"The insurer just bought the plane"
Thread Starter
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,089
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
"The insurer just bought the plane"
Occasionally, I read "the insurer just bought the plane" in the context that you're about to wreck a plane, so - worry about yourself, and sacrifice the airplane. On the surface of it, yes. That said, as is also wisely said: "Fly the airplane as far into the crash as possible" = don't give up and just let it crash, knowing/thinking/hoping that the insurer will pay for the plane. Yes, the insurer may pay for the plane, but the security of mind of that should not alter your application of your best skills to prevent/mitigate/minimize[the severity of] an accident. Let alone the duty you have to all of us to do your part to keep premiums low by minimizing claims, there are other longer lasting factors:
If you are PIC for an accident, it is likely that you are not covered for personal injury as a result of that accident. The passengers will be, but not the PIC (and sometimes PIC family members who may be involved). So, as PIC, a paid out wrecked airplane could be a very small part of the financial impact on you - your getting hurt is painful and expensive. And even if you walk away uninjured, if you were PIC for an accident with a claim, you have to declare that on every pilot report for the next many years. That will open up questions about your insurability. That could, in the long term, be more costly for you, than the damaged airplane, depending upon what else to [want to] fly.
For myself, I have been PIC for five events in which an airplane was damaged. One being destroyed. I have never been a party to a hull claim being made. In four of the events, I just paid out of pocket to repair the plane, it was less costly than a longer term premium increase, or worse, a decline to renew. For the destroyed airplane, I was training the owner, and the airplane was not hull insured, so there was no hull claim. He had a agreed to a hold harmless for me (which I insist on for training), and he was flying, so it was a hull loss cost to him - but still very personally costly to me as the official PIC.
On the whole, think about what you want the insurance to cover, and what you may not what to endure from the insurers in the future. I complete a number of pilot reports each year to be covered on customer's airplanes. A low deductible, and small hull claims may not be the best thing for you in the long run. I can and am truthful about my flying history, and happily can say that I have never had a hull claim, nor accident as pilot flying - that resulted in an insurance claim. For 33 years, I did not carry hull insurance on my C150, then I lost it uninsured in a hangar fire - that hurt! I about broke even on the premiums not paid over that period vs the loss of the plane. I had always thought that if damaged, I would just pay to fix it - I did not foresee puddle of aluminum! Obviously in retrospect, it has crossed my mind, that that would have been a good thing to insure it for! So now, yes, I fully insure my remaining airplane. But, for the risk of fuss to my flying record, I really do still fly it as though I am responsible for it, and would only consider claiming for a total loss (not just minor damage).
And, if you are flying a fully insured airplane (well... flying at all...) keep your pilot skill and currency/recency and logs up to date, and if it's your plane, also keep the maintenance records up to date. Insurers do ask after an accident! They don't have to cover a flight which did not meet the legal requirements. If you're in a situation where suddenly "selling" the plane to insurer seems like the only outcome, still try to keep the sale as small as possible - there are many other factors to that "sale" which won't be immediately apparent!
If you are PIC for an accident, it is likely that you are not covered for personal injury as a result of that accident. The passengers will be, but not the PIC (and sometimes PIC family members who may be involved). So, as PIC, a paid out wrecked airplane could be a very small part of the financial impact on you - your getting hurt is painful and expensive. And even if you walk away uninjured, if you were PIC for an accident with a claim, you have to declare that on every pilot report for the next many years. That will open up questions about your insurability. That could, in the long term, be more costly for you, than the damaged airplane, depending upon what else to [want to] fly.
For myself, I have been PIC for five events in which an airplane was damaged. One being destroyed. I have never been a party to a hull claim being made. In four of the events, I just paid out of pocket to repair the plane, it was less costly than a longer term premium increase, or worse, a decline to renew. For the destroyed airplane, I was training the owner, and the airplane was not hull insured, so there was no hull claim. He had a agreed to a hold harmless for me (which I insist on for training), and he was flying, so it was a hull loss cost to him - but still very personally costly to me as the official PIC.
On the whole, think about what you want the insurance to cover, and what you may not what to endure from the insurers in the future. I complete a number of pilot reports each year to be covered on customer's airplanes. A low deductible, and small hull claims may not be the best thing for you in the long run. I can and am truthful about my flying history, and happily can say that I have never had a hull claim, nor accident as pilot flying - that resulted in an insurance claim. For 33 years, I did not carry hull insurance on my C150, then I lost it uninsured in a hangar fire - that hurt! I about broke even on the premiums not paid over that period vs the loss of the plane. I had always thought that if damaged, I would just pay to fix it - I did not foresee puddle of aluminum! Obviously in retrospect, it has crossed my mind, that that would have been a good thing to insure it for! So now, yes, I fully insure my remaining airplane. But, for the risk of fuss to my flying record, I really do still fly it as though I am responsible for it, and would only consider claiming for a total loss (not just minor damage).
And, if you are flying a fully insured airplane (well... flying at all...) keep your pilot skill and currency/recency and logs up to date, and if it's your plane, also keep the maintenance records up to date. Insurers do ask after an accident! They don't have to cover a flight which did not meet the legal requirements. If you're in a situation where suddenly "selling" the plane to insurer seems like the only outcome, still try to keep the sale as small as possible - there are many other factors to that "sale" which won't be immediately apparent!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Joined: Jan 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 15,200
Likes: 1,202
From: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Interesting that you should raise this...
On the "what planes have you seen?" thread over on Spectators Balcony last week, I commented about a nice C185 I noticed at Narsarsuaq Airport on one of my occasional glances at their webcams to see if anything interesting is passing through. The aircraft was being ferried from Europe to the USA and a couple of days later I saw on the ASN site that it had been involved in a sadly fatal crash while landing at Bangor in Maine.
A video of the accident has now surfaced on ASN ...
I guess it's easy to say he should have just pulled the mixture and mags, accepted a trundle into the fence and let insurance pay for repairs or a replacement... but...
On the "what planes have you seen?" thread over on Spectators Balcony last week, I commented about a nice C185 I noticed at Narsarsuaq Airport on one of my occasional glances at their webcams to see if anything interesting is passing through. The aircraft was being ferried from Europe to the USA and a couple of days later I saw on the ASN site that it had been involved in a sadly fatal crash while landing at Bangor in Maine.
A video of the accident has now surfaced on ASN ...
I guess it's easy to say he should have just pulled the mixture and mags, accepted a trundle into the fence and let insurance pay for repairs or a replacement... but...
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,581
Likes: 73
From: England
Occasionally, I read "the insurer just bought the plane" in the context that you're about to wreck a plane, so - worry about yourself, and sacrifice the airplane. On the surface of it, yes. That said, as is also wisely said: "Fly the airplane as far into the crash as possible" = don't give up and just let it crash, knowing/thinking/hoping that the insurer will pay for the plane. Yes, the insurer may pay for the plane, but the security of mind of that should not alter your application of your best skills to prevent/mitigate/minimize[the severity of] an accident. Let alone the duty you have to all of us to do your part to keep premiums low by minimizing claims, there are other longer lasting factors:
If you are PIC for an accident, it is likely that you are not covered for personal injury as a result of that accident. The passengers will be, but not the PIC (and sometimes PIC family members who may be involved). So, as PIC, a paid out wrecked airplane could be a very small part of the financial impact on you - your getting hurt is painful and expensive. And even if you walk away uninjured, if you were PIC for an accident with a claim, you have to declare that on every pilot report for the next many years. That will open up questions about your insurability. That could, in the long term, be more costly for you, than the damaged airplane, depending upon what else to [want to] fly.
For myself, I have been PIC for five events in which an airplane was damaged. One being destroyed. I have never been a party to a hull claim being made. In four of the events, I just paid out of pocket to repair the plane, it was less costly than a longer term premium increase, or worse, a decline to renew. For the destroyed airplane, I was training the owner, and the airplane was not hull insured, so there was no hull claim. He had a agreed to a hold harmless for me (which I insist on for training), and he was flying, so it was a hull loss cost to him - but still very personally costly to me as the official PIC.
On the whole, think about what you want the insurance to cover, and what you may not what to endure from the insurers in the future. I complete a number of pilot reports each year to be covered on customer's airplanes. A low deductible, and small hull claims may not be the best thing for you in the long run. I can and am truthful about my flying history, and happily can say that I have never had a hull claim, nor accident as pilot flying - that resulted in an insurance claim. For 33 years, I did not carry hull insurance on my C150, then I lost it uninsured in a hangar fire - that hurt! I about broke even on the premiums not paid over that period vs the loss of the plane. I had always thought that if damaged, I would just pay to fix it - I did not foresee puddle of aluminum! Obviously in retrospect, it has crossed my mind, that that would have been a good thing to insure it for! So now, yes, I fully insure my remaining airplane. But, for the risk of fuss to my flying record, I really do still fly it as though I am responsible for it, and would only consider claiming for a total loss (not just minor damage).
And, if you are flying a fully insured airplane (well... flying at all...) keep your pilot skill and currency/recency and logs up to date, and if it's your plane, also keep the maintenance records up to date. Insurers do ask after an accident! They don't have to cover a flight which did not meet the legal requirements. If you're in a situation where suddenly "selling" the plane to insurer seems like the only outcome, still try to keep the sale as small as possible - there are many other factors to that "sale" which won't be immediately apparent!
If you are PIC for an accident, it is likely that you are not covered for personal injury as a result of that accident. The passengers will be, but not the PIC (and sometimes PIC family members who may be involved). So, as PIC, a paid out wrecked airplane could be a very small part of the financial impact on you - your getting hurt is painful and expensive. And even if you walk away uninjured, if you were PIC for an accident with a claim, you have to declare that on every pilot report for the next many years. That will open up questions about your insurability. That could, in the long term, be more costly for you, than the damaged airplane, depending upon what else to [want to] fly.
For myself, I have been PIC for five events in which an airplane was damaged. One being destroyed. I have never been a party to a hull claim being made. In four of the events, I just paid out of pocket to repair the plane, it was less costly than a longer term premium increase, or worse, a decline to renew. For the destroyed airplane, I was training the owner, and the airplane was not hull insured, so there was no hull claim. He had a agreed to a hold harmless for me (which I insist on for training), and he was flying, so it was a hull loss cost to him - but still very personally costly to me as the official PIC.
On the whole, think about what you want the insurance to cover, and what you may not what to endure from the insurers in the future. I complete a number of pilot reports each year to be covered on customer's airplanes. A low deductible, and small hull claims may not be the best thing for you in the long run. I can and am truthful about my flying history, and happily can say that I have never had a hull claim, nor accident as pilot flying - that resulted in an insurance claim. For 33 years, I did not carry hull insurance on my C150, then I lost it uninsured in a hangar fire - that hurt! I about broke even on the premiums not paid over that period vs the loss of the plane. I had always thought that if damaged, I would just pay to fix it - I did not foresee puddle of aluminum! Obviously in retrospect, it has crossed my mind, that that would have been a good thing to insure it for! So now, yes, I fully insure my remaining airplane. But, for the risk of fuss to my flying record, I really do still fly it as though I am responsible for it, and would only consider claiming for a total loss (not just minor damage).
And, if you are flying a fully insured airplane (well... flying at all...) keep your pilot skill and currency/recency and logs up to date, and if it's your plane, also keep the maintenance records up to date. Insurers do ask after an accident! They don't have to cover a flight which did not meet the legal requirements. If you're in a situation where suddenly "selling" the plane to insurer seems like the only outcome, still try to keep the sale as small as possible - there are many other factors to that "sale" which won't be immediately apparent!
Another aspect is to keep on top of hull values especially if you have owned an aircraft for a long period. At a renewal about 3 years ago I did a little bit of due diligence and was shocked by how much values had risen. We were seriously uninsured. Thing was that the increase in the premium was not too outrageous.
Joined: Jul 2016
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 226
Likes: 25
From: Broughton, UK
Fortunately this 'fly the aircraft into the ground' does not apply to glider pilots, who are all equipped with parachutes. At the first sign of anything falling off the glider, most glider pilots would jettison the canopy, and hit the silk.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,658
Likes: 501
From: Canada
2 examples I have personal knowledge.
1) after engine failure the pilot has 2 choices, the field right under him. Plenty long but very rough so the airplane is going to get bent or the perfect field at the limit of gliding distance. So making that field guarantees no damage. He tries for it but just can’t quite clear the trees and dies in the crash, or
2) After another engine failure into a very short but smooth field the pilot tries to flare for a nice landing instead of smashing the airplane on the ground because he trying for the normal no damage landing The time and distance in the flare means he now can’t stop in time and hits a stone wall with serious injuries to himself and a passenger.
A way better message IMO opinion is if you have to crash you need to hit the ground under your firm control in a wings level level flight or slightly nose high attitude. The goal is first and foremost to allow room for the airplane to de accelerate at a survivable rate,
The key to surviving accidents is to maintain control of the airplane until it is stopped. If you do it right almost any accident is survivable, If the airplane is not damaged that’s nice, but irrelevant to the requirement to avoid injuries as the primary duty of the pilot
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 36
From: France
Anything falling off would almost certainly be the result of a collision and yes, the parachute would normally be used. Running out of fuel (ie LIFT) would usually result in landing in a field, which is not an unusual thing for a glider. Some pilots own gliders with a retractable engine so would simply fly home. Not many club gliders are so equipped. So part of the sport is sometimes taking a glider home in a trailer. Though not all that often in smaller pieces than the manufacturer envisaged. This really has no relevance or comparison with a power pilot emergency landing.
