Insurance CFI Requirements

JohnAJohnson

JohnAJohnson

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
1,307
Location
Gulf Shores, AL
Display Name
Display name:
JohnAJohnson
Even when serving, qualified, and insured as PIC, my insurance company requires any CFI giving me dual to either meet Open requirements or be Named and if Named, have at least two hours dual in a 177RG from another CFI.

I can understand this for familiarization training but as long as I'm qualified to be PIC, I can't see where it is necessary for the CFI to know the nuances of the plane if, for example, his job is to teach me how to fly an approach.

I've never heard of this before and am curious if this is standard or common in the industry.
 
it’s not unheard of, but I don’t know how common it is. In my case it was an “odd” airplane, which may be a consideration for the Cardinal as well.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Even when serving, qualified, and insured as PIC, my insurance company requires any CFI giving me dual to either meet Open requirements or be Named and if Named, have at least two hours dual in a 177RG from another CFI.

I can understand this for familiarization training but as long as I'm qualified to be PIC, I can't see where it is necessary for the CFI to know the nuances of the plane if, for example, his job is to teach me how to fly an approach.

I've never heard of this before and am curious if this is standard or common in the industry.
Click to expand...

Because he very well might end up PICing it.

Also his job is also to keep you safe, I would not CFI in a plane I wouldn’t feel comfortable flying across the country solo.
 
Not sure I follow. My wife occasionally travels with me. Should the insurance company require her to get a pilots license and two hours 177RG training, just in case she might end up PICing it?

Also, the CFIs job isn't to keep me safe. I take that responsibility myself, no matter who (if anyone) is in the right seat. His job is to do what I pay him to do, i.e., instruct me in areas I want to be instructed in.

James331 said:
Because he very well might end up PICing it.

Also his job is also to keep you safe, I would not CFI in a plane I wouldn’t feel comfortable flying across the country solo.
Click to expand...
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Not sure I follow. My wife occasionally travels with me. Should the insurance company require her to get a pilots license and two hours 177RG training, just in case she might end up PICing it?

Also, the CFIs job isn't to keep me safe. I take that responsibility myself, no matter who (if anyone) is in the right seat. His job is to do what I pay him to do, i.e., instruct me in areas I want to be instructed in.
Click to expand...

No

Your wife is pax, she is not anymore required for the flight than a duffle bag filled with socks.

The CFI is required for said training, and his responsibilities go beyond “what you pay him to do”.
If you do something stupid and the FAA looks into it, how do you think it’s going to play out if the CPL or ATP CFI says to the ASI, “hey, he was only paying me to show him how to shoot a approach, so that’s not my problem”

That’s likely how you end up getting a ding on your PRIA which could cause major setbacks in ones career.

And the future earnings difference with a tarnished PRIA far exceeds whatever small amount you were paying the CFI.

Thus, no CFI worth his weight, or concerned with his future, will instruct you in a plane they are not comfortable in.

I have a few hours in a 177 enough to make your insurance, that said it was more than a few years ago, so before I offered to get someone their IFR/PPL/CPL in one Id require some airtime to get myself comfortable again.
 
The CFI is NOT required for the flight. Only requirements are my current medical, BFR, Pilot Cert, W&B, POH, Registration, (TOMATOFLAMES) etc. And that's my point. When a CFI takes the job and charges $75/hour, I expect them to have their own list of responsibilities, and it's not my job to provide them with CYA. But it is up to my insurance company, so the point is moot.
 
As far as the INSURANCE is concerned, the CFI is taking on a responsibility in your aircraft and can LOG PIC in their insured aircraft. Their risk, their rules. This doesn't have anything to do with the FAA and frankly I'm fine with that. As a CFI that flies a 177RG on a regular basis and has had a number of newbies in one, I can tell you I'd probably make the same choice as an underwriter.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
The CFI is NOT required for the flight. Only requirements are my current medical, BFR, Pilot Cert, W&B, POH, Registration, (TOMATOFLAMES) etc. And that's my point. When a CFI takes the job and charges $75/hour, I expect them to have their own list of responsibilities, and it's not my job to provide them with CYA. But it is up to my insurance company, so the point is moot.
Click to expand...

Right.

However if you’re paying a CFI (and to some crazy extent even if they are just pax) if you do something stupid it’s their butt with the FAA, and the insurance cos butt with the damages. So requiring 2hrs is more than fair.

Though it might not be your job, it is your problem depending on how many 177 current CFIs are in your area

That said just find a CFI who is current in a 177
 
Has your broker tried to negotiate a more limited provision that allows instruction from a "non-qualified" (in the insurance company's eyes) CFI so long as that CFI never acts as PIC? Also, I'd suggest reading your policy very closely to determine whether you really need approval to receive instruction when you're still qualified and acting as PIC.
 
I've seen this before, so it's not that unusual. From the insurer's underwriting standpoint, a CFI who is giving instruction in an aircraft is expected to meets the insurer's standards for flying the aircraft. To you its just learning how to fly an approach; to your underwriters, it's a CFI giving instruction, period. Someone who, even if not acting as PIC, has legal responsibilities for the safety of flight and may be called upon to take control in the ordinary course of doing his or her job.. If you are also looking to add the CFI to your policy, from the insurer's point of view, they are agreeing to cover the aircraft if you allow the CFI to borrow it for his own purposes.

"But I'm different" is probably true. We all are, but not to the underwriters who are basing requirements on their own take on claims and accident histories.

I saw a couple of responses regarding whether the CF is PIC or not. While not necessarily relevant to the insurance issue, bear in mind that during instrument training, there are times a CFI must act as PIC. The long IFR cross country is one where that's required; any flight on an IFR flight plan (or in IMC) alro requires the CFII to be PIC.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Even when serving, qualified, and insured as PIC, my insurance company requires any CFI giving me dual to either meet Open requirements or be Named and if Named, have at least two hours dual in a 177RG from another CFI.

I can understand this for familiarization training but as long as I'm qualified to be PIC, I can't see where it is necessary for the CFI to know the nuances of the plane if, for example, his job is to teach me how to fly an approach.

I've never heard of this before and am curious if this is standard or common in the industry.
Click to expand...

Requiring a CFI to have 2 hours instruction from another CFI is rather odd.
 
The regional airline pilot CFII who gave me Instrument instruction was required by my insurance company to have 5 hours Mooney time . . . . Even though I had over 300 in type at the time.
 
Clip4 said:
Requiring a CFI to have 2 hours instruction from another CFI is rather odd.
Click to expand...
Not really. The insurance companies are working off of averages and risk assessment. They think it's a bad risk not to based on their data.
 
Clip4 said:
Requiring a CFI to have 2 hours instruction from another CFI is rather odd.
Click to expand...
Why? Whom else should the CFI get instruction from? What makes a CFI unfamiliar with an aircraft any more qualified or less subject to error than a lowly pilot unfamiliar with an aircraft?

I wish I kept it, but I once came across a story about a CFI who was very familiar with a Cutlass (as many are) and started teaching in a Mooney C. Asked by the Tower whether there was a problem because the gear kept going up and down and up and down and up and down, the CFI explained they were pumping the gear for the emergency gear extension.
 
The DPE I work with says he has been seeing a trend of CFI’s taking check rides that have only flow 2 or 3 types of airplanes. Maybe insurance companies are seeing the same thing.

This is especially true of pilots coming from 141 schools. It is very possible to have an instructor flying with you that has never flown anything but a 172 and 172RG or a Warrior and Arrow.

I have seen instructors that are very inflexible in how they fly. If the instructor flying with has only ever flown Pipers they may freak out on a power off, full flap approach with a 172.

I know one that insisted on landing a Challenger light sport with full flaps and then refused to fly it any more because he thought it was dangerous. In researching the model I found that the flaperon lever is used only for trim, so he was essentially was try to land it with full forward trim when he selected full flaps.

Brian
 
brcase said:
I know one [CFI] that insisted on landing a Challenger light sport with full flaps and then refused to fly it any more because he thought it was dangerous. In researching the model I found that the flaperon lever is used only for trim, so he was essentially was try to land it with full forward trim when he selected full flaps.
Click to expand...

midlifeflyer said:
I once came across a story about a CFI who was very familiar with a Cutlass (as many are) and started teaching in a Mooney C. Asked by the Tower whether there was a problem because the gear kept going up and down and up and down and up and down, the CFI explained they were pumping the gear for the emergency gear extension.
Click to expand...

You've got to read the book! Even instructors need to read the book!
 
brcase said:
This is especially true of pilots coming from 141 schools. It is very possible to have an instructor flying with you that has never flown anything but a 172 and 172RG or a Warrior and Arrow.
Click to expand...

Heck, with the recent change to the rules, you can have a CFI who has only ever flown one type of aircraft. A G1000 Cessna 172, for example.
 
Hank S said:
You've got to read the book! Even instructors need to read the book!
Click to expand...
True, but that's exactly the point. CFIs are not immune from making make the same stupid mistakes as any other pilot, so they need (at least) the same level of type-specific experience as any other pilot.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Why? Whom else should the CFI get instruction from? What makes a CFI unfamiliar with an aircraft any more qualified or less subject to error than a lowly pilot unfamiliar with an aircraft?

I wish I kept it, but I once came across a story about a CFI who was very familiar with a Cutlass (as many are) and started teaching in a Mooney C. Asked by the Tower whether there was a problem because the gear kept going up and down and up and down and up and down, the CFI explained they were pumping the gear for the emergency gear extension.
Click to expand...

Because 2 hours dual from another CFI who also has zero time in make and model has very little impact on safety, which was the bare minimum the insurance required.
 
Clip4 said:
Because 2 hours dual from another CFI who also has zero time in make and model has very little impact on safety, which was the bare minimum the insurance required.
Click to expand...
See, there’s where you’re getting confused...insurance companies don’t much care about safety.
 
MauleSkinner said:
See, there’s where you’re getting confused...insurance companies don’t much care about safety.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree, but they are trying being statistical about safety. They know "safe" pilots can make mistakes, but if those "safe" pilots have been required to meet some standard, they can blame the accident (rightly, IMO) on the pilot / operator for not paying enough attention to the manuals, teaching, etc... in this case landing and operating a CFI isn't rocket science and a proficient CFI probably SHOULD be able to figure out how to land and figure out where stuff is in the Cardinal in 2 hours, and since said CFI will be with the owner, there's a good chance of a reasonable outcome if said owner has a heart attack on takeoff, for instance.
 
Clip4 said:
Because 2 hours dual from another CFI who also has zero time in make and model has very little impact on safety, which was the bare minimum the insurance required.
Click to expand...
That's assuming one is silly enough to want to get checked out in an airplane be someon with zero time.
 
midlifeflyer said:
That's assuming one is silly enough to want to get checked out in an airplane be someon with zero time.
Click to expand...

Not as silly as an insurance company requiring a CFI with 300 hours in make and model get a 2 hour checkout by another CFI.
 
Clip4 said:
Not as silly as an insurance company requiring a CFI with 300 hours in make and model get a 2 hour checkout by another CFI.
Click to expand...
Who said the OP was a CFI?
There might be (definitely, actually) issues with the insurance company for the owner giving instruction to someone else in his plane (commercial dual insurance) if that was the case, but if the owner was a CFI, he could do 2 hours with the non-177RG rated pilot and then switch up and get the training required by the other CFI. OTOH, this is a guy with just a PPL apparently getting an instrument rating in the aircraft from another CFI who potentially will be doing hood work with the OP, unusual attitudes, low approaches, etc. and potentially flying in IFR conditions with a student and it would behoove any CFI accepting such a job to be familiar with the aircraft.
I'd also bet good money, that if the OP flew with the CFI 10 hours in the aircraft that the CFI could log as PIC, but not as CFI, that the OP could send an email to his insurance saying I have X instructor who already has 10 hours make and model and the insurance company would accept it without the 2 hours of dual (that's actually shockingly low in some ways IMO).
 
My open pilot clause required 25 hours of retract time. My instructor used to fly U-2's in the Air Force. I asked if the wheels fall off your plane, does that count as retract time.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Who said the OP was a CFI?
There might be (definitely, actually) issues with the insurance company for the owner giving instruction to someone else in his plane (commercial dual insurance) if that was the case, but if the owner was a CFI, he could do 2 hours with the non-177RG rated pilot and then switch up and get the training required by the other CFI. OTOH, this is a guy with just a PPL apparently getting an instrument rating in the aircraft from another CFI who potentially will be doing hood work with the OP, unusual attitudes, low approaches, etc. and potentially flying in IFR conditions with a student and it would behoove any CFI accepting such a job to be familiar with the aircraft.
I'd also bet good money, that if the OP flew with the CFI 10 hours in the aircraft that the CFI could log as PIC, but not as CFI, that the OP could send an email to his insurance saying I have X instructor who already has 10 hours make and model and the insurance company would accept it without the 2 hours of dual (that's actually shockingly low in some ways IMO).
Click to expand...

“Even when serving, qualified, and insured as PIC, my insurance company requires any CFI giving me dual to either meet Open requirements or be Named and if Named, have at least two hours dual in a 177RG from another CFI.”
 
Clip4 said:
“Even when serving, qualified, and insured as PIC, my insurance company requires any CFI giving me dual to either meet Open requirements or be Named and if Named, have at least two hours dual in a 177RG from another CFI.”
Click to expand...
I'd bet good money the open requirements are 10 hours make and model, or something very similar as I said above.
 
He said the main gear retracts on the U-2 in addition to the pogo wheels coming off. He also has more than that much B-52 time. He pointed out his AF assignments kept getting smaller. First B-52's, then the U-2, then a Cessna 182 (he was the CAP liaison officer), and then he had to get out before they gave him a plane he couldn't fit in.
 
Clip4 said:
Not as silly as an insurance company requiring a CFI with 300 hours in make and model get a 2 hour checkout by another CFI.
Click to expand...
When you are an insurance underwriter you can ignore claims histories, pretend having a CFI certificate makes one in some way superior, and make your own rules. I've have been required to have insurance-based checkouts in multiple airplanes in which I had zero hours, including one or two 2-hour checkouts in those which were more high performance. Not a big deal to me, but obviously one to you.
 
midlifeflyer said:
When you are an insurance underwriter you can ignore claims histories, pretend having a CFI certificate makes one in some way superior, and make your own rules. I've have been required to have insurance-based checkouts in multiple airplanes in which I had zero hours, including one or two 2-hour checkouts in those which were more high performance. Not a big deal to me, but obviously one to you.
Click to expand...

Great, get a total green CFI to check you out in a plane he has zero experiance with. It meets that silly requirement.
 
Clip4 said:
Great, get a total green CFI to check you out in a plane he has zero experiance with. It meets that silly requirement.
Click to expand...

Someone has misunderstood somewhere. An insurance company isn't going to let one zero-time-in-type CFI check out another zero-time-in-type CFI. The one giving the check out is going to have to have some make/model time.
 
bradg33 said:
Someone has misunderstood somewhere. An insurance company isn't going to let one zero-time-in-type CFI check out another zero-time-in-type CFI. The one giving the check out is going to have to have some make/model time.
Click to expand...

So CFI A without 2 hours dual that has 100 hours make and model time is precluded, but the CFI B given 2 hours of instruction by CFI A is good to go?

The other issue is CFI A has no connection to the insurance policy or an accident and really has no duty to produce any logbook data to that insurer.
 
Last edited:
bradg33 said:
Someone has misunderstood somewhere. An insurance company isn't going to let one zero-time-in-type CFI check out another zero-time-in-type CFI. The one giving the check out is going to have to have some make/model time.
Click to expand...
Of course not.
 
Clip4 said:
So CFI A without 2 hours dual that has 100 hours make and model time is precluded, but the CFI B given 2 hours of instruction by CFI A is good to go?

The other issue is CFI A has no connection to the insurance policy or an accident and really has no duty to produce any logbook data to that insurer.
Click to expand...

What do you want the insurance company to do, require the pilot to have X hours from a CFI who has X hours from another CFI who has X hours of time in type who got X hours from another CFI all the way back to the Wright Brothers?
 
Clip4 said:
So CFI A without 2 hours dual that has 100 hours make and model time is precluded, but the CFI B given 2 hours of instruction by CFI A is good to go?

The other issue is CFI A has no connection to the insurance policy or an accident and really has no duty to produce any logbook data to that insurer.
Click to expand...
No, CFI A meets the open pilot. If he wants to be NAMED on the policy, the insurance company would more than likely waive the two hour dual requirement unless the owner called up and said something stupid like “I want to name this experienced instructor on my policy...who do you a-holes want him to get his 2-hour checkout from?”

As far as “the other issue”, it will only come up if there’s a claim. The. He DOES have a duty to prove his qualification.
 
MauleSkinner said:
No, CFI A meets the open pilot. If he wants to be NAMED on the policy, the insurance company would more than likely waive the two hour dual requirement unless the owner called up and said something stupid like “I want to name this experienced instructor on my policy...who do you a-holes want him to get his 2-hour checkout from?”

As far as “the other issue”, it will only come up if there’s a claim. The. He DOES have a duty to prove his qualification.
Click to expand...
Only if he cares about his student.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top