Are there any 'lessons learned' out of all of this aircraft destruction?
Did any tie down methods seem to work better than others? Did more aircraft
survive in hangars than on the ramp? And ultimately, it might be nice to
know if some insurance companies provided better service than others.

--
Regards,
Mike

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/amountainaero/fspic1.html
"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
.. .

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
...
Well, then talk to roughly 90% of the owners out there and straighten
them
out. I don't own an airplane - yet, but I do know that the vast
majority
of
owners out there only pay for liability insurance and risk the hull
damage
themselves

How do you "know" that? It certainly doesn't match my experience as an
owner, and as someone that knows many other owners. Even when the
airplane
is owned free and clear.

Are you an insurance broker? Underwriter? Have you done a
statistically
significant owner survey? What is the basis for your claim that 90% of
all
owners carry no hull insurance? If so few people are carrying hull
insurance, why is it that the rising hull insurance costs are causing
such
a
huge problem in general aviation?

Pete

I am not an insurance broker, but I do know a lot of pilots/owners. The
90%
is just a guess on my part, but I feel that it is close. The rising hull
insurance costs are precisely the reason that a lot of owners do not have
this insurance. You hit it right on the spot.

Perhaps an underwriter can chime in and throw out some "statistically
correct" figures.

Clyde