X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [68.31.130.243] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.3c5) with HTTP id 944649 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 15 May 2005 08:59:35 -0400 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: [LML] Insurance!!! To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.3c5 Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 08:59:35 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for Dan O'Brien : I ran into the same reaction at Sun-N-Fun. I'm low time (250 hours) and not commercial but instrument rated. The guy at Falcon sent me to the EAA booth. The guy there shook his head. He said liability only was doable, but only one company would write it, so it would be expensive. He told me the difference between my ES and a Mooney or Bonanza was that my plane is plastic. No duh! Well, the ES V-speeds are similar to the Bonanza, and I am more insurable there. In acquiring both tickets (private and instrument), I was told that by instructors that I'm an excellent pilot. Meticulous, all manouvers within commercial specs, etc. Doesn't count for crap to the insurance people. Only two conclusions are possible: 1) the ES is much harder to fly than Mooneys and Bonanzas, or 2) Lancair pilots tend to be reckless, so we can't get insurance (or not from more than one company, as I heard it). Maybe someone can come up with a more optimistic conclusion.