Update on Denver plane crash...

Great point. Midway airport used to be one of these. Forced my
father-in-law from his tie-down because they wanted him to sign a $1M
policy.


On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:04:48 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
wrote:


"Nathan Young" wrote in message
.. .
In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
insurance for private pilots.


There are airports that "require" $1MM liability insurance, although I have
no idea how they enforce that (except for those based there).

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:59:12 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.

What makes you think the a/c was insured?



Not 100% sure...which is why I said _evidently_. If he could go out and pop
for a brand new A36 (it had something like 95 hours on it and the report
said something about it being "brand new" (IIRC) I somehow suspect money was
not an factor for him. They guy is, what, 65 years old? And just got his
license? I suspect he's got a lot of money for toys.

Just like some people that are paying $5000 or more for car insurance, I'm
guesstimating that he could afford a steep premium. Someone asked who would
insure him, but I rather suspect that some insurance company, even major
ones, would cover him, but they'd want a lot of green!!

"Judah" wrote in message
...
But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...

The money...or the knowledge/sense?



"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in news:Ql8yc.412$p01.54131
@news.uswest.net:


"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
.. .
I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in
such a plane.


Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
insurance for private pilots.

Lienholders will require insurance, but if the aircraft owner 'owns'
the plane outright, it is her/her decision whether or not to insure
(hull and/or liability).

Having said that, if you can afford a new A36, you can probably afford
the premiums (which I am guessing are over 10k/year.)

Exactly...here's a guy 65 years old, right near or already into retirement.
He buys a (virtually) brand new A36 right after getting his PPL.

My guess is he's LOADED. Whether he had bought insurance or not is still to
be answered, but he most like could afford even two or three times that
much. Hell, theA36 probably ran $500-600K or more.

"Nathan Young" wrote in message
...
Great point. Midway airport used to be one of these. Forced my
father-in-law from his tie-down because they wanted him to sign a $1M
policy.


This guy flew (IIRC) out of Watkins, Colorado...a far cry from Midway.


On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:04:48 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
wrote:


"Nathan Young" wrote in message
.. .
In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
insurance for private pilots.


There are airports that "require" $1MM liability insurance, although I
have
no idea how they enforce that (except for those based there).

"Sam" wrote in message
om...
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...04/detail.html

1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.

2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.

The article says he owned it for 6 months - It is not unreasonable to assume
he had been trained in it and was fairly competent in it. The speculation
about the ink being wet and such is silly. Perhaps you could not handle the
plane, or other fresh pilots when they just come out of a 152 or 172, but it
is not impossible to have a fairly low time pilot be able to fly that plane.
(They handle quite nicely - things just happen quicker...)

If I had the money I would have bought a plane like that instead of a
grumman cheetah for my training. Why not?

In article , Tom Sixkiller wrote:
Yes but there's no legal requirement to be insured.

No...only the cash to pay the premiums.

Or not pay any premiums at all. I know of at least two aircraft that are
flown uninsured, however, this is because they are slow and have very
low hull values so insurance is almost certainly a dead loss for the
owners.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Oh... Didn't realize that. I'm not of the financial disposition to have
ever flown in a Bonanza that wasn't made in years...




"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in news:40C9BB44.17667CD3
@verizon.net:



Judah wrote:

But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...

They haven't made them with throw-over yokes in years.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

"Richard Hertz" wrote in message . net...
"Sam" wrote in message
om...
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...04/detail.html

1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.

2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.

The article says he owned it for 6 months - It is not unreasonable to assume
he had been trained in it and was fairly competent in it. The speculation
about the ink being wet and such is silly. Perhaps you could not handle the
plane, or other fresh pilots when they just come out of a 152 or 172, but it
is not impossible to have a fairly low time pilot be able to fly that plane.
(They handle quite nicely - things just happen quicker...)

If I had the money I would have bought a plane like that instead of a
grumman cheetah for my training. Why not?


Maybe I don't have a good answer for your question. I just recently
started training as a student pilot, so I don't have a lot of
experience. I've been reading about aviation and looking through
these newsgroups (admittedly subjective opinions) for several years,
and the combo of new pilot, complex, high performance plane, and
apparent student training (of his daughter) seems like it would be a
bit much for someone that just started training in January.

Its been said that these types of a/c can easily get ahead of you, but
you always have the option of slowing things down to a manageable
level. So if someone were to train in one of these w/ a good
instructor, perhaps it's not all that bad to start w/ one if you're
careful and understand the risks.

It'll obviously take awhile before all the info is gathered on this
case, and luckily there were a couple of witnesses. But we at least
know the owner (or his daughter) stalled the a/c at low altitude and
crashed. The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
pilot. Stalling any aircraft unintentionally = you are not proficient
in the plane. Allowing a student pilot to have control of the a/c at
low altitudes would say to me the guy is not too keyed in on risk
management either.

"Sam" wrote in message
om...
The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
pilot.


95 hours is plenty to be proficient in an aircraft, just not when they're
your only 95 hours, as your second statement pointed out. For an experienced
pilot, though, 95 hours is plenty (but no level is ever "enough").