Instrument rating??

This is like arguing that you shouldn't wear a parachute, cause
if you do you'll take extreme chances and kill yourself.

Of course, look at the crash record of the Cirrus (if I'm not mistaken
it is relatively high considering the number of planes produced by
them). Many believe these accidents are the result of pilots taking
risks they normally wouldn't have taken in a non-parachute aircraft.
I believe Richard Collins wrote an interesting article about this a
few months back.

I have started my instrument rating and my piloting skills have
improved 10 fold. But will I be tempted to carry on into worsening
conditions after I have my rating? Well, probably, that is part of
what the rating is for. Perhaps this is why the ATP thought it was
dangerous (the weather may well be much wose than reported). I had an
ATP (and ex fighter pilot)tell me something similar. He advised me to
take aerobatics before getting the instrument. And then if I felt
like I still needed the instrument rating go ahead, but just do it to
improve your skills, "single engine planes are for sunny weather".
(He's retired and swears he doesn't fly on instruments or in single
engines much for that matter.) I didn't take is advise on the
aerobatics (yet) but I may keep my flying to relatively good weather
even after I get my ticket.

Anyway, my CFII now is an ATP and instructor for a major carrier and
he has no problems flying in the clouds at all. So who is right?
Well, neither one of these guys are idiots....

This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance premium...
I will let the rocket scientists in this discussion ponder the implications
of that...
denny

"Greg" wrote in message I have started my instrument
rating and my piloting skills have
improved 10 fold. But will I be tempted to carry on into worsening
conditions after I have my rating?

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...
This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that
adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance
premium...
I will let the rocket scientists in this discussion ponder the
implications
of that...

If your implication is that the insurance companies have found that an
instrument rating improves safety, that doesn't actually follow. It could
be that the rating is diagnostic, rather than causative, of above-average
safety. You can't tell just from the correlation.

--Gary

denny

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:34:49 GMT, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...
This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that
adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance
premium...
I will let the rocket scientists in this discussion ponder the
implications
of that...

If your implication is that the insurance companies have found that an
instrument rating improves safety, that doesn't actually follow. It could
be that the rating is diagnostic, rather than causative, of above-average
safety. You can't tell just from the correlation.

It's a very simple relationship.

The insurance companies do not give a break unless they figure they
are going to save even more money.

That follows directly that if they give pilots with an instrument
rating a cheaper premium they figure the odds are they will have to
pay out less due to that pilot being rated.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

--Gary

denny

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in
This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance premium...

That's not generally true at all. It's ONLY true for low time pilots
and for fast cruisers. When I owned a TriPacer I asked my broker
about what kind of discount I could expect if I got an instrument
rating, and he just laughed. Of course with my Twin Comanche it's a
very different story. You only get that discount if you own something
fast - say Mooney/Bonanza/Comanche/Viking and up.

I will let the rocket scientists in this discussion ponder the implications
of that...

Fine. The implication is that unless you own have an airplane too
fast to scud run, an instrument rating doesn't do anything to make you
any safer. I'm pretty comfortable with that.

Michael

Just to give you a data point...

I guess I fall into the low time pilot category at about 250 hours TT. My
insurance bill was about $90 lower this year possibly as a result of
attaining the instrument rating. Of course, this may be a break due to TT
rather than an IA, except that I don't think you get a break because of TT
until at least 300 hours. Oh, and I fly a PA28-140, not exactly a hotrod.

Still, I didn't get the IA for the insurance. I did it to increase the
usability of my plane. Here in NJ we get a lot of hazy summers and the
occasional scuddy days in fall/spring (ceiling around 2k).

mark

"Michael" wrote in message
om...
"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in
This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that
adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance
premium...

That's not generally true at all. It's ONLY true for low time pilots
and for fast cruisers. When I owned a TriPacer I asked my broker
about what kind of discount I could expect if I got an instrument
rating, and he just laughed. Of course with my Twin Comanche it's a
very different story. You only get that discount if you own something
fast - say Mooney/Bonanza/Comanche/Viking and up.

I will let the rocket scientists in this discussion ponder the
implications
of that...

Fine. The implication is that unless you own have an airplane too
fast to scud run, an instrument rating doesn't do anything to make you
any safer. I'm pretty comfortable with that.

Michael

(Michael) wrote in message . com...
"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in
This discussion has had it's silly moments... I will simply note that adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance premium...

That's not generally true at all. It's ONLY true for low time pilots
and for fast cruisers. ..
You only get that discount if you own something
fast - say Mooney/Bonanza/Comanche/Viking and up.

Michael,

Are you sure about that? Do you have some sort of study or
evidence you could point to online?

I don't know what you consider "low time" for the purposes of this
discussion, but DH and I both have between 500 and 1000 hrs TT,
more than 300 hrs in type, do recurrant training (WINGS) every
year. Our insurance quote dropped substantially this year in what
we were told is a generally rising market.

We fly a simple, fixed-gear, fixed-prop plane which is slightly
faster than its 180 HP fixed gear cousins -- but it's no Mooney/
Bonanza/Comanche/Viking.

What's different? I finished my IR last fall.

I've heard a similar story from a fellow owner with a Piper Warrior,
which is even slower, and from the chap across the shadeports with a
Piper Archer.

So it kind of looks to us that at least some insurance companies
think the IR makes a difference. Maybe not for your Tripacer, maybe
not for someone flying a Stinson 108 or a C140, but for ordinary
garden-variety spamcans which were commonly produced as
instrument-capable planes.

Cheers,
Sydney

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message ...
I will simply note that adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance premium...
denny

Is there any real evidence of this? It's certainly *not* true for me!
Avemco told me that adding an IFR rating would not change my premium
by even one cent.

-DJR

"As a pilot you may never actually achieve perfection in the air, but
you better damn well spend every second you're up there at least
trying to achieve it" Dudley Henriques

I just posted about this on the original thread, but my insurance went down
a whopping $90 after I picked up my IA. I was told that total time would
have a bigger effect on my premium.

mark

"Dave Russell" wrote in message
om...
"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...
I will simply note that adding
the instrument rating will result in a decrease in your insurance
premium...
denny

Is there any real evidence of this? It's certainly *not* true for me!
Avemco told me that adding an IFR rating would not change my premium
by even one cent.

-DJR

"As a pilot you may never actually achieve perfection in the air, but
you better damn well spend every second you're up there at least
trying to achieve it" Dudley Henriques

On 4 Mar 2004 13:53:30 -0800, (Dave Russell) wrote:


Is there any real evidence of this? It's certainly *not* true for me!
Avemco told me that adding an IFR rating would not change my premium
by even one cent.

USAIG would not insure me in an SR20 until I got my instrument rating.