What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-10 $18,000 Insurance Quote

raabs

Well Known Member
My -10 will be flying in approx 6 months so after reading about insurance rates lately, I emailed Gallagher to get an estimate and have some time to prepare/add hours, get some dual etc., in order to minimize cost as much as possible.

Based on 215 hrs low time pilot, HP endorsement, no accidents, $235k ish hull value they replied this morning with a cost of $18,000 w 15 hours dual required. Said more avail options after getting experience in the -10.

I checked 1.5 Year+ ago on one that I was going to buy and it was estimated to be $2500 at the time.

Now... I'll do what it takes for experience and training and adding more time but $18,000 is exorbitant. Exactly how does one get experience in a -10 with $18,000 insurance?

Crazy.
 
Surprised the folks at Gallagher didn't catch on that the supplied quote was wildly outrageous. Yes you will get dinged for low time... But, I'd try to get 10 hours of TT or dual instruction/transition training in an RV10 before going to get quoted (and before yours is completed). I asked Gallagher about 1 year ago what to expect and at the time was told $2k (I'd expect the answer to likely be up to $3k today). However, that was 1000 hrs TT, 10 hrs RV10, IFR, COMM, etc... Hull value was lower, too, in the ballpark of $150k. I'm curious if rates exponentially increase when you start asking for hull over $200k, or does it really matter?
 
Katie sent me the info on the quote so I imagine she knows how outrageous it is - I think she is a lead on Van's-related insurance.

Hull value definitely matters and may need to lower it to get a reasonable rate when ready - but the cost without valuing my labor is over $200k.

Going to restart IFR, building time, and will start looking for a -10 to get training in. I have my builders insurance and non-owners insur through Gallagher. Hope they can find better options, $18,000 isn't an option.
 
Last edited:
A bit more info coming in. Apparently Starr is the only one that would write a higher hull value of $235k with less than 250 hours. Even $185k hull with less than 250 hours is still $14780.00.

If over 250 hours, others will(may, will see when I'm ready) write it at $3000-$4000, range depending on $185k-$235k hull.

Need to start adding some hours!

A data point for lower time pilots working on a -10....
 
This is a personal question so please disregard it if you wish: Are you over age 70? I recently read a note from Gallagher that new applications from individuals over age 70 were getting difficult to quote. The same article mentioned 300 hrs TT as a minimum, for the -10.
Yes, hull value matters. Too low, and the insurance company may ‘total’ a minor accident and re-sell useable parts; too high, the insurance company thinks you may be trying to profit from an accident. BTW, I built my non-deluxe but ifr -10 a decade ago, for a parts cost of around $120K. I am astounded if it is now $200K.
I’d look hard at renting, get your ifr, build up your TT to 300.
Another option, which only you can answer: Are you in a financial position to fly uninsured, either forever, or until you qualify for lower rates?
 
Insurance

I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...
 
Nope not over 70. In 50s all good health.

How many RV-10s are out there as a first-time airplane for a new private pilot?

Just curious. Is that a known number?

Who said anything about first-time airplane?;)

The issue is more an industry issue as plenty of people on here were lower time pilots when they built their -10. Like I mentioned earlier, the 2018 quote was approx $2500.
 
Good points so far. I'm in a place that I expect to have a 'lower-ish' final build cost than what many are reporting as a total finished cost. RV10 is unique as there is a nearly $80-$100k invested value swing from reported 'basic build' to 'luxury build'. I'm interested in the insurance premium swing from $150k, $200k, and $250k (read invested value vs market value). I'd bother Gallagher with the question, but I'm a long ways away from flying.... and the market is always changing.
 
Last edited:
A bit more info coming in. Apparently Starr is the only one that would write a higher hull value of $235k with less than 250 hours. Even $185k hull with less than 250 hours is still $14780.00.

If over 250 hours, others will(may, will see when I'm ready) write it at $3000-$4000, range depending on $185k-$235k hull.

Need to start adding some hours!

A data point for lower time pilots working on a -10....

You can build a lot of time in 6 months. That $18K could buy you an ugly-but-airworthy 150 that you can fly the **** out of and still sell for what you paid. You could spend a little more, do an instrument rating too, and I suspect the time built with the IR would offset a HUGE chunk of that $18K.
 
You can build a lot of time in 6 months. That $18K could buy you an ugly-but-airworthy 150 that you can fly the **** out of and still sell for what you paid. You could spend a little more, do an instrument rating too, and I suspect the time built with the IR would offset a HUGE chunk of that $18K.

Per my earlier post, they are now indicating 250 hrs would bring it down to $3-$4k depending on hull value. I will be flying the **** out of something for 6 mos and finishing the IFR ticket.

This is how crazy the insurance market has gotten with apparently only 4 carriers writing new policies on -10s.
 
I'm planning to self-insure the airframe while I build time, but I'll absolutely have liability throughout. Haven't gotten quotes yet but I figure it will be significantly cheaper.
 
I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...

you may be surprised, i have never gotten a quote for a -10, but I carry liability only on my RV-4 and it is like 250 a year. the fact that I have an atp and 12000 hrs might have a bit to do with that, but I would not expect it make that much difference.

bob burns
RV-4 N82RB
 
I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...

you may be surprised, i have never gotten a quote for a -10, but I carry liability only on my RV-4 and it is like 250 a year. the fact that I have an atp and 12000 hrs might have a bit to do with that, but I would not expect it make that much difference.

bob burns
RV-4 N82RB

Pretty sure he is saying defending a liability lawsuit would be very expensive.

Another option is ground-not-in-motion coverage if you can self-insure the hull but don't want to be without liability
or storm/fire coverage.
 
Last edited:
No accidents, no claims, no violation, no other issues.

BTW, I built my non-deluxe but ifr -10 a decade ago, for a parts cost of around $120K. I am astounded if it is now $200K

A quick addition of items.
QB ~$68k w shipping.
I/O 540 $52k
Prop $9k
Avionics $40-$50k
Aero sport or similar interior w/ OH console $7k+
Paint $20k +/-
That’s $196k-$206k for starters?
Plus tax and a whole lot of misc.

Of course you can do slow build if you have time, learn how to paint exterior, sew interior etc.
 
I hope you can get liability only insurance. I have a friend who tried to do this and was unable to get insurance. This was a couple of years ago when insurance started to rise. He is a very high time pilot who didn’t like the quote he got when he tried to insure his turbine twin. He tried to get ground only, no luck. Next tried liability only, again no luck. He is self insured now. A risk I could never take. Good luck!
 
I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...

I asked my broker about liability only, found it was substantially cheaper. I don’t know if that applies to the RV-10, however, as it has 4 seats which I gather ups the liability exposure quite a bit. My guess is that those two extra seats are playing a substantial role in determining the OP’s premium .

Maybe doing the 10 hours of transition training in an RV-10 now would be cost-effective relative to the insurance premium later. Especially if the OP can build additional TT hours in some other plane and get to the TT minimum.
 
I got insurance for my newly completed RV10 in early October. I had 210 hours total, not instrument rating, and 3 hours PIC in a RV10. $200K hull for $3,800 and no additional RV10 time required. Only one insurance company quoted. Not really the second quote was something like $18K.

For me, and my experience, $3,800 was a bargain. I was high risk and I was shocked that 3 hours waived any additional RV10 time. I did mitigate my personal risk, by getting some additional transition training and my first few flights were only done when the weather was close to perfect.
 
My -10 will be flying in approx 6 months so after reading about insurance rates lately, I emailed Gallagher to get an estimate and have some time to prepare/add hours, get some dual etc., in order to minimize cost as much as possible.

Based on 215 hrs low time pilot, HP endorsement, no accidents, $235k ish hull value they replied this morning with a cost of $18,000 w 15 hours dual required. Said more avail options after getting experience in the -10.

I checked 1.5 Year+ ago on one that I was going to buy and it was estimated to be $2500 at the time.

Now... I'll do what it takes for experience and training and adding more time but $18,000 is exorbitant. Exactly how does one get experience in a -10 with $18,000 insurance?

Crazy.

Something sounds very wrong with your quote. Try BWI. https://bwifly.com/
 
Something sounds very wrong with your quote. Try BWI. https://bwifly.com/

Agree. I reviewed BWI yesterday.

It was Starr that was the only one that would write the $230k hull with the 215 hours and was $18,000. I have my non-owned through them and will be happy when I can end it.

I’ll have to lower hull and increase hours to get to $3-$4k range.
 
I got insurance for my newly completed RV10 in early October. I had 210 hours total, not instrument rating, and 3 hours PIC in a RV10. $200K hull for $3,800 and no additional RV10 time required. Only one insurance company quoted. Not really the second quote was something like $18K.

For me, and my experience, $3,800 was a bargain. I was high risk and I was shocked that 3 hours waived any additional RV10 time. I did mitigate my personal risk, by getting some additional transition training and my first few flights were only done when the weather was close to perfect.

Who was the insurance company?
 
This is slightly, but only slightly, off topic: I see some posts suggesting that they are ‘willing to go without hull coverage, but never without liability’. Then they turn around and get liability coverage for a passenger - where statistically most of the risk lies - limited to $100K, often a smaller amount than the hull value. Does this make sense? The point is, the typical liability coverage is woefully inadequate if a passenger is killed or seriously injured. The vast majority of owners are hoping to not be unlucky, or are hedging their bets by carrying only family members (who gain nothing by suing). Truly adequate liability limits are obscenely expensive, if available at all. The odds are pretty small, but let’s not pretend that even with $1 million ‘smooth’ coverage, we don’t still carry some risk.
 
Data point

Age 64, ASEL, 1200 hrs TT and 1000 in RV-6A. Hull value 160k. Starting this September paying $2600/yr and was required to get 3 hours in a -10 before first flight coverage.
 
Age 64, ASEL, 1200 hrs TT and 1000 in RV-6A. Hull value 160k. Starting this September paying $2600/yr and was required to get 3 hours in a -10 before first flight coverage.

I’m 10 years younger and have 300 more hours, but the quotes I’ve gotten are very close to this.
 
This is slightly, but only slightly, off topic: I see some posts suggesting that they are ‘willing to go without hull coverage, but never without liability’. Then they turn around and get liability coverage for a passenger - where statistically most of the risk lies - limited to $100K, often a smaller amount than the hull value. Does this make sense? The point is, the typical liability coverage is woefully inadequate if a passenger is killed or seriously injured. The vast majority of owners are hoping to not be unlucky, or are hedging their bets by carrying only family members (who gain nothing by suing). Truly adequate liability limits are obscenely expensive, if available at all. The odds are pretty small, but let’s not pretend that even with $1 million ‘smooth’ coverage, we don’t still carry some risk.

Good point. I wonder if it is possible to have passengers sign away their rights to sue or if something that not isn’t really possible. It isn’t like an Experimental plane is going to be used to run an air charter operation.
 
Hmmm

Pretty sure asking a passenger to sign a document stating “if something happens” will eliminate the need for such a document...
 
Good point. I wonder if it is possible to have passengers sign away their rights to sue or if something that not isn’t really possible. It isn’t like an Experimental plane is going to be used to run an air charter operation.

In most states this is difficult, because it isn’t the passenger that’s suing you. He’s dead. It’s his wife, his kid, his parents, etc. And generally speaking, one person has no right to ‘sign away’ someone else’s right to sue. I have seen some attempts to have passengers sign documents, authorizing their estate to pay any judgements against the pilot, making lawsuits by other family members pointless. I have no idea if these work.
 
I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...

I was under the impression that hull coverage was the more expensive part of insuring an EAB. I thought typical liability premiums, without hull coverage was pretty small compared to getting "full" coverage. Am I wrong?

Years ago, I asked about insurance for EAB. At that time the popular consensus seemed to be just liability (no hull coverage), "if you wreck it, you eat it!"
 
Last edited:
In most states this is difficult, because it isn’t the passenger that’s suing you. He’s dead. It’s his wife, his kid, his parents, etc. And generally speaking, one person has no right to ‘sign away’ someone else’s right to sue. I have seen some attempts to have passengers sign documents, authorizing their estate to pay any judgements against the pilot, making lawsuits by other family members pointless. I have no idea if these work.

I wonder how they handle it at a Young Eagles rally? I guess with S***loads of insurance??
 
As for the $100,000 per passenger limit -- sometimes that's all you can get! Most bestest is to get $1M "smooth," which means $1M spread around to passengers as needed, but I'm not sure I've heard of that being offered for years.

The other point is that if you have insurance for $100,000 but get sued for $2M, the insurance company has to defend you -- they can't pay off the $100,000 and tell you the rest is yours. I think.

Another point is that aircraft insurance is grouped by like kinds. If Joe Blow is a reckless RV-10 pilot, as is his buddy in the next hangar, and they both crash, everybody's RV-10 rates will go up. So if you see somebody being a jerk about how they fly, yes, it is your business. Nobody likes to call somebody out, and accountability is not an American virtue, but...

I'm not defending any of this, I'm just stating what I think is correct...
 
Who was the insurance company?

I insured with AIG, the high quote I believe was from Global. Gallagher is my broker. Those 3 RV10 hours probably made a big difference to AIG.

You may want to ask Gallagher to see what insurance would cost with you with 225 hours Total Time and 10 hours in a RV10.
 
I wonder how they handle it at a Young Eagles rally? I guess with S***loads of insurance??

EAA has insurance requirements for participating pilots/aircraft, then has additional insurance to cover anything* above and beyond the owner's insurance limits.

*Yeah, I know. There are probably edge cases that could exceed EAA's insurance, whatever that is.
 
I have had a horror story with Star when it came to a totally legitimate claim. A friend had a professional ferry service move his Super Cub and the highly-rated yet green ferry pilot ground looped the heck out of it at the first fuel stop. The ferry outfit (operated by some lady out of Austin who is a hit on the social media sites) had Star. So Star starts saying the landing gear was old and rusted out. They were betting on the fact that the 1954 dataplate would work in their favor. And not the 19 year old ferry pilot with all the ratings and none of the experience. Unfortunately for Star the airframe was all new Airframes Alaska. The wings were new and the landing gear was a modern state of the art STC'd AOSS gas strut gear. The only 1954 part on the airframe was the dataplate and the rear control stick. The gear failed from a side load and the Star expert team said the photos showed rust in the landing gear tubes. Unfortunate for them also, the photo showed primer, not rust. The NTSB took the gear and fittings to their lab and determined the failure was pure overstress and mechanical and there were no anomalies in the materials or design. Star still says there was a problem with weak landing gear. When the buyer who had never seen the airplane in person pushed the dream team ferry company the owner lady basically said to sue her because she wasn't worth anything anyway. I had first hand knowledge of this aircraft and worked on it extensively. If ferried it across the country. I saw it compete in STOL competitions with the AOSS gear. I saw a photo of the failure and am an aerospace engineer specializing in structures. It was an overstressed gear that failed due to loss of directional control with associated side load. As obvious to me as it was the NTSB. Star is full of ****.
 
I was under the impression that hull coverage was the more expensive part of insuring an EAB. I thought typical liability premiums, without hull coverage was pretty small compared to getting "full" coverage. Am I wrong?

Years ago, I asked about insurance for EAB. At that time the popular consensus seemed to be just liability (no hull coverage), "if you wreck it, you eat it!"

The “liability” I spoke of is the certain lawsuits that would follow an incident. Very few people could self insure against those lawsuits...
 
FWIW, Starr insures my work airplane. This year, they tried to be very aggressive (unfriendly) with the terms of the policy, with about a 30% rate hike. In the end, we worked it out, but it wasn't easy..

I hear that Starr is also cancelling Bonanza policies this year, saying they're getting out of the type, or getting out of the business of insuring older aircraft.

Pretty sure that Starr is in the process of reviewing how they think about the risk vs premium formula.
 
The “liability” I spoke of is the certain lawsuits that would follow an incident. Very few people could self insure against those lawsuits...

Not necessarily. I would be willing to put my house and a few other things in a trust and self insure the plane if it came down to an $18K quote. Chances are, an accident that injures people on the ground, the pilot wont be around to deal with it, and my wife is usually in the plane with me.

Full disclosure, I do have full coverage through Ghallager for the -7, and it is reasonable.
 
The “liability” I spoke of is the certain lawsuits that would follow an incident. Very few people could self insure against those lawsuits...

So, for the little 2 seater, tailwheel, EAB I have now, I've got $100,000 each person, $1,000,000 property and $1,000,000 "each accident".

Are you saying other EAB owners have much more than this?

By they way my premiums for this (no hull coverage) is hundreds, not thousands per year.

------------------

I'd be interested to know about cases where EAB owner/builders (or their estates) have been successfully sued as a result of an accident.
 
Last edited:
So, for the little 2 seater, tailwheel, EAB I have now, I've got $100,000 each person, $1,000,000 property and $1,000,000 "each accident".

Are you saying other EAB owners have much more than this?

.

I carry $1 million combined single limit. But at last renewal (July 2020) Gallagher cautioned me that the company was offering this to renewals only. If I chose to drop to $100K sub-limits, I couldn’t go back up in the future.
 
No accidents, no claims, no violation, no other issues.



A quick addition of items.
QB ~$68k w shipping.
I/O 540 $52k
Prop $9k
Avionics $40-$50k
Aero sport or similar interior w/ OH console $7k+
Paint $20k +/-
That’s $196k-$206k for starters?
Plus tax and a whole lot of misc.

Of course you can do slow build if you have time, learn how to paint exterior, sew interior etc.

Understating the hull value might lower your premiums, but being underinsured has drawbacks. A better way might be to actually lower the value of your plane for your initial insured period.

Have you thought about a phased approach to the final airplane? You could lower the hull value $30-50K by delaying paint and some of the avionics. If you have one or more GTN-equivalents in your panel, you could wire the tray(s) but delay purchasing the box. (I considered doing this in my RV-8 just for the sake of warranty preservation for an IFR navigator that I wouldn't need until I was out of Phase 1.) Once you get your plane flying and get through the first year, you could finish the plane and raise the insured hull value without the steep entry penalty.
 
I don't think there are many people who have the financial ability to fly uninsured...you may be able to cover the aircraft damage/loss but the LIABILITY is where it will be expensive...

The vast majority of claims are for hull damage. Liability claims are quite small in percentage. Therefore, getting liability only coverage is quite inexpensive. I just renewed my 10 and the liability only quote was somewhere around $400 per year.

Financially able or not, it makes no sense not to have liability coverage, given the low cost and high risk. If you own your plane with no loan on it, self-insuring for damage is usually a potentially viable option. If you have a loan on the plane, pretty likely that insurance is required. Also, if the value of the plane is considered part of the families assets that are necessary for retirement or other purposes, then insurance becomes necessary.

Larry
 
Last edited:
I guess

I guess that I am not being clear.

Yes, liability coverage only IS substantially cheaper, I am not disputing that.

The post I replied to said to SELF INSURE, meaning NO insurance, liability or hull.

I made the statement that very few people could afford the liability, as in if someone were to get hurt or killed. The LIABILITY lawsuit would cost more than the vast majority of people to could afford to pay...

Hope that clears it up...
 
Maybe I am just confused so please correct me.

With the 100k$ limit per person even on a 1mil$ insurances liability insurance actually covers less then many hull limits. So if you crash with one passenger your insured liability risk is lower then your hull risk.

So I am confused on how you might think you can afford e.g. loosing the 220k$ RV-10 but you can’t afford the 100k$ the insurance would cover in liability. Seems you can either afford a loss of a couple of hundred k$ in which case you could afford both or you can’t in which case you need both insurances.

Somebody did mention that the liability insurance would defend you if being sued. I am curious if that is actually true. I don’t recall seeing anything in my insurance policy which would prevent the insurance from just writing a 100k$ check to the injured party and walk away leaving me with the remaining litigation cost and risk exposure. So in a sense they would only defend me if they see a good case of wining at a cost lower then 100k$ in litigation cost.

What am I missing?

Oliver
 
RV-10 $18,000 insurance quote

First, with most insurance companies, the $100,000 sub-limit on liability only applies to a passenger. I got a quote recently from Avemco for my Onex, and the $100,000 sub-limit in their policy applied to persons. This is a big difference. A passenger is usually defined as a person in the aircraft. The per person sub-limit applies to any person regardless of where they are, in the airplane, on the ground, etc. So two examples which will clarify this. First, you are sitting on the ground, you go to start the engine, and as you start it a person walks into the prop and is killed. With Avemco, you only have $100,000 of liability coverage. With the other companies, you have 1,000,000 of liability coverage. Or as you are flying, the engine quits and there is no good place to land. You wind up hitting a house and kill 4 people. Again with Avemco, you have $400,000 of liability coverage, $100,000 per person. With other companies, you have $1,000,000 of liability coverage. This post is not meant to say anything negative about Avemco, just to explain the different kinds of sub-limits.

All policies have a defense clause. That is the insurance company has to defend you until the claim is settled, or a judgment is reached and the insurance company has paid its liability limit. So the company cannot just write a check for $100,000 and walk away unless they get a liability release for you.

The reality is that any time a person is killed or seriously injured a liability limit of $100,000 is not enough! Buy the highest liability limit that you can, and try to buy a policy that does not have the sub-limit of $100,000 per passenger. When I bought and insured my RV-12 and my Onex, I was not able to find a company willing to write the liability insurance without the 100,000 sub-limit.
 
The post I replied to said to SELF INSURE, meaning NO insurance, liability or hull.

I made the statement that very few people could afford the liability, as in if someone were to get hurt or killed. The LIABILITY lawsuit would cost more than the vast majority of people to could afford to pay...


In this state, "going bare" isn't an option for an airworthy aircraft. Minnesota requires liability insurance as a condition of registration. Proof of insurance has to be included with each annual registration. Other states are similar in requiring liability insurance, or at least require proof of financial responsibility (usually in the form a surety bond of some kind). Proof of insurance is also required by the airport where I keep my plane as a condition of hangar rental. YMMV.


...
 
Last edited:
Per my earlier post, they are now indicating 250 hrs would bring it down to $3-$4k depending on hull value. I will be flying the **** out of something for 6 mos and finishing the IFR ticket.

This is how crazy the insurance market has gotten with apparently only 4 carriers writing new policies on -10s.


The market has changed significantly over the past year and we are seeing that the pilot requirements for many aircraft have changed as well. Specifically the RV-10, RV-8, and RV-12’s. To get a decent rate on a RV-10 the pilot needs a minimum of 250 total logged hours, and an instrument rating helps as well. When the aircraft is a new build we only have 3-4 carriers that will cover the test phase in full with no restrictions to coverage. Out of these carrier's there are only 1-2 that will quote pilots at 250 total hours, while the other 2 need 300 total or even 500 total logged pilot hours. The advice we can give for anyone building an RV-10 is to work on building up your total hours to at least 250 and work on getting your instrument rating. The rates have increased over last year so even as a higher time pilot you will most likely see an increase at your renewal. As always reach out to your broker with any questions and concerns you may have.
 
The reality is that any time a person is killed or seriously injured a liability limit of $100,000 is not enough! Buy the highest liability limit that you can, and try to buy a policy that does not have the sub-limit of $100,000 per passenger.

I have a $2 million Umbrella liability policy, but aviation accidents are excluded
 
We could not find smooth anywhere

We do carry an umbrella, but we could not find a policy anywhere that did not have an aviation exclusion

We consulted an attorney and were made aware that any negligence on my behalf will not protect our assets held in trust

We carry 200,000 per pax just in case something happens

I have a liability waiver that I have spouses and parents sign.

Other than that...that's the best I can do to enjoy my RV and still share it with other people.
 
liability

For example:
You have $100,000 per person liability.
An injured pax sues you for $1,000,000.
Before trial, the pax offers to settle for $100,000.
The ins company refuses as that is the limit of the policy so they they have nothing to lose by refusing to settle.
The pax wins big at trial and is awarded the $1,000,000.
The ins co. must pay $1,000,000
By refusing to settle, the ins co. has accepted virtually unlimitted liability as they have a fiduciary reponsibility to protect the client and they have breached that responsibility by not settling for $100,000.

This is one big reason why ins companies are so willing to settle out of court.
 
Back
Top