421C down in Washington State

In article . com,
says...


I would think that few insurance companies would insure a pilot in a
421 without an Instrument rating!


I don't pretend to know how the insurance companies see it, but that is a
lot of airplane to manage for a single pilot - IR rated or not. In many
ways, a KingAir would be "easier" to fly in those conditions.

GF

That is amazing that a non-instrument rated pilot could get insurance
in a 421. I wanted to partner with a non-instrument rated pilot in my
Mooney and the broker almost laughed.

-Robert

That is amazing that a non-instrument rated pilot could get insurance
in a 421. I wanted to partner with a non-instrument rated pilot in my
Mooney and the broker almost laughed.

Why?

Mary and I have priced insurance in all sorts of planes. Neither of us are
instrument rated, and insurance costs are only marginally higher.

Now a 421 is whole different kettle of fish -- but a Mooney? 10 hours of
instruction, and we're in.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:57:33 +0100, G Farris wrote:

In article . com,
says...


I would think that few insurance companies would insure a pilot in a
421 without an Instrument rating!


I don't pretend to know how the insurance companies see it, but that is a
lot of airplane to manage for a single pilot - IR rated or not. In many
ways, a KingAir would be "easier" to fly in those conditions.

GF

How is the 421C a lot of airplane for one pilot? I find it quiet easy
for one pilot. With all the switches located on the left side of the
seat, I find it much easier for one pilot to operate than for two. It
is hard for the copilot to activate a lot of stuff like the lights,
deicing/anti icing equipment... you name it. There is not much
accessible for a right seat pilot to reach without interfering with
the left seat pilot.

Scott D.

take out the obvious to email me

I recently talked with an owner of a 421 that had relatively low multi
engine time. He was partnered with another multi pilot. Both are
instrument rated. He told me that the first year's insurance was over
$7000
and that was after a Flight Safety course and 60 hours with high time
421
MEI.

I've read about new Cirrus SR22 owners paying $8000 for their first
year's insurance. That seems incredible to me that a cabin-class
pressurized turbo'd twin like a 421 could cost less to insure than a
fixed-gear single.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I recently talked with an owner of a 421 that had relatively low multi
engine time. He was partnered with another multi pilot. Both are
instrument rated. He told me that the first year's insurance was over
$7000
and that was after a Flight Safety course and 60 hours with high time
421
MEI.

I've read about new Cirrus SR22 owners paying $8000 for their first
year's insurance. That seems incredible to me that a cabin-class
pressurized turbo'd twin like a 421 could cost less to insure than a
fixed-gear single.


Well the Cirrus is on a roll here lately.

-------------------------------------------
DW

Well the Cirrus is on a roll here lately

No doubt. I still think it's a very impressive airplane, especially
after an hour-long CFI demo ride I went on last summer. Twin speed,
fixed gear and just one engine to feed/maintain. Then there's that
panel... Amazing.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I recently talked with an owner of a 421 that had relatively low multi
engine time. He was partnered with another multi pilot. Both are
instrument rated. He told me that the first year's insurance was over
$7000
and that was after a Flight Safety course and 60 hours with high time
421
MEI.

I've read about new Cirrus SR22 owners paying $8000 for their first
year's insurance. That seems incredible to me that a cabin-class
pressurized turbo'd twin like a 421 could cost less to insure than a
fixed-gear single.


Hull value - you can buy a pretty well decked out Cessna 421C for the same
price as a SR22.

Allen

I believe the 421 I refered to had a hull value of around $275,000. Just a
comparison, we insure our Aztec for $90k hull, 1mil/300k/100k liability and
the premium is around $4500. I've also read about the Cirrus insurance
rates being high. I was lead to believe it was because the Cirrus is a
relatively new design and insurance companies are/were nervous about
composite construction. It would be interesting to know the breakdown of
hull/liability premiums on a new Cirrus.
Jim

wrote in message
oups.com...
I recently talked with an owner of a 421 that had relatively low multi
engine time. He was partnered with another multi pilot. Both are
instrument rated. He told me that the first year's insurance was over
$7000
and that was after a Flight Safety course and 60 hours with high time
421
MEI.

I've read about new Cirrus SR22 owners paying $8000 for their first
year's insurance. That seems incredible to me that a cabin-class
pressurized turbo'd twin like a 421 could cost less to insure than a
fixed-gear single.

In article , Unknown says...


How is the 421C a lot of airplane for one pilot? I find it quiet easy
for one pilot. With all the switches located on the left side of the
seat, I find it much easier for one pilot to operate than for two. It
is hard for the copilot to activate a lot of stuff like the lights,
deicing/anti icing equipment... you name it. There is not much
accessible for a right seat pilot to reach without interfering with
the left seat pilot.



Well, you notice I said "manage" - not "fly".
I was referring as much to matters of judgment as anything else, and with
this a second pilot can be of immeasurable help. I agree it's designed for
single-pilot, and it's "easy" to fly - but I happen to believe that this
category of aircraft is a lot easier to fly into a world of trouble than it
is to fly back out of it. This was part of my reference to a turboprop - a
KingAir may require some more serious preparation before getting off the
ground, but with more power and better systems, it will prove more capable
and less effort to manage when you get into the nasties in the teens and
lower flight levels.

The other part of my statement refers to engine management - large piston
engines, particularly when they are turbocharged require careful management
with regard to temperature and altitude, and a second pilot can help with
this too. Compared once again to two turboprops, which just spin effortlessly
in these conditions.

I love these large piston twins - but sometimes I think, besides being too
expensive for many owners to maintain properly, they are just a bit too big
for their own britches. . .

Just my opinion.

G Faris