Insuring a C310 vs. Piper Seneca

[Dave]

I've got about 750 Total Time, 50 complex, 100 IFR. Private, IFR,
Commercially rated.

I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride. So,
in research mode I asked my agent to get me some rates on Senecas and
C310s in the $150-$175K range. She came back and said, even with an
instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period. So, she asked
them at what hours would they insure me - here's what they gave her
(in the most vague of terms) -

Seneca - 100 hours multi with at least 50 in type
C310 - 50 hours multi, 10 in type

Huh?? Someone explain that one. I thought the 310 would be a higher
risk for them. No C/R props, flies faster and higher, etc. And, all
my time is in Pipers, including a lot in the Saratoga, so I'm familiar
with the cabin, panel, layout, etc. That probably means nothing,
though, except in my mind.

In looking in the $150-$175K range I'm finding I can get a reasonably
well equipped Seneca II(sometimes IIIs!) or a later model C310. I
like the 310 fuel capacity, speed, and sleek design.

I like the Seneca fuselage. I don't think either excel at hauling,
nor do I intend on filling it with 6 people often.

The C310 nonturbo models are still faster than the Senecas, which are
all turbo after the II model. That's more maintenance.

What are your thoughts on the insurance and comparing the apple to the
orange?

[Dude]

Geez, I need to call on this. My step up plans are in danger. I don't
think I could afford a wheels up in an uninsured twin.


"Dave" > wrote in message
m...
> I've got about 750 Total Time, 50 complex, 100 IFR. Private, IFR,
> Commercially rated.
>
> I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
> estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride. So,
> in research mode I asked my agent to get me some rates on Senecas and
> C310s in the $150-$175K range. She came back and said, even with an
> instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period. So, she asked
> them at what hours would they insure me - here's what they gave her
> (in the most vague of terms) -
>
> Seneca - 100 hours multi with at least 50 in type
> C310 - 50 hours multi, 10 in type
>
> Huh?? Someone explain that one. I thought the 310 would be a higher
> risk for them. No C/R props, flies faster and higher, etc. And, all
> my time is in Pipers, including a lot in the Saratoga, so I'm familiar
> with the cabin, panel, layout, etc. That probably means nothing,
> though, except in my mind.
>
> In looking in the $150-$175K range I'm finding I can get a reasonably
> well equipped Seneca II(sometimes IIIs!) or a later model C310. I
> like the 310 fuel capacity, speed, and sleek design.
>
> I like the Seneca fuselage. I don't think either excel at hauling,
> nor do I intend on filling it with 6 people often.
>
> The C310 nonturbo models are still faster than the Senecas, which are
> all turbo after the II model. That's more maintenance.
>
> What are your thoughts on the insurance and comparing the apple to the
> orange?

[Jim Burns]

Here's what we found this summer when insureing our Aztec. $90,000 hull,
$1mil / $100,000
3 pilots, equal ownership
1) Commercial, SEL, MEL, SES, IA, 1500TT, 1200tail, 40multi, 90complex &
high performance
2) Commercial, SEL, MEL, IA, CFII 500TT, 50tail, 15multi, 275complex & high
performance
3) Private, SEL, MEL, IA 250TT, 15multi, 50complex & high performance

AIG wouldn't rate us due to the Private pilot's low total time, they wanted
500hoursTT, without the private pilot they would cover #1 and #2 for $3600
per year
Avemco wanted $6500 per year
Global wouldn't quote us at all, they said they didn't do step up policies.
London wouldn't quote us, they said they didn't do step up policies.

We ended up going with a company (who's name excapes me) that required the
private pilot to get 25 hours Multi instruction, then 10 hours solo before
passengers. Rate is $4200 per year, BUT there is a $10,000 deductible for
any kind of gear up or gear failure accident. Additionally insured pilots
clause requires 500hours multi time with 50 in make/model.

While shopping, we were told that Aztecs are one of the underwriters
favorite twins to insure. Plenty of power, but not TOO much, non
turbocharged, a big fat wing, and a huge useful load, and a sturdy airframe.
It could be that once you say "Seneca" that they lump all models together
and automatically think "turboed". Just a guess. I would think that the
310 would require higher times due to it's more complex gear and fuel
systems and it's higher speed and faster wing. Maybe that particular
company has a high claim ratio on Senecas and a low claim ratio on 310's?

We recieved several strange comments from the underwriters. One said the
high rate was due to the model PA-23, which is also an Apache, which they
hate due to the small engines and ability to overload it with 4 adults.
Some underwriters were willing to recognize the differance but still gave us
make/model time credit for our Apache time.

Doubt if this helps, but that is what we ran into.


Jim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004

[Dave S]

My thoughts are that there is a "gotcha" in the 310 policy that has
drastically lowered the cost of the claim.

One flight school I used to rent from was considering a 310. The
prospective insurance MANDATED a 10k deductible for gear up claims and
did not allow an out if there was a mechanical glitch that caused it
(apparently there was a frequently occuring problem in the gear system
causing gear ups, besides the usual "software" error)

This is thirdhand info, so take it for what it is.. but that may offer a
view as to why the "higher performance" plane might cost less to insure.

Dave(a different one)

Dave wrote:
> I've got about 750 Total Time, 50 complex, 100 IFR. Private, IFR,
> Commercially rated.
>
> I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
> estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride. So,
> in research mode I asked my agent to get me some rates on Senecas and
> C310s in the $150-$175K range. She came back and said, even with an
> instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period. So, she asked
> them at what hours would they insure me - here's what they gave her
> (in the most vague of terms) -
>
> Seneca - 100 hours multi with at least 50 in type
> C310 - 50 hours multi, 10 in type
>
> Huh?? Someone explain that one. I thought the 310 would be a higher
> risk for them. No C/R props, flies faster and higher, etc. And, all
> my time is in Pipers, including a lot in the Saratoga, so I'm familiar
> with the cabin, panel, layout, etc. That probably means nothing,
> though, except in my mind.
>
> In looking in the $150-$175K range I'm finding I can get a reasonably
> well equipped Seneca II(sometimes IIIs!) or a later model C310. I
> like the 310 fuel capacity, speed, and sleek design.
>
> I like the Seneca fuselage. I don't think either excel at hauling,
> nor do I intend on filling it with 6 people often.
>
> The C310 nonturbo models are still faster than the Senecas, which are
> all turbo after the II model. That's more maintenance.
>
> What are your thoughts on the insurance and comparing the apple to the
> orange?

[Howard]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> We ended up going with a company (who's name excapes me) that required the
> private pilot to get 25 hours Multi instruction, then 10 hours solo before
> passengers. Rate is $4200 per year, BUT there is a $10,000 deductible for
> any kind of gear up or gear failure accident. Additionally insured pilots
> clause requires 500hours multi time with 50 in make/model.

That would be Aerospace Insurance Managers.

[Howard]

I've been an aviation insurance underwriter for seven year now and I still
don't understand how some of these people come up with their underwriting
guidelines.

The problem is many companies don't actually analyze their loss data, they
make knee-jerk reactions to statistically meaningless events. One company I
worked for suffered three losses with fatalities on Commander 114s in a
period of about 9 months. They decided the airplane was high risk and
nearly stopped writing them. Never mind the fact that in two of the three
accidents the cause was pilot error (one was CFIT the other was loss of
control at slow airspeed).

You'll probably find that every insurance company has it's quirks. Some
won't allow student pilots in Cessna 182s. Some won't write Twins over 25
years old but they'll happily write 60 year old single engine aircraft.
Some will insure helicopters used for flight training, but won't insure
fixed wing aircraft used for flight training. Go figure.

J. Howard

"Dave" > wrote in message
m...
> I've got about 750 Total Time, 50 complex, 100 IFR. Private, IFR,
> Commercially rated.
>
> I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
> estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride. So,
> in research mode I asked my agent to get me some rates on Senecas and
> C310s in the $150-$175K range. She came back and said, even with an
> instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period. So, she asked
> them at what hours would they insure me - here's what they gave her
> (in the most vague of terms) -
>
> Seneca - 100 hours multi with at least 50 in type
> C310 - 50 hours multi, 10 in type
>
> Huh?? Someone explain that one. I thought the 310 would be a higher
> risk for them. No C/R props, flies faster and higher, etc. And, all
> my time is in Pipers, including a lot in the Saratoga, so I'm familiar
> with the cabin, panel, layout, etc. That probably means nothing,
> though, except in my mind.
>

[Jim Burns]

Howard wrote:
>Some won't write Twins over 25
> years old but they'll happily write 60 year old single engine aircraft.

Yep, we ran into one like that also. Great comments Howard.

Another thing that strikes me is that the underwriters don't assume the risk
for the rules that they make up. Each of my policies shows the actual
companies assuming the risk and the list reads from far and wide and from a
very small percentage to a large percentage. It's like a mutual fund. The
underwriter pawns off a percentage of the coverage to different insurance
companies, mostly with names you've never heard of. So why the bizarre
rules? Maybe the final insurance company only wants to have x % of it's
risk put into general aviation?

Recently we've had a similar situation arise in the agriculture industry.
Insurance companies are once again allowed to purchase farm land for
investments. They also have "managed investment" divisions that are out
buying land on behalf of retirement funds. The retirement fund manager goes
to the insurance company and says "We have $xxxxx, we want this percent
invested in row crop farms, this percent invested in cash crop operations,
this percent in contract acreage, this much must be irrigated, this much
must be dry land. Here's the money, go do it." It's almost bizarre, just
bizarre enough that I can see insurance companys saying "Where can we get a
great rate of return on a little money?" and someone starts telling them
how high aviation rates are.

Jim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004

[Michael]

(Dave) wrote
> I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
> estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride.

Don't do it. It won't drop your insurance enough to offset the cost
of the course, and you won't learn much. Ask them if they will rent
you the plane you're training in solo. If not (and at 10-12 hours, I
know the answer will be not) you won't have learned enough to be safe
- just enough to get a piece of paper. You're way better off buying
your own airplane and training in it - unless you buy turbo, of
course.

> She came back and said, even with an
> instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period.

Go to someone else. I know people without multi ratings at all are
being insured in C-310's. The tipoff is the Seneca vs. C-310
comparison - the C-310 is definitely a more demanding airplane.

Michael

[Dave S]

Jim Burns wrote:
(SNIP)
> Global wouldn't quote us at all, they said they didn't do step up policies.
> London wouldn't quote us, they said they didn't do step up policies.
>
(SNIP)
>
> Jim
>

Not to sound ignorant, but I am unfamiliar with the term "Step up
policies" in this context? Anyone care to expand?


Dave

[Dude]

I don't know for sure, but I think they mean policies for pilots looking to
step up to the next level of airplane.

For example, a Mooney pilot with 500 hours, 200 complex, wants to buy a
twin. A step up policy would have a requirement for training before solo
pilot, or PIC with passengers would be covered.

There seems to be a trend where no one wants to cover a twin owner without
lots of twin hours. At the same time, many schools are no longer renting
their twins without instructors on board because they get a break that way.

If this keeps up, twin prices will plummet even further.

"Dave S" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> Jim Burns wrote:
> (SNIP)
>> Global wouldn't quote us at all, they said they didn't do step up
>> policies.
>> London wouldn't quote us, they said they didn't do step up policies.
>>
> (SNIP)
>>
>> Jim
>>
>
> Not to sound ignorant, but I am unfamiliar with the term "Step up
> policies" in this context? Anyone care to expand?
>
>
> Dave
>

[Dave]

> Go to someone else. I know people without multi ratings at all are
> being insured in C-310's. The tipoff is the Seneca vs. C-310
> comparison - the C-310 is definitely a more demanding airplane.
>
> Michael



I've been with my agent for a while, and she's pretty thorough. I'm
going to Action Multi Ratings in Groton, CT. Many other pilots I know
have gone through there. The training is all in a Seneca I for about
$1500, which includes books, ground school, wet rental, instructor and
the checkride. That's a good deal, in my opinion, especially because
there are at least 5 other pilots I know that did it and raved about
the program there.

I'd love to know the companies that are insuring twins to owners with
0 time, provisioning that they fly with an instructor for X hours.
They may have existed in the past, but I have a feeling they're far
and few between now, and probably have some pretty crappy premiums.

[Aaron Coolidge]

Dave > wrote:
: I'd love to know the companies that are insuring twins to owners with
: 0 time, provisioning that they fly with an instructor for X hours.
: They may have existed in the past, but I have a feeling they're far
: and few between now, and probably have some pretty crappy premiums.

Avemco will probably insure a person in this circumstance. A couple years
ago when I looked at Senecas, 310's and Twin Comanches I was quoted
insurance on all three types by Avemco. I had 300 TT, no complex or multi.
The quotes were very high, but not out of bounds considering my experience.
The Twin Comanche was highest ($7000), the 310 next ($4500), the Seneca
cheapest ($3800). Avemco said that I could expect those rates to drop
by about 50% with 100 to 200 hours of multi time in type. The quotes
were for $1M/$100k with $100k hull (I have no assets, so please don't
explain that those limits are too low.)
Although those quotes were within reason considering my experience they were
too high for me and I have not gone the multi route.
--
Aaron Coolidge

[Michael]

(Dave) wrote
> I've been with my agent for a while, and she's pretty thorough.

Your call - but somehow those who want to get insured always do. I
just recently (meaning within this past year) saw a guy get insured in
a Twin Comanche. Less than 250TT, no instrument rating, no complex or
multi time. Yes, it cost something like $7000 and he had to get his
multi/IFR to solo it, but he was covered.

> I'd love to know the companies that are insuring twins to owners with
> 0 time, provisioning that they fly with an instructor for X hours.
> They may have existed in the past, but I have a feeling they're far
> and few between now, and probably have some pretty crappy premiums.

They always have been few and far between, and the premiums have
always been high. That's not the same as not insurable at any price.

For example, I bet if you call Travers, you will get coverage in a
Twin Comanche. No clue who to call on C-310 coverage, but if you join
the owner's group, they will know.

Michael

[JerryK]

"Dave" > wrote in message
m...
> I've got about 750 Total Time, 50 complex, 100 IFR. Private, IFR,
> Commercially rated.
>
> I have no multi time, but am about to go to a school to get it. They
> estimate 10-12 hours in my log book when I finish my checkride. So,
> in research mode I asked my agent to get me some rates on Senecas and
> C310s in the $150-$175K range. She came back and said, even with an
> instructor by my side, they won't insure me. Period. So, she asked
> them at what hours would they insure me - here's what they gave her
> (in the most vague of terms) -
>
>

Just a thought, but can you get your ME rating in the type of plane you are
interested in? I have a Cessna 340 and got my ME rating in a Cessna 310.
The insurnace company counted that time as "in type." Between the initial
ME rating, ME Commercial, and some pleasure flying in rentals I had about 75
ME with 35 in the 310 and 10 in the 340. That, and Flight Safety, were
enough to get me coverage in a cabin class twin. I could have easily gotten
insurance in a 310 without the Flight Safety training.

Jerry

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Dave > wrote:
>I'd love to know the companies that are insuring twins to owners with
>0 time, provisioning that they fly with an instructor for X hours.

Have you tried Avemco? They deal direct, not through brokers. The
disadvantage is that their prices are on the high side, but they seem
to be willing to write most risk. They have a long list of items
that will get you discounts, most (all?) of which can be pro-rated mid-
year. So if you plan to make a big jump in "insurability" (anything
from getting a hangar to completing a phase of Wings, getting your
IR or crossing a time in type mark) take a look at whether you'd be
better off going with Avemco and getting those discounts in 3-6 months
rather than waiting until renewal.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Howard]

"Michael" > wrote in message >
> For example, I bet if you call Travers, you will get coverage in a
> Twin Comanche. No clue who to call on C-310 coverage, but if you join
> the owner's group, they will know.
>
> Michael

I'll get against that. The company that used to insure most of the Twin
Comanches for Travers is now no longer writing them. Most of them are
finding homes with new carriers, but some less-experienced pilots will find
it harder to get insurance on Twin Comanches than they used to.

Howard

[Mark Manes]

I had 1100 TT single engine and Instrument rating and 48 yrs old. I bought
a 310 in Oct 2001 with the intention of getting my ME Commercial rating (had
bypass surgery in Nov 2001) and ended up getting the rating in Sept 2002.
First year with no rating and no ME or Complex time was $6700, 2nd year with
70 hrs and ME Commercial & Instrument rating was $6500,3rd year with 200
hrs $3700 and this year with 400 hrs $3200. Starting out was limited to an
instructor with 25 hrs time in type (and a bunch of ME/complex time-750 hrs
I think). I had to have 25 hrs dual after getting the rating and a yearly
IPC. No required recurrent training (yet). I even asked if I would get a
break for recurrent training and they wouldnt say. Underwritten by
Aerospace 1st 2 yrs and now Aviation Markets

Mark Manes
N28409
WC5I


"Dave" > wrote in message
om...
> > Go to someone else. I know people without multi ratings at all are
> > being insured in C-310's. The tipoff is the Seneca vs. C-310
> > comparison - the C-310 is definitely a more demanding airplane.
> >
> > Michael
>
>
>
> I've been with my agent for a while, and she's pretty thorough. I'm
> going to Action Multi Ratings in Groton, CT. Many other pilots I know
> have gone through there. The training is all in a Seneca I for about
> $1500, which includes books, ground school, wet rental, instructor and
> the checkride. That's a good deal, in my opinion, especially because
> there are at least 5 other pilots I know that did it and raved about
> the program there.
>
> I'd love to know the companies that are insuring twins to owners with
> 0 time, provisioning that they fly with an instructor for X hours.
> They may have existed in the past, but I have a feeling they're far
> and few between now, and probably have some pretty crappy premiums.

[Dave]

Aaron Coolidge > wrote in message >...

> Avemco will probably insure a person in this circumstance. A couple years
> ago when I looked at Senecas, 310's and Twin Comanches I was quoted
> insurance on all three types by Avemco. I had 300 TT, no complex or multi.


Got an Avemco quote after reading this. $8000 with 10 hours multi.
Requires 10 hours in type with instructor and a sign off from that
instructor. $150K hull.

I'm going to call and ask how that will decrease with more multi time.

That also doesn't factor in their King Schools safety program that
gives up to 10%.