Renting Cirrus insurance requirements ???

[Pace]

Fuji

I am not attacking the Cirrus by any means as That is the aircraft which I best feel will suit my rental requirements.
In the previous thread we had a pretty detailed and at sometimes heated discussion on using the chute as standard procedure for engine failure!

My posting style and it appears to work!!! is to encourage discussion or if you like inflame passion in one way or the other so maybe I am not quite so fixed on my ideas as may appear

I know I have shifted my opinion on the chute in a positive light and have found your input and others very informative and convincing.

This thread started because I was sourcing a Cirrus 20 for my own use and found one which on the surface appeared to be a very good deal.

I was initially looking at renting 30 hours and was made aware that I needed to use 1/3 of those 30 hours just to fly the aircraft solo.
To me that meant a number of possibilities.

First revenue to the organisation or their instructor in fixing a high insurance requirement?

Second the aircraft demanded high insurance for a reason?

Either it had some inherent flight characteristics which meant high accident rates or the chute use was damaging the aircraft?

We still do not appear to have found out why the Cirrus costs so much to insure and why the insurance companies want such a high level of training to fly the machines!

I also am confused as to why the insurance companies totally disregard pilot experience, qualifications and ability and lump us all in the same pot as the 50 hr PPL?

None of those legitimate questions have been answered other that to say how wonderful the aircraft and its chute system is and how little damage is done on landing one under the chute.

I cannot make 2 and 2 equal 4!!!! in these discussions

Pace

[172driver]

I also am confused as to why the insurance companies totally disregard pilot experience, qualifications and ability and lump us all in the same pot as the 50 hr PPL?

PACE, this is certainly not to cast aspersions on your abilities, but if you speak to any rental outfit anywhere, you will soon find that the people most likely to bend their SEPs are none other than - high time ATPLs. Reason seems to be that many of those have become too used to flying highly automated machines. Which, of course, would make an airline pilot highly suitable for a Cirrus

[Fuji Abound]

Ah the insurance, I didn't realise that was still troubling you.

I don't know the whole answer but her is a go.

The rumor was that in the early days the accident rate in Cirrus was higher than the average. Now we all know that insurance is based on risk assessment (and perhaps despite my earlier comment to a smaller degree risk perception). There was a also a fair amount of talk (which as we have seen is still popular of all these pilots jumping into Cirrus with the money but without the experience. Doubtless to some degree this did contribute to the accidents.

All Cirrus were high value aircraft (because most were almost new) whereas a pilot could equally "jump into" a Mooney with a hull value of less than a third.

There is no doubt the Cirrus is not the ideal aircraft for a low time pilot. Even now glass is still relatively new and takes some getting accustom to. The aircraft is fast (as SEPs go) and slippery. Its easy to end up hot and high. It really does take some pilots a while to master a Cirrus and feel comfortable.

Then there is the question of high time, highly experienced pilots. Well even that doesn't always wash. The skill set for flying a commercial jet is quite different; there are plenty of commercial pilots who have long since flown a performance SEP. In fact even for these pilots the transition is not a complete walk in the park. Just ask (as I have) for them to demonstrate a PFL or a half reasonable landing in a good cross wind. I might even add that many dont do that good a job of single pilot ops be it coping with airspace outside the system (which they have long forgotten) or flying IFR without the co-pilot managing a goodly proportion of the exercise. Is it not still the case that single pilot IFR ops is one of the hardest things we do?

So there are plenty of reasons when the 'phones rings the conversation is along these lines;

I want some insurance for a Cirrus, on the cheap mind you,

Well, Sir whats the value,

Oh I don't know I guess £300K, its not mine you see

ah yes, I do see, Sir, and how many hours do you have,

Oh 10,000 I am a training captain you know,

Yeees, Sir I thought you might be, but how many hours on a SEP,

Oh, well couple of hundred,

and when would that have been Sir,

Hmmm, four years ago (if you are lucky), but what does it matter?

and so you have flown with an Avidyne glass cockpit before,

Well no .. .. .. but,

and how many hours are you intending to fly a year,

Well, I only want to do a dozen or so, the girlfriend was thinking of a quick jolly down to Venice next week, I go there all the time for the company you know.

Ah yes, I see so lets just sum this up, you havent flown a SEP in over three years, you have never flown an Avidyne glass cockpit, you probably are only going to be flying once a month, the aircraft is worth around £300K and you think because of your hours you will be OK doing a tour of Europe next week on the strength of your multi IR on a BoAir69. Now let me see, yes we can give you a good cheap deal .. .. .. ..

[Pace]

Or it could be I have 2500 hrs on multi engine piston twins ranging from a Duchess through Barons, Cessna 310s 340s Golden Eagle, Crusaders, Piper Aztec, Seneca 12345 etc etc

Singles where to start 152? Piper Saratoga Bla Bla Bla Mooney bla bla bla. Trinidad Grumman Tiger,Commander 114, Firefly just to mention a fraction!
I have in the past had keys thrown at me to a single I have never flown and gone straight off into IMC!!!

Oh my god I cannot tame the highly complex Cirrus in a league of its own

Its ok I am only teasing

Pace

[goldeneaglepilot]

You might be teasing Pace, but it touchs a valid point - some are so "anal" about their precious aircraft type that they portray that are very "difficult" when it comes to letting others fly it. They also paint the picture that you have be superman before it would even be possible.

Its usually through fear of the experienced pilot making what they ( the owner) says is very complex and difficult, look fairly easy.

Welcome to the world of the elite precious owners club. I often experienced that in the day of Star annuals when I flew a GA renewal test flight with the owner as observer on an unusual type (rather than the bog standard Cessna or Piper). It was quite interesting to hear the owner warning you of how difficult it was to fly as you read the POH before the flight and then managed to fly the five minute climb performance part of the test at +/- 1kt of specified airspeed within a few minutes of getting airbourne (for the first time in type).

[Sillert,V.I.]

These rigid insurance requirements make no sense at all to me.

Surely it would make more sense to replace this with a requirement for a sign-off from an approved Cirrus instructor that you were competent to handle & manage the aircraft solo. Some folks might be able to demonstrate this in a couple of hours; equally there could be others who'd still be struggling after 20.

The training, checkride & signoff should take as long as it takes - no more and no less.

[Slopey]

The problem Pace is that they have one, you don't - so it's their train set.

So, either accept the terms, or rent something else/elsewhere. Or buy one!

[Pace]

Rent something else as no way am I spending over £2000 just to get checked out on a SEP and using 1/3 rd of my 30 hrs budget doing so !
It should be what it takes 2 hrs or 20

Pace

[007helicopter]

You might be teasing Pace, but it touchs a valid point - some are so "anal" about their precious aircraft type that they portray that are very "difficult" when it comes to letting others fly it. They also paint the picture that you have be superman before it would even be possible.

Its usually through fear of the experienced pilot making what they ( the owner) says is very complex and difficult, look fairly easy

GEP I don't feel that this view point has come across in the recent Cirrus discussions and there has been some beneficial healthy debate. I have not heard anyone claiming you need to be super human to fly a Cirrus or any other aircraft.

Regarding PACE's point this is about insurance costs and restrictions even for experienced high hour SEP pilots, It is in my opinion purely lead by the insurers risk, hull value, and the fact that higher hour experienced pilots have in fact trashed more Cirrus than the lower hour types, there is hard evidence that time on type is more important than total hours in terms of preserving life.

Not my opinion just how it has worked out for whatever reason.

[007helicopter]

It should be what it takes 2 hrs or 20

I personally do not disagree with that and one size should not fit all, however I think they see the 5 hours flying and 5 ground as a minimum.

[A and C]

5 hours ......on a cirrus !!!!!!! ?

Your statement is far to general, peope with a background like Pace should be looking at little more that an hour in the air and two on the ground, after all there is nothing radical about this tricycle SEP, now if we were looking at something a little more radical, say an EXtra 300 the checkout might take five hours.

[Pace]

I personally do not disagree with that and one size should not fit all, however I think they see the 5 hours flying and 5 ground as a minimum.

007H

I would stomach 5 hrs flying 5 hours ground. The organisation I was looking at had attractive hourly rates and an acceptable monthly rate but then demanded 10 HRS dual before being allowed to take the aircraft or over £2000 of your budget just to get to the stage of flying it yourself.

The explanation was that it was an insurance requirement and that experience had no bearing on those hourly requirements.

5 hrs I would have accepted and ground studies no problem as long as they did not charge £200 per hour ground study

10 hrs made me think it was either a genuine over the top insurance requirement or a manipulated insurance requirement designed to generate income.

Pace

[Fuji Abound]

Pace I know you might be teasing but some may take you seriously and its not fair to mislead (for too long).

So just to clear this up;

- Everything is relative. If you have a couple of hundred hours on PA28s a Cirrus is a rocket ship, if you are regularly flying twins or more complex SEPs its a doddle. As ever how much time you will need will depend only on your recent high performance SEP time and familiarity with glass. If yo have never flown glass and intend to learn in the cockpit whatever your background you will need 5 hours to be remotely familiar with all the systems. You would be daft to gain that experience in the cockpit.

- There are Groups around that will sign you off in a couple of hours if you are "good enough" maybe even a bit less, although I cant imagine why you wouldn't do a couple of hours with an instructor for the fun of it.

- There are groups that will arrange the insurance for you once you are signed off and with the cost built into the rates.

- There are "approved" instructors that will sign you off on any Cirrus you can lay your hands on, on exactly the same basis which will secure you the requisite insurance on whatever basis fits.

- In the nicest way I have told you so Pace, and while I enjoy the debate as much as you all of the problems that are the subject of this thread can be made to go away without any problems.

- As someone else said whatever Cirrus you fly if it is not yours, and just like any aircraft, the owners will set the terms. You might not agree with the terms but that is life. Fortunately there are some groups that don't take advantage but the cost does reflect the value of the aircraft, the cost of a group policy particularly where the group is given the freedom to include pilots that the Group has approved so long as they meet the minimum insurance restrictions and other financial considerations.

None of this is especially about Cirrus. I have run groups and we set minimum requirements. Frankly I was taught not to be particularly interested in how many hours etc the applicant had, but to fly with them. They could cut the mustard in their flying ability AND their willingness to look after the aircraft or they couldn't. I had a multi thousand hour pilot tell me he wanted to do more than an hour and I had a multi thousand hour pilot who wasn't prepared to look after the aircraft in the way the rest of us wished.

I am sure you know all that, and I don't think anyone has disagreed it is unreasonable to require a pilot to demonstrate his ability beyond that necessary to prove competence. I don't think anyone approves of excessive insurance premiums but they are what they are, and to the extent they are loaded they reflect the reasons I set out earlier in this thread.

I cant add anything further so its time to bow out but good luck with the debate.

[horsebox]

Pace,

Am second guessing the Cirrus group you are talking about. If its the same, I do a bit of instructing for them at one of the other locations. The ten hours is not a moneymaking scheme as far as I can see, just the result of offering an expensive aircraft to the open rental market.

The origonal checkout was 5 hours, which seemed adequate for most people, this was bumped up to 10 hours due to insurance requirements, this applies across the board, even for experienced sep instructors, and can be a bit of a pain, but thats how it is. Its a balancing act, lower checkout requirements = massively higher premiums, and a 10 hour checkout was a blunt tool to even things out.

For someone like yourself it would probably equate to 3-5 hours, checkout, and the remainder effectively carrying a safety pilot.

The cirrus is marketed to and attracts alot of high net worth individuals, a % of whcih have pulled the chute, resulting in a high chance of a full hull loss on a new expensive aircraft, and an owner with the means to take matters further if they want to.

If you look at insuring a cirrus as a private owner/operator the minimum hours I have heard being quoted would probably shock you, and has directly led to a number of people joining the no equity groups, to allow them to build up experience on type to access lower premiums themselves.

[Pace]

Horsebox

Thanks for that explanation I am sure it is the same group! So just to clarify the 10 hrs does not have to be with the instructor but after he is satisfied you can knock off the rest at the quoted dry hourly rate with an approved safety pilot till you hit the magic 10 hrs?
Fuji your input much appreciated and may take you up will certainly call?
We get there in the end

Pace

[peterh337]

If you have a couple of hundred hours on PA28s a Cirrus is a rocket ship,

I would not necessarily agree. Or at least I don't think that is the issue.

I am a very average pilot, who took well above the minimum hours to achieve every single piece of paper I ever collected, but I do have a very good understanding of aircraft systems, and technical aspects of flying generally.

I found the TB20 a doddle to convert to, at PPL+50hrs (the 50hrs was in PA28s).

And a TB20 is quite similar to an SR22 in straight performance.

I think there is no significant difference between flying at 100kt and 150kt. The sheep down below move just a little faster

A high perf plane is actually much easier to fly because you have big margins, on loading, runway length, crosswind. In 10 years I have not cancelled once due to c/w. +1000fpm is not much but is a real luxury compared to a PA28-140

The big big difference is that you have to go about things differently.

In a PA28, most PPLs just fly to an airfield, join the circuit, slow down a bit, and land. They were flying at 1500ft anyway so they don't even have to descend much. And anyway 1500ft is pretty much the 1000ft standard circuit height, isn't it What's a few hundred feet between friends? This is supposed to be a hobby, after all.....

In the SR22/TB20/etc anybody who goes places will be flying along at say 5000ft (5300ft or some other odd figure is better for better traffic avoidance odds, even though there is almost no other traffic above about 3000ft) and if you arrive overhead the airfield, or even just a few miles out, still at 5000ft and still doing 150kt, you are going to make a right dick of yourself, doing half a dozen orbits trying desperately to descend while slowing down at the same time in full view of the restaurant clientele

So you need to get the old brain in gear say 30 miles out. Much further out if going IFR (I start sorting the plates out, and working out a CDA, with 100nm to run).

It took me only about 10 hrs to officially convert to the TB20, but it took a helluva lot longer to learn how to use the brain. In the PPL, I was never taught to use the brain (fly by numbers).

I think anybody who isn't totally inept can easily fly a Cirrus, to the extent of taking off, burning a load of juice for an hour, and landing on a nice long runway, on a nice day.

What is a lot harder is teaching people to use their brain in the correct way. And one cannot do it in a "club checkout" type of flight. In such a flight, all you can do is spot whether the punter does the 5000ft/150kt thing and if so, politely take over, land, and politely turn him down.

And what I found was that anybody who had the right discipline already owned their own IFR plane...

One should be taught "technical flying" in an IR, but most IR holders who are even remotely current already have their own IFR plane. It is the people who only ever flew with PPL instructors who have the basic problems.

In short, no easy solutions to this.

You also need to learn the aircraft systems. In 2002, I never found an instructor who knew how the HSI worked, how to set up the KLN94, etc. Would you get into a car without working out how to work the lights, the indicators, the wipers, the radio? Many people would, but you can't do that with a plane like an SR22 because most of the knobs will be a complete mystery

[belowradar]

I think that FUJIABOUND makes some valid points

Pace how many hours have you got on Avedyne EFIS ?

As an high time jet pilot with ATPL invulnerability can creep in

This like all aircraft is OK vfr but familiarity IFR is a different matter

Cirrus recommend a minimum of 10 hours for VFR transition and 15 for IFR transition. Time on type is critical for competent and safe IFR flight.

The group that you refer to permits and encourages any qualified pilot to join and 10 hours is where the insurance draw the line which compared to many privately owned aircraft is pretty good. The line could be drawn at 500 hrs but why exclude newly qualified and competent pilots who are happy to learn the syatems properly.

When you did groundschool on your Citation did you moan and fuss about the need to do it ?

[Pace]

When you did groundschool on your Citation did you moan and fuss about the need to do it ?

Ground school? Systems or even a systems sim no issue with that!

A citation flies at twice the speed of a Cirrus and over twice the altitude but I can assure you that you will not be required to do 10 hrs in the aircraft for a type rating issue.

Give me a Cirrus and with no checkout I will guarantee I will deliver it to the S France completely intact and operated correctly.
The way some talk of this aircraft is as if it was some highly advanced military hardware with very demanding handling which will bite at the slightest provocation and kill you at a sneeze.

As to the avionics fit yes if you need to know the system inside out you are correct if you want basic functions its not rocket science.
I flew a Bravo with Primus 1000 and had a full conversion on that unit but realise you do not need to use 90% of its functions to fly and get places.

Pace

[Fuji Abound]

Peterh - just to chip in on that new line of debate I also dont disagree with you, because there are almost always exceptions to a general rule.

The younger you are the faster your reactions so arguably young low hour pilots might adapt to high speed aircraft more quickly.

I think "techy" people pick up glass really quickly, those not, well struggle for a long time.

Those are just two examples of why there are exceptions to any general rule. However if you talk to those who routinely convert pilots to a Cirrus they will tell that low time pilots with a background of the typical training GA aircraft take more time to adapt to high performance SEPs.

Moreover I do think the cirrus is a little different to many high performance SEPs. It is more slippery and without the luxury to dump the u/c, flaps or speed brakes so pilots are even more likely to be hot and high, the side stick is different (nothing more) compared to the conventional yoke with which most low hours pilots will be familiar, many high performance SEPs still have conventional six packs so however you cut it there is one less thing going on there as well, and the landing profile is a little different.

You may well have found transitioning to a Cirrus more difficult than a TB20 those years ago, perhaps not a whole lot, but never the less more of a challenge.

Moreover its one thing flying the thing another being comfortable. I reckon flying a DA42 is a very easy way into twins and anyone who has flown a DA40 will find it easy once they have adjusted to the extra speed and the size. A Seneca or Aztec is in theory no different but I reckon most pilots will find either a real handful to start with, if for no other reason than "the systems" come from a different age, are not necessarily intuitive but when things go wrong you had better be familiar with them.

[Fuji Abound]

Give me a Cirrus and with no checkout I will guarantee I will deliver it to the S France completely intact and operated correctly.

From what you say, your challenge (assuming you have never used an Avidyne or G1000 depending on which is fitted) would be to operate the avionics correctly - I don't mean just getting by in VMC which you would probably do.

Your other challenge would be to land on a 700 m runway in the south of France with a stiff cross wind if it were your first landing and you hadn't flown a side stick before.

In both scenarios you might wish you had polled the aircraft around the sky for a few more hours first .. .. .. and then again maybe not. As I said earlier there is no absolute rule, but of this I can assure you, I know of some really high hour commercial pilots who would wish they had.

and lets gets this Cirrus business out of the equation, exactly the same could and would apply to a G1000 Mooney as but one example.

I am definitely no Sky God but I flew a Bambi making the mistake that of course it wouldn't present a problem straight out the box. I can give you a few reasons why for me it was much more so than I suspect would be true of a cirrus and yet it is slower and less complex.

As I keep on saying a Cirrus is easy to fly, I can name a number of other SEPs I have flown that I think were much more difficult, but just in exactly the same way it has enough differences that you might be glad of an hour or two.

Mind you I am always very impressed how well people with your background and experience fly, it certainly puts me to shame. I am just an amateur, for you guys doing it as a living it is a different game, as it rightly should be.