The slowly death of General Aviation in the U.S.

Insurance usually dictates checkout requirements. However, some people also misunderstand even the insurance company's requirements... heck I've even had phone conversations where the insurance broker and underwriter (on the same call) were having trouble explaining exactly what a particular insurance clause was requiring. On the G1000 I wouldn't be surprised if 5 hours of G1000 experience, or possibly in make/model was required but I'd be pretty surprised if it had to be in that specific airplane. Usually, from what I've seen, an experience requirement in a specific airplane is a loophole for lesser experience required, for example, a policy might require 25 hours of tail wheel experience in make/model -or- 10 hours dual in that specific airplane... things like that.

Those are just as easily misunderstood by the FBO/instructors. So, it's not a bad idea to ask for a copy of an FBO's policy to be sure they aren't misunderstanding things.
 
rframe said:
Those are just as easily misunderstood by the FBO/instructors. So, it's not a bad idea to ask for a copy of an FBO's policy to be sure they aren't misunderstanding things.
Click to expand...

This is good advice in general.

However, sometimes the checkout isn't insurance-driven. At the school I used to manage, our insurance policy was wide open. The underwriters basically left it to our discretion who we'd allow to fly our planes and what the checkouts would or wouldn't include.

In the case of a G1000 checkout, I can't remember exactly what the requirements were, but it was something along the lines of 5 hours--because honestly, that's not an unreasonable number. I think it was about 2 hours of ground training using a simulator and/or power cart connected to the aircraft, followed by 1-3 hours of flying for VFR privileges, with another 1-2 hours of flying for IFR privileges.

One must remember, the FBO can require any standard they see fit. Just because Bandit says he only wants to putt around on a VFR day doesn't mean that's the standard the FBO wants to hold their renters to. If they want to make sure everyone is proficient enough to fly a G1000 aircraft into Class B airspace when the weather is low IFR, they have the right to require that.

Another point to consider is how the FBO might offer rental aircraft, yet not *really* want to rent them. This would be the case with flight schools primarily focused on training. Their schedule/prices might be set up in such a way that they need the aircraft to be flying several hours per day and/or with an instructor to remain profitable. Sending Bandit out on a 30 minute sightseeing flight will not make money and might even lose money for them. In cases such as these, the flight school might increase the checkout requirements to make sure only more serious renters apply...say, a businessperson wanting to take an aircraft on longer cross country trips, or a timebuilding pilot wanting to rack up 50 hours of XC time towards their instrument rating.
 
jrh makes a very good point and I've done similar things, but I'm more blunt about it. I've told renters that if they do not fly X number of hours per month then I'm not able to rent to them. Even in a low volume environment where I really need people to be out flying so I can pay the bills, the guy who wants to fly 1 hour per month is pretty much a pain for me and not worth it. That might sound bad to those who think all businesses should bend over backwards for their customers, but it's the truth when you look at the big picture and I'm just trying to be honest with my customers.

1. I dont make enough off him to offset the time I need to handle the administrative tasks associated with his use
2. I cannot trust him to remain proficient and therefore I am increasing my liability significantly for little or no profit
3. His occasional use is usually only at prime times when it interferes with other customers who want to fly regularly, again a "cost" without significant gain.
 
jrh said:
This is good advice in general.

However, sometimes the checkout isn't insurance-driven. At the school I used to manage, our insurance policy was wide open. The underwriters basically left it to our discretion who we'd allow to fly our planes and what the checkouts would or wouldn't include.

In the case of a G1000 checkout, I can't remember exactly what the requirements were, but it was something along the lines of 5 hours--because honestly, that's not an unreasonable number. I think it was about 2 hours of ground training using a simulator and/or power cart connected to the aircraft, followed by 1-3 hours of flying for VFR privileges, with another 1-2 hours of flying for IFR privileges.

One must remember, the FBO can require any standard they see fit. Just because Bandit says he only wants to putt around on a VFR day doesn't mean that's the standard the FBO wants to hold their renters to. If they want to make sure everyone is proficient enough to fly a G1000 aircraft into Class B airspace when the weather is low IFR, they have the right to require that.

Another point to consider is how the FBO might offer rental aircraft, yet not *really* want to rent them. This would be the case with flight schools primarily focused on training. Their schedule/prices might be set up in such a way that they need the aircraft to be flying several hours per day and/or with an instructor to remain profitable. Sending Bandit out on a 30 minute sightseeing flight will not make money and might even lose money for them. In cases such as these, the flight school might increase the checkout requirements to make sure only more serious renters apply...say, a businessperson wanting to take an aircraft on longer cross country trips, or a timebuilding pilot wanting to rack up 50 hours of XC time towards their instrument rating.
Click to expand...

Which is all fine and dandy, it is the prerogative of the FBO. However, anyone with a modicum of Glass experience coupled with some G430/530 can figure out the G1000 by reading the manual. The FBO can require whatever they like, but this is one reason for the decline in GA.

There's a school nearby that has a 206 that never flies. It is $300/hr and requires a 5 hour checkout. I have over 500 hours in high performance singles and a similar amount of time in high wing Cessnas, I'm certain I could safely operate a 206 after reading the POH. $300 is a little steep for me anyway, but it would be nice to have access to it for the occasional trip with family or friends. There is no way I am going to fork out $1500 to go do practice approaches and traffic patterns. It's obnoxious.
 
Hubbs said:
There's a school nearby that has a 206 that never flies. It is $300/hr and requires a 5 hour checkout. I have over 500 hours in high performance singles and a similar amount of time in high wing Cessnas, I'm certain I could safely operate a 206 after reading the POH. $300 is a little steep for me anyway, but it would be nice to have access to it for the occasional trip with family or friends. There is no way I am going to fork out $1500 to go do practice approaches and traffic patterns. It's obnoxious.
Click to expand...

Have you asked them if there is any way to reduce the requirement?

As I said earlier, I used to manage a flight school, and we could adjust checkouts as we saw fit. If somebody came in with 100 hours of G1000 time, usually a 45 minute or 1 hour checkout would suffice. Same for our 172RG--if a person came in with a bunch of Piper Arrow time coupled with high wing Cessna time, we'd let them go with a simple 1 hour checkout, as opposed with 3-5 hours for most pilots. The numbers weren't written in stone.

Something to keep in mind is how the vast majority of rental pilots are not professional aviators. While you, me, and Bandit might have thousands of hours in dozens of different makes and models, we are highly atypical around most FBOs. Insurance requirements and checkout policies are written for the sub-500 hour weekend warrior who may or may not be proficient since they've only flown 20 hours in the past year and it's been 1.5 years since their last flight review. Don't be offended that you're so far above average.
 
jrh said:
Have you asked them if there is any way to reduce the requirement?

As I said earlier, I used to manage a flight school, and we could adjust checkouts as we saw fit. If somebody came in with 100 hours of G1000 time, usually a 45 minute or 1 hour checkout would suffice. Same for our 172RG--if a person came in with a bunch of Piper Arrow time coupled with high wing Cessna time, we'd let them go with a simple 1 hour checkout, as opposed with 3-5 hours for most pilots. The numbers weren't written in stone.

Something to keep in mind is how the vast majority of rental pilots are not professional aviators. While you, me, and Bandit might have thousands of hours in dozens of different makes and models, we are highly atypical around most FBOs. Insurance requirements and checkout policies are written for the sub-500 hour weekend warrior who may or may not be proficient since they've only flown 20 hours in the past year and it's been 1.5 years since their last flight review. Don't be offended that you're so far above average.
Click to expand...

That is a good question. I never have asked if the checkout requirements could be modified, that would certainly make the checkout a little bearable.

As you said, your insurance allowed you to use your discretion. I imagine some insurance companies will not.
 
At our club, and on the 150, 172 or 177 its pretty much can you take off, land and do a stall without crashing? .7 good enough.....

Mooney requires 25 hours of gear swiging time previously and a 1.5 hour ride, or 10 hours with a CFI in the Mooney.
 
You guys make some good points. The FBO has the right to require what ever they want and we also have the right to turn around and walk right out the door. When I used to instruct we had pretty liberal guidelines too for checkouts and we took into account experience levels during the checkout.
 
jskibo said:
At our club, and on the 150, 172 or 177 its pretty much can you take off, land and do a stall without crashing? .7 good enough.....

Mooney requires 25 hours of gear swiging time previously and a 1.5 hour ride, or 10 hours with a CFI in the Mooney.
Click to expand...

At the one of the FBO's in Daytona, I did a checkout in a G1000 182. That single 1 hour flight covered me in the 182, the 172S with and without G1000, 172L, 152 and 150. I checked myself out in a 152 one night.

And speaking of crazy insurance, I went to get a quote on the plane I'm buying (1940 Aeronca Chief), for ground only hull coverage and liability. They wanted like 10 hours of dual and 10 hours solo prior to carrying pax, at what was nearly 10% of the purchase price of the airplane, to cover the value of the airplane only when it gets wrecked while sitting on the ground.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
At the one of the FBO's in Daytona, I did a checkout in a G1000 182. That single 1 hour flight covered me in the 182, the 172S with and without G1000, 172L, 152 and 150. I checked myself out in a 152 one night.

And speaking of crazy insurance, I went to get a quote on the plane I'm buying (1940 Aeronca Chief), for ground only hull coverage and liability. They wanted like 10 hours of dual and 10 hours solo prior to carrying pax, at what was nearly 10% of the purchase price of the airplane, to cover the value of the airplane only when it gets wrecked while sitting on the ground.
Click to expand...
Wow, that seems crazy on ground hull!
 
We get a lot of out of town folks flying in to be a one day club member to get ten hours in the mooney before they go buy one. Seems to be a good business for our active CFi and good cash flow for the club....hoping to take some of that business from him next year ;)

I take the mooney every flight it's available now so I can rack up the complex time the same rate as the Cardinal. Figured it would be more valuable for insurance in the future if we get a Bonanza or similar.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
And speaking of crazy insurance, I went to get a quote on the plane I'm buying (1940 Aeronca Chief), for ground only hull coverage and liability. They wanted like 10 hours of dual and 10 hours solo prior to carrying pax, at what was nearly 10% of the purchase price of the airplane, to cover the value of the airplane only when it gets wrecked while sitting on the ground.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, I'd guesstimate about $1000-1500 for personal non-commercial coverage on a Champ with minimal TW experience, and about 3/4 of that being hull for ground and flight? What was the quote?
 
rframe said:
From what I've seen, I'd guesstimate about $1000-1500 for personal non-commercial coverage on a Champ with minimal TW experience, and about 3/4 of that being hull for ground and flight? What was the quote?
Click to expand...

On a $14,000 declared value (probably more than it's worth, but that's irrelevant really), they wanted nearly $925 for flying hull coverage and $1 million/$100K liability, but required 10 hours of dual and 5 solo. That was thru Falcon, which isn't known for being totally low time tailwheel friendly. Ground only, non-motion hull coverage and liability was about $600.
 
I liked this letter to the editor in the most recent AOPA Pilot ...

"Bruce Landsberg is way over-thinking the cause of the relentless decline in American GA. It's not the overreaching bureaucracy or some spooky failure of American nerve or vision. The entire issue can be distilled by one simple and depressing fact: $6 per gallon gas.

Mr. Landsberg, don't let this toxic political environment cloud your vision: GA would come roaring back with all of the optimism of the 1960s and '70s with 48-cent gas. Of course, don't hold your breath for that."

-William H. Corwin
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
At the one of the FBO's in Daytona, I did a checkout in a G1000 182. That single 1 hour flight covered me in the 182, the 172S with and without G1000, 172L, 152 and 150. I checked myself out in a 152 one night.

And speaking of crazy insurance, I went to get a quote on the plane I'm buying (1940 Aeronca Chief), for ground only hull coverage and liability. They wanted like 10 hours of dual and 10 hours solo prior to carrying pax, at what was nearly 10% of the purchase price of the airplane, to cover the value of the airplane only when it gets wrecked while sitting on the ground.
Click to expand...
Do you happen to be buying the Chief that some guy over on POA is selling?
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
On a $14,000 declared value (probably more than it's worth, but that's irrelevant really), they wanted nearly $925 for flying hull coverage and $1 million/$100K liability, but required 10 hours of dual and 5 solo. That was thru Falcon, which isn't known for being totally low time tailwheel friendly. Ground only, non-motion hull coverage and liability was about $600.
Click to expand...

Yeah that sounds about right. Even with significant TW experience I'd be surprised if you can get flying coverage below about $800. Also, on ground-only hull, they have taxi and no-taxi coverage.. so on a TW you can expect taxi will be almost as high as full flight and ground. So, just make sure they are giving you no-taxi ground hull coverage if you really just want protection against it getting hit by something or flipping over in a tie-down or something along those lines.
 
rframe said:
Yeah that sounds about right. Even with significant TW experience I'd be surprised if you can get flying coverage below about $800. Also, on ground-only hull, they have taxi and no-taxi coverage.. so on a TW you can expect taxi will be almost as high as full flight and ground. So, just make sure they are giving you no-taxi ground hull coverage if you really just want protection against it getting hit by something or flipping over in a tie-down or something along those lines.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm going to keep looking into it. The sad thing is, that with the current value of the airplane, simply paying for insurance for about 10 years, and you've paid for the plane again.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Yeah, I'm going to keep looking into it. The sad thing is, that with the current value of the airplane, simply paying for insurance for about 10 years, and you've paid for the plane again.
Click to expand...

You want a really good laugh, call for some quotes on commercial coverage. You'll quickly see why it's so hard to find tailwheel instruction anywhere :)

Also, one other thing to consider, if you're pinching pennies, is to consider that you might not really need full value coverage on the hull. If you ground loop it and hit a wing, if wind catches it and flips it over in a tie-down, or even with a prop strike on a small Continental... you're probably only looking at $2,500-5,000 in damages, so you might think about under-insuring it... as long as you dont have a note on the hull. Obviously, there's some risk, but it's not a totally unreasonable thing to do.
 
rframe said:
You want a really good laugh, call for some quotes on commercial coverage. You'll quickly see why it's so hard to find tailwheel instruction anywhere :)

Also, one other thing to consider, if you're pinching pennies, is to consider that you might not really need full value coverage on the hull. If you ground loop it and hit a wing, if wind catches it and flips it over in a tie-down, or even with a prop strike on a small Continental... you're probably only looking at $2,500-5,000 in damages, so you might think about under-insuring it... as long as you dont have a note on the hull. Obviously, there's some risk, but it's not a totally unreasonable thing to do.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, no doubt on the commercial coverage. The school I did my endorsement on allowed for solo rental of their 7ECA. I was shocked, when after about 7 hours, the CFI said, you want to take it solo now?

I've got a hangar for it, so I'm not worried about much but the hangar burning down when I'm not around. Otherwise, a prop strike isn't going to be a engine teardown, it'll be a replacement. No way would I tear down a Lycoming O-145, I'd sell it and convert to continental power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top