Destruction of GA – huge indemnity insurance
Thread Starter
Destruction of GA – huge indemnity insurance
It appears that airports like Perth and Darwin are now asking for staggering higher cover for indemnity insurance for private aircraft.
In Perth, an aircraft must be insured for $50 million, and at Darwin it is $30 million. As most aircraft have a $20 million indemnity policy, this results in quite substantial extra costs for owners who wish to take their aircraft to these airports.
Does anyone have any information on this?
In Perth, an aircraft must be insured for $50 million, and at Darwin it is $30 million. As most aircraft have a $20 million indemnity policy, this results in quite substantial extra costs for owners who wish to take their aircraft to these airports.
Does anyone have any information on this?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick.
$20 million is normal now for ordinary events. I run a small music festival and even for this we need a $20 million indemnity.
I suspect a rogue aircraft would do a lot more damage than a drunk audience member.
Wunwing
$20 million is normal now for ordinary events. I run a small music festival and even for this we need a $20 million indemnity.
I suspect a rogue aircraft would do a lot more damage than a drunk audience member.
Wunwing
I suggest that the professional indemnity insurance now required of ATOs/Flight Examiners will be the end of industry testing officers.
It will start with regional airports, and only the big schools will be able to maintain the insurance.
It has started already - to get an IPC from our base in Scone we have to go to Inverell, Sydney, Coffs or Port Macquarie to get to the "nearest" qualified ATO.
There's nobody in Tamworth that can do it - BAe/CAE keep to themselves and the CASA FOIs don't do it any more.
CASA won't let me upgrade my rating to do IPCs because despite being a Chief Pilot for most of the last 20 years, assessing and grading and coaching instrument flying for the 40+ pilots that I have employed, I haven't had enough experience teaching Bloggs how to do ADF intercepts.
...minimum 500 hours of IFR instructional experience to qualify to be assessed as a IFR testing officer. Tossers.
It will start with regional airports, and only the big schools will be able to maintain the insurance.
It has started already - to get an IPC from our base in Scone we have to go to Inverell, Sydney, Coffs or Port Macquarie to get to the "nearest" qualified ATO.
There's nobody in Tamworth that can do it - BAe/CAE keep to themselves and the CASA FOIs don't do it any more.
CASA won't let me upgrade my rating to do IPCs because despite being a Chief Pilot for most of the last 20 years, assessing and grading and coaching instrument flying for the 40+ pilots that I have employed, I haven't had enough experience teaching Bloggs how to do ADF intercepts.
...minimum 500 hours of IFR instructional experience to qualify to be assessed as a IFR testing officer. Tossers.
Last edited by Horatio Leafblower; 15th Mar 2018 at 07:25.
I suggest that the professional indemnity insurance now required of ATOs/Flight Examiners will be the end of industry testing officers.
It will start with regional airports, and only the big schools will be able to maintain the insurance.
It has started already - to get an IPC from our base in Scone we have to go to Inverell, Sydney, Coffs or Port Macquarie to get to the "nearest" qualified ATO.
There's nobody in Tamworth that can do it - BAe/CAE keep to themselves and the CASA FOIs don't do it any more.
CASA won't let me upgrade my rating to do IPCs because despite being a Chief Pilot for most of the last 20 years, assessing and grading and coaching instrument flying for the 40+ pilots that I have employed, I haven't had enough experience teaching Bloggs how to do ADF intercepts.
...minimum 500 hours of IFR instructional experience to qualify to be assessed as a IFR testing officer. Tossers.
It will start with regional airports, and only the big schools will be able to maintain the insurance.
It has started already - to get an IPC from our base in Scone we have to go to Inverell, Sydney, Coffs or Port Macquarie to get to the "nearest" qualified ATO.
There's nobody in Tamworth that can do it - BAe/CAE keep to themselves and the CASA FOIs don't do it any more.
CASA won't let me upgrade my rating to do IPCs because despite being a Chief Pilot for most of the last 20 years, assessing and grading and coaching instrument flying for the 40+ pilots that I have employed, I haven't had enough experience teaching Bloggs how to do ADF intercepts.
...minimum 500 hours of IFR instructional experience to qualify to be assessed as a IFR testing officer. Tossers.
https://www.casa.gov.au/file/185216/...token=sE5Tdzec
The lack of assessable Flight Examiners is a real threat to the Australian Aviation industry. Most, if not all, FER holders are associated with a flight training organisation of some sort. This does not meet the intent of ICAO guidelines, it fosters potential conflicts of interest. Examiners are supposed to be independent of training providers and allocated randomly by the CASA flight testing office.
Your experience as chief pilot checking pilots is equal to the experience requirements acceptable as a CAO 82.0 check pilot. If I was you I’d explore the provision in their form under section F as an alternative level of experience.
"I couldn't possibly support that as an equivalent level of safety"
Bring me down from Darwin, HB! You know I love a new adventure...
Seriously, though - in order to do the FE job I carry insurance for PI and non-owned aircraft - costs me north of $20k per year. Although I empathise with the complaints about high test fees, I have to charge a fair penny to try and recoup that each year from flight tests...
The “old guard” clinging to CAAP Admin 1 have a great advantage at the moment, asking it even harder...
Seriously, though - in order to do the FE job I carry insurance for PI and non-owned aircraft - costs me north of $20k per year. Although I empathise with the complaints about high test fees, I have to charge a fair penny to try and recoup that each year from flight tests...
The “old guard” clinging to CAAP Admin 1 have a great advantage at the moment, asking it even harder...
I can't help but ask, why insure? $20K per year would pay off a plane. There is no legal requirement to insure yourself. I choose not too. I hold an independent FE rating.
If you support the insurance industry, there is not much point in complaining.
If you support the insurance industry, there is not much point in complaining.
When was the last time someone sued CASA for an ATO's incompetence? Would this change if there are big fat insurance policies and no government-funded QCs to defend them?
I bet you it would.
I bet you it would.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This whole insurance business is a complete rort. At our airport aircraft owners own their hangars and the airport owns the earth they sit on. The airport forces us to insure our hangars. My aircraft is insured and the airport won't allow us to store fuel in the hangar. I see little risk of my hangar nipping out and attacking a passing aircraft or doing any other damage so why can't I decide whether to insure or not.
The airport itself carries insurance so why the need for every individual hangar to have compulsory insurance? There is nothing like compulsory insurance to make insurance companies rub their hands together and pluck a large number out of the air.
The airport would have 3rd party property and personal damage included in it's insurance and no doubt part of that cost is included in our annual rent for our small piece of land. It should be none of their business whether the hangar owner chooses to insure the building or not.
With car insurance we have a compulsory component and an owners choice component. Why the hell does aviation have to be different?
The airport itself carries insurance so why the need for every individual hangar to have compulsory insurance? There is nothing like compulsory insurance to make insurance companies rub their hands together and pluck a large number out of the air.
The airport would have 3rd party property and personal damage included in it's insurance and no doubt part of that cost is included in our annual rent for our small piece of land. It should be none of their business whether the hangar owner chooses to insure the building or not.
With car insurance we have a compulsory component and an owners choice component. Why the hell does aviation have to be different?
So the roof gets ripped off your hangar that's uninsured and damages an aircraft - who are the insurers of said aircraft going after? I'm sure they'd try it on with the airport insurers if your hangar isn't insured.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the roof gets ripped off your hangar that's uninsured and damages an aircraft - who are the insurers of said aircraft going after? I'm sure they'd try it on with the airport insurers if your hangar isn't insured.
If I fully insured my hangar we have the situation where for the one mishap the aircraft is insured, the airport is insured and the hangar is insured. No wonder insurance companies can afford to live in giant inner city skyscrapers.
So the roof gets ripped off a house that’s outside the aerodrome perimeter fence and lands on an aircraft inside the aerodrome perimeter.
Is there a compulsory $20 or $30 million 3rd party property damage insurance obligation imposed on the owners of the houses?
Is there a compulsory $20 or $30 million 3rd party property damage insurance obligation imposed on the owners of the houses?
The airport itself carries insurance so why the need for every individual hangar to have compulsory insurance?
Is there a compulsory $20 or $30 million 3rd party property damage insurance obligation imposed on the owners of the houses?
RA, why would the airport's third party property insurance cover damage caused by your property? It covers damage by their property to others. Your property, your insurance.
LB, the airport doesn't own the property the house is sitting on so can't impose any conditions. They do own the property your hangar is sitting on so can impose conditions.
I wasn’t aware that the usual house and contents policies of insurance included $20 to $30 million of third party property cover, TIEW. I mustn’t have been reading the policies closely enough.
Le P: I know what airport owners can and can’t do. I was trying to make a different point.
But you highlight the reason for so many of the things that are done to the aviation industry by airport operators and the regulator: They do it simply because they can.
Le P: I know what airport owners can and can’t do. I was trying to make a different point.
But you highlight the reason for so many of the things that are done to the aviation industry by airport operators and the regulator: They do it simply because they can.