Insurance?

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
So where is the cutoff for an insurance company applying a discount in the premiums based on total number of flight hours? 1000 hours? 10,000 hours...15,000, 20,000?

And now it looks like some of us will have other issues to deal with...our age as we get up in our 60’s, and 70’s.

Regarding the T-51 accident rate, we really need to know the accident rate per hours flown, such as per every 100 or 1000 hours.

TFF

Well-Known Member
Age 70 with 15,000 airplane ATP and 17,000 helicopter CFI is uninsurable in helicopters. No accidents. High time with no accidents means your due and are a risk, not safe and qualified. I see the risk management equation saying 2000-5000 hrs total is the sweet spot.

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
Does anyone have the stats for P-51’s, and Warbirds in general for accident rates and insurability?

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Regarding the T-51 accident rate, we really need to know the accident rate per hours flown, such as per every 100 or 1000 hours.
Reminds me of an old joke. A man wants to hire an accountant.

He asks the first applicant, "How much is two plus two?" The man replies, "Four."

He asks the second applicant the same question: "How much is two plus two?" "Four" is the answer, again.

The third applicant arrives. "How much is two plus two?" The job seeker gets out of his chair, closes the door and the window blinds, leans forward and says, "How much would you LIKE it to be...?"

So... how much would you LIKE the T-51's accident rate to be? Because one can spin it just about however one wishes.

Other than the annual FAA survey, there are no independent estimates of the number of hours homebuilt fly every year. And the FAA only produces an estimate for the entire fleet. So we have to assume the T-51 statistics are the same as the overall homebuilt ones.

Let's take a crack at it using FAA/Nall Report methodology. There are 52 T-51s on the registry. By the FAA's annual survey, only 60% of them are active. So that's 31 aircraft. The FAA annual survey says that homebuilts fly about 50 hours a year. So that's 1,550 total T-51 hours flown every year.

Roughly speaking, the Nall Report says there are about five accidents involving GA aircraft every 100,000 flight hours. On the average, there's one T-51 accident every year. That comes to about 64 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

In contrast, there are about five RV-7 accidents every year. There are about 1400 on the registry. That's 840 active aircraft. Flying 50 hours a year, that's 42,000 total hours. So that's about 12 accidents per 100,000 flight hours...better than the T-51, but still over twice that of the overall GA fleet.

Ignore the estimate of active aircraft, and use the full registry set? Titan accidents are down to 38 per 100,000 flight hours. Assume the Titans are flying twice the FAA-estimated hours for homebuilts? We're down to 19, STILL three times higher than the GA rate.

But then... let's look at just FATAL accidents. If you do that, the T-51 has a perfect record (at least in the US through 2018).

So...what would you LIKE it to be?

I have posted a number of times of the problems with using the FAA Annual Survey to compute homebuilt aircraft accident rates. It is the only independent source of estimates for annual flight hours, but it lumps all homebuilts together. PLUS it compares business/commercial hours with the purely recreational hours flown by EAB aircraft. PLUS it doesn't work right for predicting the number of active aircraft in an environment where aircraft are automatically deregistered if the owner doesn't pay his triannual fee.

Ron Wanttaja

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
So where is the cutoff for an insurance company applying a discount in the premiums based on total number of flight hours? 1000 hours? 10,000 hours...15,000, 20,000?
way back when, my first airplane was an experimental Pitts S-1S. No one would insure me unless I had, IIRC, 200 hours in type. Talked to them quite a bit, ang got them down to, IIRC, 20 hours in type. Keep in mind that the airplane is a single seat.

I called the lower cost company, and asked, “If Bill Thomas Hall of Fame 2002 Bill Thomas | International Aerobatic Club calls you and says that I can fly the airplane OK, will you insure me?” They would. I flew with Bill, mostly doing stick forward flat, accelerated, transition, and regular spins, plus takeoffs and landings. Got insurance. After three or four years, the cost was less than 30% of the initial cost.

BJC

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
Reminds me of an old joke. A man wants to hire an accountant.

He asks the first applicant, "How much is two plus two?" The man replies, "Four."

He asks the second applicant the same question: "How much is two plus two?" "Four" is the answer, again.

The third applicant arrives. "How much is two plus two?" The job seeker gets out of his chair, closes the door and the window blinds, leans forward and says, "How much would you LIKE it to be...?"

So... how much would you LIKE the T-51's accident rate to be? Because one can spin it just about however one wishes.

Other than the annual FAA survey, there are no independent estimates of the number of hours homebuilt fly every year. And the FAA only produces an estimate for the entire fleet. So we have to assume the T-51 statistics are the same as the overall homebuilt ones.

Let's take a crack at it using FAA/Nall Report methodology. There are 52 T-51s on the registry. By the FAA's annual survey, only 60% of them are active. So that's 31 aircraft. The FAA annual survey says that homebuilts fly about 50 hours a year. So that's 1,550 total T-51 hours flown every year.

Roughly speaking, the Nall Report says there are about five accidents involving GA aircraft every 100,000 flight hours. On the average, there's one T-51 accident every year. That comes to about 64 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

In contrast, there are about five RV-7 accidents every year. There are about 1400 on the registry. That's 840 active aircraft. Flying 50 hours a year, that's 42,000 total hours. So that's about 12 accidents per 100,000 flight hours...better than the T-51, but still over twice that of the overall GA fleet.

Ignore the estimate of active aircraft, and use the full registry set? Titan accidents are down to 38 per 100,000 flight hours. Assume the Titans are flying twice the FAA-estimated hours for homebuilts? We're down to 19, STILL three times higher than the GA rate.

But then... let's look at just FATAL accidents. If you do that, the T-51 has a perfect record (at least in the US through 2018).

So...what would you LIKE it to be?

I have posted a number of times of the problems with using the FAA Annual Survey to compute homebuilt aircraft accident rates. It is the only independent source of estimates for annual flight hours, but it lumps all homebuilts together. PLUS it compares business/commercial hours with the purely recreational hours flown by EAB aircraft. PLUS it doesn't work right for predicting the number of active aircraft in an environment where aircraft are automatically deregistered if the owner doesn't pay his triannual fee.

Ron Wanttaja
Based on the guys I know, I’ll bet that 50 to 75 hours / year is the norm. The T-51 pilots are a very active group of owners, who really enjoy the airplane.

We are making mods to my FWF system, so I don’t end up a statistic.

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Based on the guys I know, I’ll bet that 50 to 75 hours / year is the norm. The T-51 pilots are a very active group of owners, who really enjoy the airplane.
I have a *rough* system for computing average annual hours based on the number of hours on homebuilts at the date of their accidents. Several of the T-51s were around the ~50 hour/year point.

Here's a summary of my results for homebuilts that had 50 or more accidents from 1998 through 2018:
Homebuilt Type
Average Annual Hours​
Overall
50​
Vans (all)
73​
Vans RV-4
51​
Vans RV-6
77​
Vans RV-7
77​
Vans RV-8
86​
Glasair
51​
Glastar
65​
Lancair
68​
Lancair 2-Seat
67​
Lancair IV
69​
Zenair
47​
Zenair CH-701
42​
Zenair CH-601
50​
Searey
51​
Avid
44​
Kitfox
39​
Rans
45​
Velocity
55​
Note that my result for overall homebuilts is pretty close to the FAA survey value. Obviously, though, the "travelin' machines" see a few more hours.

[Note to Mods: Could you enable the "Collapse" function for tables so it doesn't default to full width?]

Ron Wanttaja

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
I’m also being told that the ground-not-in-motion feature of insurance has quadrupled in price.

Mark Z

Well-Known Member
I start flying with an airline pilot today who is having similar insurance problems. He’s going from an RV-7a to an RV-7. He has to have 25 hours of TW instruction before they will talk to him reasonably.

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
P-51 accident list. Note the high percentage of fatalities.

And this:

BJC

akwrencher

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Very informative article, thank you.

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...al-p51-mustang

Insurance: For a new buyer without any warbird experience, AOPA Insurance estimates $65,000/year; for an owner with a lot of experience, probably around$50,000.
Yeah, and that was in 2018 when your T-51 policy would still have been "just" \$5K per year. I wonder what it would to insure a P-51 in 2020. "If you have to ask . . . "

About the aviation insurance mrket, not about warbirds or high-loss airframe types:
Per the previously linked interviews, it doesn't seem that losses attributable to old pilots have significantly increased (Avemco rep). It does seem that some natural disasters have increased hull losses on the ground (so that would justify increases in ground not in motion premiums, etc but not liability coverage). I strongly suspect, as rv7charlie mentioned, that the poor performance of financial markets (IMO, bond returns and especially anticipated future bond returns being most significant) may be a key underlying factor here rather than a jump in claims payouts (esp for liability). As premiums rise, I'd bet adverse selection increases and an upward spiral ensues.

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
I emailed AOPA asking about the unmentioned investment factor after reading the article. If they answer, I'll share it here.

Charlie

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
For our factional owned Cessna, rates went up in the fall of 2019. The AOPA article was from Jan 2020 because everyone complained about the hikes in Q4 of 2019. Now in Q4 of 2020 our agent has already told us to prepare for an even bigger hike. We get the renewal quote at the end of the month.

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
For our factional owned Cessna, rates went up in the fall of 2019. The AOPA article was from Jan 2020 because everyone complained about the hikes in Q4 of 2019. Now in Q4 of 2020 our agent has already told us to prepare for an even bigger hike. We get the renewal quote at the end of the month.
And these premium hikes are just now hitting T-51 owners. With 400% increases.
I contacted my friend who owns and flies Buzzin' Cuzzin, asking him about this. He said that our rates are getting close to actual P-51 Mustang rates, and that it was excessive.

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
I emailed AOPA asking about the unmentioned investment factor after reading the article. If they answer, I'll share it here.

Charlie
And the answer is....
"
Hi Charlie,
Yes, A few underwriters indeed have mentioned their investment of premiums falling short of historic norms. I pass this note along to Tom Haines. Thanks for the e-mail comment!"

TXFlyGuy

Well-Known Member
Well...the world stock markets have an impact. Who would have thought?

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
The stock market is near all time high. Hard to loose past several years with 30% gains.