Drone manufacturers and legislators are constantly working to adapt to each other and to create a framework in which operators can work safely alongside everything else in the air. As part of that, the insurance industry is trying to tackle the new landscape. Should drone insurance be mandatory?
When I first purchased insurance, I was flying purely as a hobbyist. However, when I switched companies, I received an email from my new company telling me that they had seen drone shots in my work and they would not insure me if I didn't add aerial liability to my plan. My agent was helpful, but he made it clear in no uncertain terms that insurance companies are essentially terrified of drones and appear to be overcompensating for their presence. What was even more annoying was that a drone liability policy (with no equipment replancement coverage) that offered a quarter the total liability coverage of my general policy cost nearly as much as my full general liability and full replacement policy. If you ask anyone who knows me, I'm much more likely to trip over a light stand and knock it into someone than I am to crash a drone into a person (which is literally impossible given where I fly). Nonetheless, here I am with a normal insurance policy and an aerial liability policy for a crash that is so exceedingly unlikely to happen that it really makes the amount I pay a ripoff. So, as Billy Kyle asks in this video, should drone insurance be mandatory? I don't think it's a bad idea, but I do think the industry needs to get a better handle on insuring them at a cost commensurate with the actual risk as opposed to the perceived risk. What are your thoughts?