2% of the value of the aircraft to cover the aircraft and third party liability
Our insurance on a Piper Archer II, with four pilots in a group share is around £1800 a year. However this does include discounts on the basis all pilots have more than 350 hours total time, each pilot states they fly about 60 hours a year each, and has IMC rating. How much discount is given to these 3 factors I don't know I am afraid. I assume the latter counts for very little in terms of discounts.
thanks again boys
I pay just under £3k for a TB20, insured for an agreed hull value of £195k, and one named pilot only with 1500hrs with a CPL/IR.
About 10 years ago, same plane, same value, £6.2k for "club use" i.e. any pilot with a PPL and legal to fly the type i.e. just having the conversion training.
£1,600 p/a for a £75k PA32R-301 Saratoga, with 4 pilots (the lowest hours of which are 750hrs) minimum 100hrs on type.
Something to check on your insurance
Just come across this interesting article. local copy
It's worth checking that your combined insurance cover is usable to cover the passenger liability.
It is suggested that one could have a policy which is quite cheap and has the normal €5M-10M or similar 3rd party cover, but the passenger liability is just the legal minimum (c. €100k) which is obviously not likely to be enough. But since passenger claims make up the bulk of GA claims, this is how they can get the premium right down.
I was most shocked to find that our insurance didn't cover any damage we did while making sonic booms. I think insurance would be the least thing I'd worry about if the Auster was making a sonic boom.
My shock turned to abject horror when we discovered they had an exclusion for damage caused to the aircraft by a nuclear attack.
In 2012, my insurance mentioned a max total third party liability of x and a separate limit for pax y, being a lot lower. However, according to my broker, the CSL could be used for pax.
My 2013 policy does not make the distinction between third party and pax liability, just mentions a CSP of x. My broker confirmed that x can be used for any kind of third party liability. I am talking a large German insurer here. Is this maybe the latest trend?
my insurance mentioned a max total third party liability of x and a separate limit for pax y, being a lot lower.
Naughty of them 
However, according to my broker, the CSL could be used for pax.
Not what the policy said, however...
Is this maybe the latest trend?
More likely, IMHO, a widespread realisation that limiting passenger liability to some silly low value is dishonest, especially as most people will never spot it.
Looks like an 'advertorial' to me - trying to drum up business rather than a genuine piece of reporting.
Interesting point though.
