Insuring a Columbia 400 & weekend only insurance

"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Actually, I made a mistake: one of those three was a COL350, there's a
bunch
more of those, plus the 300's, and the insurance would be based, I
assume,
over the Columbia line which numbers in the thousands. I'm not sure if
the
300/350/400 series is assessed as a single type.

Reference material:

http://www.gama.aero/dloads/2006GAMA...alDatabook.pdf

Thanks, but I'm not really into 'Trivia Pursuit'.

It isn't.
It provides the number of aircraft/make/models built by the various
manufacturers. It tells how many 300's, 350's and 400's were made.
Through the end of 2006...
300's - 75
350's - 124
400's - 286
Total Columbia aircraft produced since 1995 -2006 is 485.
Where did you get the "thousands" number?

I explained in another post after reading the data. Also, ICYMI, I was
including the Lancairs.

Do you really thing those numbers are THE big difference in why his
insurance quote was so high?

Hope your ego has been sated.

In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Actually, I made a mistake: one of those three was a COL350, there's a
bunch
more of those, plus the 300's, and the insurance would be based, I
assume,
over the Columbia line which numbers in the thousands. I'm not sure if
the
300/350/400 series is assessed as a single type.

Reference material:

http://www.gama.aero/dloads/2006GAMA...alDatabook.pdf

Thanks, but I'm not really into 'Trivia Pursuit'.

It isn't.
It provides the number of aircraft/make/models built by the various
manufacturers. It tells how many 300's, 350's and 400's were made.
Through the end of 2006...
300's - 75
350's - 124
400's - 286
Total Columbia aircraft produced since 1995 -2006 is 485.
Where did you get the "thousands" number?

I explained in another post after reading the data. Also, ICYMI, I was
including the Lancairs.

Do you really thing those numbers are THE big difference in why his
insurance quote was so high?

Hope your ego has been sated.

No, as you so aptly commented, it is based on pilot experience.

On 2007-07-03, Matt Barrow wrote:

What have you been quoted, and by whom?

I haven't shopped it out, figuring it will save me some time to find
out in usenet what discounts to be aware of before I start making
calls. Newps commented in another thread that it would cost $8-10k to
insure him in a Columbia, versus $1900 in a Bonanza. That's what
prompted this thread.

Nope. AAMOF, as a infrequent flyer, you're going to pay more. MUCH
more. Particularly with a high performance aircraft.

Have 3000+ hours, an IR, and fly 300+ hours a year and your rate
will go WAY down.

That's the kind of info I was looking for. The cost of accumulating
3k hours outweighs the reduced insurance premium. But getting the IR
sooner rather than later may be justified.

--
PM instructions: do a caesar cipher on the alpha characters in my address using +3 as the key.

On 2007-07-03, Gig 601XL Builder wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

I also doubt you are going to find a carrier that would be willing
to start a policy every Friday and end it on Sunday.

That's not what I was looking for anyway. I would be more interested
in an annual policy that is effectively excludes flying incidents
Monday-Thursday.

--
PM instructions: do a caesar cipher on the alpha characters in my address using +3 as the key.

On 2007-07-04, Matt Barrow wrote:

In the context of the original post (boy, has this group got the
tendancy to go off on tangents!) it was a pilot flying VERY FEW
hours each month in an aircraft that goes over a half-million $$$,
complaining about the cost of insurance. He never did come back with
the numbers for the "comparable" aircraft price quotes. He also
didn't answer whether he had an IR (that make a HUGH difference),
nor how much TT he had.

I have 200 hours. Unless there is some underdog insurance provider
who is keen to the market of infrequent pilots, and willing to take
half the risk for 3/4ths of the premium, the daily cost of owning a
Columbia will probably be unreasonable.

I'm trying to find out what all my options are. Renting makes the
most sense, but schools are reluctant to let their trainers go for a
weekend. I know of a couple that will, but availability is not quite
acceptible. There's a local flight club, but there are ~35 members
sharing 1 AC, and the cost is ~$85/mo. + the hourly, and I suspect the
availability is unacceptible under those circumstances.

I have yet to compare renters insurance to owners insurance. If it's
correct that pilot experience and credentials are the primary factor,
then I'm expecting renters to be comparable to owners.

--
PM instructions: do a caesar cipher on the alpha characters in my address using +3 as the key.

"Justin Gombos" wrote

That's not what I was looking for anyway. I would be more interested
in an annual policy that is effectively excludes flying incidents
Monday-Thursday.

You must not understand insurance.

Think of it this way. How would you not flying Mon-Thurs make you less likely
to crash or break something, resulting in a claim?

Would you be flying more hours if you had a full week policy? If not, why lower
a year's premium?

If anything, flying Fri-Sun would expose you to more risk, in possible mid-air's
with increased weekend fliers. That is the bottom line; to insure you for
cheaper, they would need to see lower risk. You would not be giving them lower
risk, so cost stays the same.
--
Jim in NC

Justin Gombos wrote:
On 2007-07-03, Gig 601XL Builder wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

I also doubt you are going to find a carrier that would be willing
to start a policy every Friday and end it on Sunday.

That's not what I was looking for anyway. I would be more interested
in an annual policy that is effectively excludes flying incidents
Monday-Thursday.


But that is pretty much what they'd be doing anyway. What makes you think
that your risk flying 50 hours per year only on weekend would be any less
than the guy in the next hanger who flys 50 hours a year but on any day of
the week?

In fact since there will be more recreational pilots flying on weekend the
chance that you would run into one of them increases. There would also be
the added concern that on one of your weekend jaunts you would be more
likely to fly in worst weather because waiting until Monday isn't an option.

But it all boils down to the fact that the insurance company's risk would
not be reduced enough for you to even notice the difference.

Justin Gombos wrote:
On 2007-07-04, Matt Barrow wrote:

In the context of the original post (boy, has this group got the
tendancy to go off on tangents!) it was a pilot flying VERY FEW
hours each month in an aircraft that goes over a half-million $$$,
complaining about the cost of insurance. He never did come back with
the numbers for the "comparable" aircraft price quotes. He also
didn't answer whether he had an IR (that make a HUGH difference),
nor how much TT he had.

I have 200 hours. Unless there is some underdog insurance provider
who is keen to the market of infrequent pilots, and willing to take
half the risk for 3/4ths of the premium, the daily cost of owning a
Columbia will probably be unreasonable.

There is a much easier way to reduce the insurance company's risk. Reduce
the dollar amount that they are insuraning. Of course if you have the
aircraft financed you must be insureed for the at least the finaced amount.
But if that is the case the finance company wouldn't go along with your idea
for weekend only coverage anyway. You do know that aircraft can be damaged
or destroyed while sitting in the hanger, don't you? If not I have some
photos at the house of a Citation that was broken in half when the roof of
the hanger collapsed.




I'm trying to find out what all my options are. Renting makes the
most sense, but schools are reluctant to let their trainers go for a
weekend. I know of a couple that will, but availability is not quite
acceptible. There's a local flight club, but there are ~35 members
sharing 1 AC, and the cost is ~$85/mo. + the hourly, and I suspect the
availability is unacceptible under those circumstances.

Who is renting Columbia 400 as trainers?

If availability is you number one concern then buying or better yet finding
a partner that needs the plane to fly for business (they'll use it mostly
during the week) is the way to go.


I have yet to compare renters insurance to owners insurance. If it's
correct that pilot experience and credentials are the primary factor,
then I'm expecting renters to be comparable to owners.

"Justin Gombos" wrote in message
news:9QUki.5254$nQ4.3245@trndny01...
On 2007-07-03, Matt Barrow wrote:

What have you been quoted, and by whom?

I haven't shopped it out, figuring it will save me some time to find
out in usenet what discounts to be aware of before I start making
calls. Newps commented in another thread that it would cost $8-10k to
insure him in a Columbia, versus $1900 in a Bonanza. That's what
prompted this thread.

He's wayyyy high, I think (I don't know his coverage or his logbook). But
then his Bo is about $100-150K (IIRC) and a newer COL400 is pushing $600K.

http://www.flycolumbia.com/.docs/_si...irst_Quote.pdf

(hope that wraps correctly)

Check the part about optimal pilot characteristics and see how many you fall
into.


Nope. AAMOF, as a infrequent flyer, you're going to pay more. MUCH
more. Particularly with a high performance aircraft.

Have 3000+ hours, an IR, and fly 300+ hours a year and your rate
will go WAY down.

That's the kind of info I was looking for. The cost of accumulating
3k hours outweighs the reduced insurance premium. But getting the IR
sooner rather than later may be justified.

Well, you don't have to have 3000 hours, but it sounds like you fall into a
few of the "high risk" categories. An IR can save as much as 25% on your
insurance.

Check the URL'ed PDF and let us know how it went. Also, call the broker
listed at the bottom; they gave give you more specifics, and they have a
good handle on Columbia's product line.

--
Matt Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY


"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become
dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest
authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
-- Omar Ahmad, Chairman Emeritus, Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR).

"Justin Gombos" wrote in message
news:W7Vki.9224$ZO4.3568@trndny05...
On 2007-07-04, Matt Barrow wrote:

In the context of the original post (boy, has this group got the
tendancy to go off on tangents!) it was a pilot flying VERY FEW
hours each month in an aircraft that goes over a half-million $$$,
complaining about the cost of insurance. He never did come back with
the numbers for the "comparable" aircraft price quotes. He also
didn't answer whether he had an IR (that make a HUGH difference),
nor how much TT he had.

I have 200 hours. Unless there is some underdog insurance provider
who is keen to the market of infrequent pilots, and willing to take
half the risk for 3/4ths of the premium, the daily cost of owning a
Columbia will probably be unreasonable.

It will be until you get a whole bunch more hours and training.

I'm trying to find out what all my options are. Renting makes the
most sense, but schools are reluctant to let their trainers go for a
weekend. I know of a couple that will, but availability is not quite
acceptible. There's a local flight club, but there are ~35 members
sharing 1 AC, and the cost is ~$85/mo. + the hourly, and I suspect the
availability is unacceptible under those circumstances.

Other clubs in the area? That seems like an extremely high ratio. The only
club I belonged to some years back was 9-10 AC for 85-90 members. Mostly
172's and a couple Warriors/Archers and even a couple T182's.


I have yet to compare renters insurance to owners insurance. If it's
correct that pilot experience and credentials are the primary factor,
then I'm expecting renters to be comparable to owners.
Some other folks may be able to clarify, but IIUC, renters insurance does
not cover the airframe, the clubs insurance covers that?

Good luckm but you will have to stay away from any high-performance aircraft
with your low hours and low annual flying time.

--
Matt Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY