insurance the same as auto insurance lets say you have a prop strike it which totals out the aircraft do they pay you the least amount of money they are able to find what a dealer would pay you for it.
Aircraft insurance is usually based on "declared value"; if it's totaled that's what they'll pay you.

The flip side is that if the aircraft is worth $60K and you insure it for only $30K for cheaper premiums, if you damage it to the tune of $25K repairs they'll total it and you only get the $30K and they now own the plane.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
1,062
Location
Dollywood
If this is a public airport that gets federal funds, what is an eaa chapter doing controlling ramp space?

If its a private field, then you are sol. But a public airfield should not have and eaa chapter doing anything like that.
 

skydawg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2016
Messages
177
Location
Denver, Colorado
Recently spoke with my insurance agent who said 4 carriers dropped out of market in last year. Not looking forward to my renewal bill in November.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
6,164
Location
Upper midwest in a house
If this is a public airport that gets federal funds, what is an eaa chapter doing controlling ramp space?
the eaa chapter is leasing/renting space from the airport. Some of that lease by default includes ramp space. The lessee (in this case, EAA chapter x) is under no obligation to provide even 1sq inch of the property they lease/rent to another party free of charge. Not aware of any provision in an AIP/block grant that requires an airport to provide ”free” tie down space.
 

kent Ashton

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
819
Location
Concord, NC
The whole aircraft insurance situation just sucks. We are collectively paying multi-millions of dollars not just to insure our ourseleves but to insure airport administrators and municipalities that imagine THEY will get sued in connection to something WE did. How often does that happen? Rarely, I would bet.

It could be helped if the FAA would reform the Grant Assurances to say that a public airport that takes federal funds (1) cannot enforce "additional insured" requirements against airport tenants and (2) operators at a public airport who choose to fly naked do so at their own risk (which is the case when an operator with no liability insureance, from say, a private airstrip, flies into a public airport). However, it would take an act of congress to change the FAA on this. I will go quietly now, nurse.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,984
Location
Memphis, TN
The only business that will increase its rates to cover its losses, and have a customer base pretty much stuck following. They WILL make their profit. While all business have to cover it all to stay in business, most businesses don’t get to dictate a no loss policy. Loose one year, and the next will recover that loss in addition to the regular profit. Until they are required to hold a substantial amount of money in reserve, like they use to,it will be like this.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
1,062
Location
Dollywood
Not aware of any provision in an AIP/block grant that requires an airport to provide ”free” tie down space.
Public airport kinda implies it.

From the AIP
These include obligations to operate and maintain the airport in a safe and serviceable condition, not grant exclusive rights, mitigate hazards to airspace, and use airport revenue properly.


Having a back 40 for 'da public' would cure anything related to exclusivity
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
6,164
Location
Upper midwest in a house
Public airport kinda implies it.

From the AIP
These include obligations to operate and maintain the airport in a safe and serviceable condition, not grant exclusive rights, mitigate hazards to airspace, and use airport revenue properly.


Having a back 40 for 'da public' would cure anything related to exclusivity
The airport didn’t grant exclusive rights. Any tenant is free to lease all the space they can afford. Quite a bit different than saying one is ‘entitled’ to free tie down,
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
1,062
Location
Dollywood
I did find this:

Question 8. What aeronautical uses of a hangar are permissible?​


FAA Response.


  • Storage of active aircraft.
  • Shelter for maintenance, repair, or refurbishment of aircraft, but not the indefinite storage of non-operational aircraft.
  • Construction of amateur-built or kit-built aircraft provided that activities are conducted safely;
  • Storage of aircraft handling equipment, e.g., tow bar, glider tow equipment, workbenches, and tools and materials used to service, maintain, repair or outfit aircraft; items related to ancillary or incidental uses that do not affect the hangars' primary use.
  • Storage of materials related to an aeronautical activity, e.g., balloon and skydiving equipment, office equipment, teaching tools, and materials related to ancillary or incidental uses that do not affect the hangars' primary use; V' Storage of non-aeronautical items that do not interfere with the primary aeronautical purpose of the hangar (for example, televisions, furniture).
  • A vehicle parked at the hangar while the aircraft usually stored in that hangar is flying, subject to local airport rules and regulations.

So if the hanger you rent says 'no building' or 'no maintenance' and they get FAA money, you might want to show them this.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
1,062
Location
Dollywood
The airport didn’t grant exclusive rights. Any tenant is free to lease all the space they can afford. Quite a bit different than saying one is ‘entitled’ to free tie down,
And yet many do.. So much that AOPA filed MULTIPLE Part 13 complaints:


Might have to join AOPA so they can fight the good fight. Also, as a past ramp rat, Signature sucks
 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,984
Location
Memphis, TN
You have to check the lease. I know plenty of hangars with non airplane stuff only. They got in with a long term lease before the crackdown. New leases tend to be really tight for liability.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
1,062
Location
Dollywood
You have to check the lease. I know plenty of hangars with non airplane stuff only. They got in with a long term lease before the crackdown. New leases tend to be really tight for liability.
See post #53.

If they take FAA money, they are not mobile home storage.

Leases are most likely written by a solicitor without any FAA rules experience.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,984
Location
Memphis, TN
I understand, but my old airport went though this. They are honoring legacy contracts. The FAA is ok with that. They made new tenants have airplanes and old ones could have what they want. In about ten years, there won’t be any legacy contracts left at that airport. Civil and FAA law sometimes don’t mix well.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
6,164
Location
Upper midwest in a house
And yet many do.. So much that AOPA filed MULTIPLE Part 13 complaints:


Might have to join AOPA so they can fight the good fight. Also, as a past ramp rat, Signature sucks
Yeah, AOPA is like the pink ribbon organizations. Rally membership to fight the good fight, but at the end of the day not much happens. After 35 yrs I dropped my membership for good. FBO exclusivity has been going strong for over a decade now and only gotten worse. When there’s a “quick turn service fee” of $1000 that’s a clear sign to keep anything with a propeller far away.
 

flyby50

Active Member
Supporting Member
Joined
May 4, 2022
Messages
25
Location
Arizona
The whole aircraft insurance situation just sucks. We are collectively paying multi-millions of dollars not just to insure our ourseleves but to insure airport administrators and municipalities that imagine THEY will get sued in connection to something WE did. How often does that happen? Rarely, I would bet.

It could be helped if the FAA would reform the Grant Assurances to say that a public airport that takes federal funds (1) cannot enforce "additional insured" requirements against airport tenants and (2) operators at a public airport who choose to fly naked do so at their own risk (which is the case when an operator with no liability insureance, from say, a private airstrip, flies into a public airport). However, it would take an act of congress to change the FAA on this. I will go quietly now, nurse.

Wouldn't it be smart to require aircraft owners to at least have liability insurance for incidents like this one.

 

KeithO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
927
Location
Jackson, MI
"Require" anything and you have an instantly captive market that you can charge whatever you like. Car insurance in Michigan is a good example. $1200 a year for pretty much any car, even it it only cost $2000 to buy. In my case multiply x 3 thus $3600 a year for 3 vehicles. The most expensive $13k. The cheapest $5000.

I was quoted $2600 a year for liability only on my 2007 Arion Lightning.
 
Top