BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 18:22

Rick,

Exactly why nobody rides with me. You can't have enough insurance. $1m would cover about 4 years of missed income for most of my friends.

It is sad. The warnings, placards, waivers etc, mean nothing.... Especially to spouses. I would probably take a few BTers but only if I knew them well.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 18:39

Rotax was working on a 250-350 hp engine that I saw at Osh about 5-6 years ago. The project got cancelled, it would have been a great engine.

Username Protected wrote:

100hp from 82 cu in. Wonder how a bigger design would fare?

They are working on it. I think they are trying to come up with a 200 HP motor. The secret which is no secret is the gear reduction and liquid cooling, and higher compression. The new FI Rotax (and I am no fan too expensive) has a fairly high compression ratio for an aero motor. The Aussie Jabiru is also pretty good but rather conventional so I doubt it is anymore viable long run than the LyCon's. The Japs came out with a great 4 stroke two cylinder motor a while back very reliable but since it is aero they ( Distributors iirc) jacked up the price on it too. An amazing thing you tell someone its for aviation and the next thing they do right off is double or triple the price.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 19:04

Quote:

This point may have already been made in this (very long) thread, but one thing to keep in mind regarding experimental aircraft is the lack of adequate available liability protection. I currently have $1M "smooth" coverage on my Bonanza, which I consider to be the minimum acceptable amount, but the highest limit available for most experimental category planes is $100K per person. This is an extremely low limit that will not go far in the event of a claim -- the insurance company will just cut a check for $100K and then disappear. It will then be up to the aircraft owner or his heirs to deal with the resulting lawsuits and legal costs.

I am a big fan of the current kitplanes such as RV's, Lancair's, etc. -- they are fun, efficient airplanes. However, the very real liability exposure is something that any potential buyer/builder should consider carefully.

And then, at some point, you have to sell the airplane that you built and/or maintained with the liability trail that ensues.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 19:20

Username Protected wrote:

Quote:

This point may have already been made in this (very long) thread, but one thing to keep in mind regarding experimental aircraft is the lack of adequate available liability protection. I currently have $1M "smooth" coverage on my Bonanza, which I consider to be the minimum acceptable amount, but the highest limit available for most experimental category planes is $100K per person. This is an extremely low limit that will not go far in the event of a claim -- the insurance company will just cut a check for $100K and then disappear. It will then be up to the aircraft owner or his heirs to deal with the resulting lawsuits and legal costs.

I am a big fan of the current kitplanes such as RV's, Lancair's, etc. -- they are fun, efficient airplanes. However, the very real liability exposure is something that any potential buyer/builder should consider carefully.

And then, at some point, you have to sell the airplane that you built and/or maintained with the liability trail that ensues.

history shows the risk there is nil. Can you find an example of a builder or owner-meintainer being held liable by a subsequent owner ?
E/AB airplanes are like any airplanes, you can always find a reason to not have one if you don't want one. Many pilots are to experimentals as Ben is to all airplanes.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 19:22

Username Protected wrote:

-- - -
. Many pilots are to experimentals as Ben is to all airplanes.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:02

Username Protected wrote:

This point may have already been made in this (very long) thread, but one thing to keep in mind regarding experimental aircraft is the lack of adequate available liability protection. I currently have $1M "smooth" coverage on my Bonanza, which I consider to be the minimum acceptable amount, but the highest limit available for most experimental category planes is $100K per person. This is an extremely low limit that will not go far in the event of a claim -- the insurance company will just cut a check for $100K and then disappear. It will then be up to the aircraft owner or his heirs to deal with the resulting lawsuits and legal costs.

I am a big fan of the current kitplanes such as RV's, Lancair's, etc. -- they are fun, efficient airplanes. However, the very real liability exposure is something that any potential buyer/builder should consider carefully.

Rick -
If you are talking about piston experimental and insurance limits available you are generally correct. However turbine experimentals like the Epic Lt for instance do qualify with some of the carriers (only 4 total quoting Epic's at present) for higher limits up to $5m for instance. I have 3-4 Epic Lt flyers who carry $5m smooth limits. They were only able to secure this limit after about 200+ hrs logged in type (if memory serves me correctly). There is no question limit availability is different for experimentals (generally lower) in comparison to certified piston and turbine aircraft. It is definitely rare (but not impossible) to secure a smooth limit in a piston single-engine experimental aircraft.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:05

Okay lots of you are thinking about just flying and having fun, if that describes you then the airplane for you is a Sonex.

Fairly inexpensive and it's an experimental a misnomer for sure but it is what it is.

http://www.sonexaircraft.com

I would get one just for S&G and it is not too slow, could make a reasonable commuter for 100-300 miles pennies on the dollar.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:06

So, carrying 1 mil smooth on a Christen Eagle is not realistic?.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:20

Username Protected wrote:

Rick -
If you are talking about piston experimental and insurance limits available you are generally correct. However turbine experimentals like the Epic Lt for instance do qualify with some of the carriers (only 4 total quoting Epic's at present) for higher limits up to $5m for instance. I have 3-4 Epic Lt flyers who carry $5m smooth limits. They were only able to secure this limit after about 200+ hrs logged in type (if memory serves me correctly). There is no question limit availability is different for experimentals (generally lower) in comparison to certified piston and turbine aircraft. It is definitely rare (but not impossible) to secure a smooth limit in a piston single-engine experimental aircraft.

Hello Tom,

Thank you for posting this info. You are correct, I was referring specifically to piston engine experimental aircraft such as Lancairs, Glasairs, RV's, etc. I have inquired in the past and was told by at least 3 different insurance brokers that liability limits of greater than $100K per person were essentially unavailable to me, especially with low time in type. I am an ATP rated professional pilot with over 15,000 accident-free hours in complex aircraft, but I have no time logged in any of the high performance kit planes.

If I were to buy or build one of these great planes, I would probably limit the passenger list to my spouse and/or other close family. This strategy would probably work for me, but others might find it difficult to do so. Of course another option would be to buy/build a single seat airplane, like the new SubSonex jet -- I saw it fly at Oshkosh and it looked like a lot of fun!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:30

Username Protected wrote:

Rick,

Exactly why nobody rides with me. You can't have enough insurance. $1m would cover about 4 years of missed income for most of my friends.

It is sad. The warnings, placards, waivers etc, mean nothing.... Especially to spouses. I would probably take a few BTers but only if I knew them well.

Hi Todd,

I would probably do the same if I owned an Experimental aircraft. With $1M per person liability I might feel differently, but with only $100K per person I would rarely allow anyone else in the plane (other than my wife).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 20:32

Username Protected wrote:

So, carrying 1 mil smooth on a Christen Eagle is not realistic?.

The only way to find out is to run the quoting process - it could very well be obtainable if you have good tailwheel time and prior aerobatic experience in other aircraft. But by and large - no there aren't many carriers quoting $1m smooth on piston single experimental aircraft.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Aug 2014, 22:22

Username Protected wrote:

That radial is a work of art.

Dare I ask the cost.

IF my brain remembers, about $45k for 110hp...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Aug 2014, 03:17

That's actually not too bad for a new motor..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Aug 2014, 05:31

Username Protected wrote:

That's actually not too bad for a new motor..

pretty steep for ~100hp. Granted the radial doubles as a sculpture.
But for cost comparison, in the realm of 100hp homebuilts you can build a corvair engine conversion for ~4k

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Aug 2014, 08:43

Username Protected wrote:

That's actually not too bad for a new motor..

pretty steep for ~100hp. Granted the radial doubles as a sculpture.
But for cost comparison, in the realm of 100hp homebuilts you can build a corvair engine conversion for ~4k

Can Experimentals save General Aviation?