29singlespeed wrote:Sorry to ask, care to share more insight? Risk assessment is indeed a larger formula the # Aircraft / # Accidents. I am just unclear why the Maule seems to be the most expensive TW to insure. Granted, not the only cost going into operating cost and insurance is at an all time low for aviation.
Sure… I had posted some of this in other threads so forgive me if some is a repeat.
These are not issues limited to only the Maule as there are other aircraft that “suffer” from some of the same. Insurance rates all depend on the amount of money collected minus the amount paid in claims for each model aircraft. This is known as the loss ratio there is one for each model aircraft. It is determined by taking the total amount paid in claims for a specific model aircraft and dividing that number by the total amount of premium collected for that aircraft. If the loss ratio exceeds about 70% for a given model aircraft then it it not profitable to write it at the current premium. Somewhere around the 70% mark is the breakeven point for a loss ratio once the cost of doing business is paid...i.e. rent, payroll, expenses to adjust a claim (these are independent of the claim itself) The breakeven loss ratio for each aircraft varies by company.
The loss ratio is dependent on many factors, not the least of which is the number of aircraft in a specific model that are insured. The more aircraft insured, the less a single loss will affect the ratio. Compared to other similar models, the Maules are a minority when looking at production numbers so there are less of them that can be insured meaning that each loss affects the group to a greater degree. Another factor that affects the loss ratio is the cost of claims. While a fatal loss will hit a loss ratio very hard, thankfully they are not a frequent occurrence. What are frequent occurrences are the “smaller” claims such as propstrikes, wingtips, and bent gear. While these “smaller” claims do not seem like much, consider the average value of a Maule. I would venture an educated guess that across the fleet the average value is around $50,000 - $60,000. A prop strike often requires a tear down inspection and parts, new prop, etc. The claim for a simple prop strike can easily hit $30,000 and that does not include any damage to the airframe that often accompany it. With relatively low values and the high cost of repair a “small” claim can quickly become a total loss.
If we put all that together it looks similar to this: If 100 Maule aircraft are insured by a single company at an average value of $50,000 and at an average of $2,500 per year in premium it will add $250,000 to the ratio. 70% of that $250,000 equals $175,000 meaning that if losses incurred exceed $175,000 the company has lost money on writing the Maule. Now, if only 17 of those Maules have a prop strike claim of no more than $10,000 during the year, the company will lose money. If there are only 4 total losses in that year with no other losses, the company will lose money. If there are 2 fatalities that year and no other losses, the company will lose money. Keep in mind that 2 fatalities can come from one accident as the passengers are (usually) each covered for up to $100,000. The reality is that there will be a mixed bag of losses each year so it is a gambling numbers game.
There are other issues that contribute to the premiums as well such as the number of different models of Maules that have been produced. This becomes an issue when you take the relatively small total number of Maules and divide them by 43+ models of which some major parts (i.e. wings) may not be interchangeable which compounds the issue when it comes time for repairs. Combine this with a factory that does not keep a ready supply of parts for the fleet and many are custom made when ordered…not to mention parts have been known to take extended periods of time to receive when ordered. This extends the time it takes to repair a claim which increases the administrative cost of handling the claim and often the storage cost of the aircraft awaiting repairs away from home.
As I said, there is a lot more to the insurance rates than just the number of losses. Just because insurance is high on a particular aircraft does not necessarily mean it is dangerous. Also as I mentioned at the beginning of this post, these variables are not Maule specific and affect other aircraft as well. Take the aforementioned examples and input the variables for something like a Cessna 180 / 185 and you will get an even better idea…higher values, more readily available parts, more common parts between models, larger fleet, etc.
This is still just an overview of some of the factors that go into the rating of aircraft, but hopefully it answers some of your questions.
The more claims in type cause higher rates for that aircraft. If we had fewer claims the rates 
