(Robert M. Gary) wrote
I think the insurance co's just figured out the sea claims are more
frequent regardless of the amount of pilot time.

No doubt. The same is true for lots of other kinds of aircraft -
twins and taildraggers immediately come to mind. But they're all
insurable - and so are seaplanes. It just costs more. Two otherwise
identical airplanes - the Pacer and TriPacer - will have a 50%
difference in the insurance rate even with experienced tailwheel
pilots, and with a low time pilot the rate is more than double on the
taildragger. Up North, where seaplanes are actually used routinely,
rentals are available - they're just too far for me. There are also
lots of places that will get you a tailwheel endorsement or a multi
rating - but won't rent you the plane solo. Their reason is always
insurance, and it really is the truth - solo insurance would increase
the cost.

The operations that will rent you the plane after getting the
endorsement/rating are invariably more expensive per hour - even with
the best of instruction, the loss rate for low time pilots is going to
be high on a Baron or a Cub (be it on floats or wheels) and the
insurance reflects this. I've also noticed that more hours are
generally required - you may be able to squeak someone through a multi
ride in 4-7 hours, but you're not going to train the vast majority of
pilots to proficiency in that amount of time. The reality is that it
takes 15-25 hours, depending on prior experience and aptitude, to
become proficient in a twin.

I'm not a seaplane pilot, so it's impossible for me to asess the
skills of seaplane pilots. However, I am a reasonably experienced
multiengine pilot and I can pretty readily asess the skills of
multiengine pilots. In my experience there is a HUGE difference
between those who JUST got the rating at a place that won't rent you
the plane (ATP immediately comes to mind) and those who JUST got the
rating at a place that will. I also see the same trend in tailwheel
proficiency. Sure, if you get enough experience, in the end it won't
matter much - but unless you buy your own plane and operate it
uninsured, that won't be happening. In order to become insurable -
meaning adequately proficient in the eyes of people who somewhat know
what they are doing, not the FAA - more training will be required.

The reality is that the operator who is going to rent you the plane
solo is going to train you to proficiency - he doesn't want you to
have an accident when you go off on your own. Thus he is going to
maintain a higher quality of instruction and higher standards. The
operator who is offering a rating, especially one with a guaranteed
price, has already decided not to carry solo insurance to cut the
cost. You better believe he will further cut the costs by doing only
the minimum necessary to get you through the checkride. Unless you
need it for professional reasons, I just can't see the point of
getting a rating like that.

Michael