Does it ever make sense to fly with only liability insurance?

I am still a student pilot and just picked up an old mostly original Cessna 175, original engine near tbo, priced accordingly, I think. I figure if I can get a couple hundred hours out of it, it won’t owe me anything and if/when I move on to a nicer (and more expensive) plane, I’ll have a chance at better insurance rates vs getting a nicer plane now. I need to finish my ppl and then I’d like to be able to land off airport at my house and some farms that we have.

I have not seen any quotes yet (agent tried to email one today but evidently forgot the attachment) but I’m assuming I’ll want to be sitting down when I do get them, given my very low hours. What kind of savings would you have to see to entertain going without insurance for the airplane and it’s recovery if off-airport?

Any other general advice about what kind of insurance I do or don’t need or want? This airplane stuff is all new to me.

I don’t have near the experience of others on here, but for me, the insurance question comes down to what I can afford to eat if uninsured coupled with realistic risk. For the first 15 years of my flying, I was operating a 172 from airport to airport. It wasn’t without risk - I spent a lot of time flying in the mountains far from the road system, but the odds of a catastrophic crash were relatively low, so I didn’t insure. When I started flying a Cub, that calculation changed. Almost all of my flying became off-airport, the likelihood of a mistake increased, the cost of recovery increased, and the cost of the airplane increased. Basically, I can afford to fly the plane, but I can’t afford to replace it. So now I carry hull insurance.

If you could wreck your plane, dust yourself off, and get back into flying, maybe skip hull for a while. If a wreck would ruin any hope of flying for the foreseeable future, buy the insurance. Or, at least that’s my approach.

What Brian said is accurate. I did a lot of Ag flying with drift liability insurance that was required but no hull insurance. That was because the engines were high time and hull insurance doesn't cover the engine unless the airframe is totalled. I insured my own airplanes, however, for more than purchase price. Since they also were high time and out with students often, they also were cheaply bought. I moved up on totalled insured airplanes. I also taught my students to takeoff fast in low ground effect and not pitch up without zoom reserve and to land slow using power if available. Precautionary landings increase incidents and accidents but reduce fatalities.

The GO-300 in the 175 wants to run at high engine RPM, but you are already committed to what has already happened with the engine. If it is high time, not so normal on 175, that is good. It has been run right.

Email me [email protected] and I will attach my free ebooks Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques and Contact Flying Revised. They cover the low, altitude and expense, end of general aviation.

When I was doing a lot of instructing in Alaska in my 170, on floats and wheels, hull insurance was insanely expensive. So, I only carried liability. My philosophy was if bad happened I could walk away from the plane if need be.

As soon as I stopped instructing in my plane, I started carrying hull.

So, it really depends on your circumstance. But, before I decided, I’d for sure get a quote on both liability alone as well as liability and hull. You may be surprised.

Take it cautious at first.

MTV

Just make sure you at least have appropriate liability. I sure hope this guy in the piper did!

Get the quote first. It might not be so bad. I paid $800 on my 182 and fresh private pilot (2010). In that case I think that’s pretty cheap if you’re under $2k.

You could be a super safe pilot but sometimes shit happens. Engines stop. A light PA18 on bushwheels can land in some tight and rough spots after an engine out and you’ll still make it home for lunch.

A Cessna trike on a forced landing out will most likely have collapsed nose gear, prop strike, engine tear down, cowl repair, etc... at least from what I’ve seen.

Just food for thought. I’d protect your investment and get the insurance.

BigBen wrote:Does it ever make sense to fly with only liability insurance?

I am still a student pilot and just picked up an old mostly original Cessna 175, original engine near tbo, priced accordingly, I think. I figure if I can get a couple hundred hours out of it, it won’t owe me anything and if/when I move on to a nicer (and more expensive) plane, I’ll have a chance at better insurance rates vs getting a nicer plane now. I need to finish my ppl and then I’d like to be able to land off airport at my house and some farms that we have.

I have not seen any quotes yet (agent tried to email one today but evidently forgot the attachment) but I’m assuming I’ll want to be sitting down when I do get them, given my very low hours. What kind of savings would you have to see to entertain going without insurance for the airplane and it’s recovery if off-airport?

Any other general advice about what kind of insurance I do or don’t need or want? This airplane stuff is all new to me.

Just saw your location. Any chance that you bought that 175 from the former (recently retired) airport manager?

As to your topic, Hull insurance on a cheap plane is pretty cheap but if you need to squeeze every dime out of your budget then you just have to decide about your risk factor. I probably under-insured my Citabria when I had it. I mean, I placed the hull value at the amount I paid for the plane but nowhere near enough to replace it.

Over time I upped the hull value to cover my initial cost plus the improvements I had made. Any more than that and it just seemed like I was at the casino where the odds always favor the house, and that money would be better saved in my own account.

I thought it was funny that the insurance policy gave an amount for recovery of the plane if it had an off airport landing than I would have been given for my hull loss.

If I was ever going to take a passenger I would NOT fly with out liability. If a passenger gets hurt very bad it could ruin you financially.

If you wrecked it by yourself can you afford to walk away and replace it no worries. If not, buy insurance.

My 2 cents worth.

aftCG wrote:
Just saw your location. Any chance that you bought that 175 from the former (recently retired) airport manager?

I did.
Hopefully that’s a good thing.

I told Avemco right up front the type of flying I do, and where, my age (72) and my ranch strip length and slope. Also my hrs TT of course. To my amazement, they quoted me a price for liability insurance that was MUCH less than I thought it would be, not to mention I had thought they would just laugh. $420.00 a year.....million bucks worth of coverage. I don't worry about hull insurance, as I'll never crash. I now have a warm fuzzy feeling that is easily worth that much once a year, even if I never need it.

OregonMaule wrote:If I was ever going to take a passenger I would NOT fly with out liability. If a passenger gets hurt very bad it could ruin you financially.

If you wrecked it by yourself can you afford to walk away and replace it no worries. If not, buy insurance.

My 2 cents worth.

I'm not sure if he asked about flying without liability.

BigBen wrote:Does it ever make sense to fly with only liability insurance?

One thing I do know is that all liability is not the same. They definitely have different tiers and the medical limits for individual passengers could be functionally low in today's medical care/insurance climate. And cartwheeling into a newer Gulfstream parked on the ramp may exhaust your little liability limits.

BigBen wrote:

aftCG wrote:
Just saw your location. Any chance that you bought that 175 from the former (recently retired) airport manager?

I did.
Hopefully that’s a good thing.

I've been within 5' of the plane but wasn't examining it and I don't know its history. I do know that Mike is a stand up guy.

aftCG wrote:
I've been within 5' of the plane but wasn't examining it and I don't know its history. I do know that Mike is a stand up guy.

I can’t claim to know him very well, but that’s the impression I got.

Another option to consider is a high deductible for some rate relief.

Just don’t be going cheap hoping to make it all back with a video of your daring “escape” that gets posted on youtube

Mantoga wrote:Just don’t be going cheap hoping to make it all back with a video of your daring “escape” that gets posted on youtube

Last I checked, I exceed the weight rating for parachutes, so that scheme probably won’t work for me unless BRS has started making a ‘chute in a backpack.

I don't worry about hull insurance, as I'll never crash.



My kinda pilot right there

I got the quote today, $776 hull and $567 liability.

BigBen wrote:

Mantoga wrote:Just don’t be going cheap hoping to make it all back with a video of your daring “escape” that gets posted on youtube

Last I checked, I exceed the weight rating for parachutes, so that scheme probably won’t work for me unless BRS has started making a ‘chute in a backpack.

HA! Me too partner, me too