I've never flown on skis, but years ago when I was first learning to fly in Alaska, an acquaintance had learned the hard way about another pair of issues with skis, besides what's been mentioned here: hard to steer, and no brakes! I forget where he'd landed his 180, but Talkeetna comes to mind, and he was taxiing on the snow-packed runway/ramp toward a line of airplanes parked there. As he got closer, he tried to turn away from them by kicking hard right rudder and blasting a little with power, but instead of turning, the airplane went straight. He pulled the mixture, but the prop was still turning as it bit into a Cherokee 140's wing.

That was his first winter on skis. The second winter, he pulled the skis and headed down the Alcan for a family visit. Somewhere in the Yukon, at about -70F, his engine failed, and he safely landed on a frozen lake--no airframe damage. He was there for less than a day before the SAR people got to him, but by then he was in a dire hypothermic state. He was clutching his newly purchased ELT, and he wouldn't let go of it. This was the first winter in which ELTs were mandated.

Obviously he survived, and his insurance paid to have the airplane retrieved by helicopter. When he told his stories to us newbies at the Elmendorf Aero Club during one of our "safety meetings", you can bet his photos and tale of survival had an impact on us!

Cary

8GCBC wrote:

akavidflyer wrote:

rw2 wrote:Thanks for the input guys! Guess I'll have to upgrade to insurance that will cover me on ski's when the time is right.

My insurance said it didn't matter if I was on wheels or ski's. The only time the rates went stupid is when on floats.

Same here...no increase for skiing but, big premium for the floats.

I would put my quotes in three buckets. I've been tailwheel for less than a year and needed a quote when I was zero time. The three buckets are: "Ok", "wow!" and "uh, WTF?"

I was able to get a very reasonable quote with two notable restrictions: No skis, no bahamas. And I was able to get the bahamas part waved with a change in deductible when operating in that region. I called a couple weeks ago and they are still unwilling to quote me on skis.

For "wow!" money, I was able to get skis. But the insurance was about three times the price.

For "uh, WTF?" money I could get floats.

We don't need to start yet another insurance thread here, but from the previous ones I'd say the float quote was in the ballpark. The ski quote was quite high. The one I went with was pretty good considering my lack of tailwheel time.

Since my intention, for as long as I can get away with it, is to not spend winter in places that get covered with snow, that was an easy trade-off to make. If I end up in a colder climate again someday then I'll be re-opening the investigation.

FWIW, I checked approx 8 or so years ago when I bought my skis, and it was ok with wheel coverage.
I don't know the current situation in the insurance world, tho.
I expect tail wheel time and total hours might come into play, too.

The only thing worse then going over in snow while on wheels, would be to do it when you HAVE skis, but still in the hangar! Thus my very cautious approach to a field landing a few weeks ago in Montana that had 4 to 6" of snow. I first flew over to a nearby paved strip (closed for the winter to wheeled traffic and not plowed or otherwise maintained, but offering areas where the snow had mostly blown off), landed, then got out and walked over to the snow covered grass alongside and got a feel for it's "character". Only then did I head over to the other field, where it went fine. 29" tires helped.

All I could think is that if I somehow tipped it over, sure as hell some wise ass would pipe up with "hey, you need skis for that thing". The only reason for putting off the ski installation of course is it means I have to take the 29's off and put the 8:00's on, and that's fine when it's WINTER and lot's of snow, but when I still have ground in sight, mostly, I prefer the fatties, those small tires looks like hockey pucks and ride about the same.

not to turn this into a tire thread but since I put my 29's on over a year ago you should hear all the negative comments I get about,"looks like a cartoon plane"... "what do you need those for "...."you could have got by with 8.50's"... mind you I'm in San Diego where there might be one other big tired airplane in the three surrounding counties.. but they work well in the back country of San Diego as well as every place else that isn't paved, like Idaho and Utah and Nevada... So I just smile and say... "yeah but I'm having more fun than you".....The Baby Bush wheel goes on the back of tha Maule today... funny but that seems to get good comments so far... go figure...

I landed once on Lake Hattie, west of Laramie on a foot of snow on top of ice, in my stock PA-12', fishing was fine, tried to take off(106 HP) got in old tire tracks, kept it there, got enough airspeed to raise one tire, was able to get off then.

I learned a lesson not using the old ski tracks from the landing.

My thinking ( if you can call it that ), was that I had a MT CS, 180HP, light loading/aft CG and plenty of room to do a cowboy takeoff. The aircraft was suppose to just get up on the "step" of the fresh snow and go.

Well, snow does not allow the same release (on my skis) as I had hoped and the takeoff was longer. There was no danger because I left a lot of room but, it gave me a lasting impression. The old tracks show fresh snow (relative) depth, overflow, and terrain roughness (which may have dictated the better choice).

Not saying I would always use the old tracks. However, old tracks tell a lot about what's happening on the ground. Leaving a set of fresh tracks and going around (in the air before landing) to check conditions, may save me one day.

Per the recent published reports the snow turned out to be crunchy ice and he came to an abrupt stop. No damage other than a prop strike (and we all know that is not as simple a fix as it sounds ). No injuries. Local guy out of Cottonwood Idaho. S.... Happens.

At the risk of sounding cynical, it appears the pilot stopped "flying" the airplane. Inattention? It has happened to me. Glad he walked! Good reality check looking at photograph.