Author Damian Fowler takes on the private piliot community Thursday in an op-ed published in The New York Times, questioning why fliers of private planes are not currently required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to carry liability insurance. Doing so, he argues, would force private pilots to go through more rigorous training as required by their insurance carriers and could help cut down on small aviation crashes.

"Just type 'private plane crash' or 'helicopter crash' into Google Alerts and the updates come in regularly," Fowler writes. "In January, in Aspen, Colo., a twin-engine private jet crashed and burst into flames, killing one and injuring two. In February, in Nashville, a twin-engine aircraft missed a landing approach and all four people on board died. In March, in Ridgway, Colo., an airplane went into a flat spin, crashed into icy water, and killed five people. Just yesterday, a small plane went down in New Jersey."

The insurance industry could help improve this situation by offering more stringent oversight of general aviation pilots than the FAA currently requires. By bringing insurance statistics into the picture, and by having "a vested interest in the pilot being properly trained and experienced in the aircraft before they take on the risk," the carriers could, Fowler argues, help improve pilot training and safety across the board.

So why isn't this coverage required yet?

Click here to read the full story in The New York Times.

Special Reports /

Private planes and liability insurance: What's the holdup?

Related Stories

Recommended For You