single vs twin

[Sageair]

I just posted a reply on the instrument rating that is going to be similiar to this one in so much as an individuals circumstances has as much do do with the sgl vs twin equation as the aircraft itself does. I live at 4,500 msl and often see density altitudes of over 7,000 ft sitting on the runway here(Northern Nevada).Most normally aspirated twins have a single engine ceiling that equates to a hole in the ground around here. I believe that many not all but many pilots do a better job of managing an engine failure when they only have one and then do a good job of getting the aircraft on the ground under control rather than tring to fly away on one engine when its simply above the aircrafts capabilities ,unless one is prepared to pull the good engine back and make an off airport landing . Plus you always have to remember with two engines you just doubled your chance of an engine failure. My two cents worth

[leardvr]

I agree 100% that training is an importent part flying of flying a twin and most people don't do single engine work nearly enough; in fact I've only flown with 1 owner/operator that was willing to do single engine work during BFR's. But I disagree that a single is safer then a twin during in engine failure. Correct me if I'm wrong in a sigle you have one engine and if it quits your ARE landing somewhere. And that somewhere may not be quite that place you want. In a twin you have two (or more) engines, if one quites and you hold Blue line (MAX GROSS of COURSE) then you have SOME control over where your going to land. The truth is that above the air crafts single engine ABSOLUTE alt Blue line is your best single engine rate of decent. As far as pulling the power back on the good engine, why do that? Like I said if you've trained then you should be able to keep the right side up and the good engine will help you get somewhere. You said that you have high DA and they often time exceed the AC single engine SERVICE ceiling (by the way at that alt your still capable of climbing). Could you plase provide me with the NO engine service ceiling of your C-182? Also if you figure out the math you don't double your chance of an engine failure flying a twin. The same way driving a car isn't less safe then an 18 wheeler b/c it has less tires.
If someone can afford to fly a high performance twin engine aircraft then most likly they can't afford to get hurt/die or do it to anyone else. Those people should train and train single engine ops and they don't do it enough. It's the perverbial Dr in a Bonanza. For what ever they don't think they have to.
I agree that High PA flying in the mountains no less is very demanding on airplane and pilot and shouldn't be done with out some mountain flight training.

God Bless and sorry about the soap box.

[This message has been edited by leardvr (edited 01-05-2002).]

[Sageair]

leardvr,first let me say how much I enjoy discussing/debating a subject with someone who is knowledgeable and has some common sense. When I mentioned pulling the power back on the good engine I was referring to the worst case scenario of losing an engine at or very shortly after take-off. In the situation of high density altitude and at or near max gross weight it may simply not be possible to climb away or even maintain altitude. That is what I meant by pulling back the power on the good engine to make an off airport landing at the minimum forward airspeed which will certainly be higher than the mandated 61 knot stall speed of a single engine design. I look forward to your future thoughts.

[Rowan]

First of all I believe that you are the only person who can decide if you are ready for a twin engined aircraft. You are flying a high performance single which is also an extremely competent machine. I myself moved from a Cessna T210 into a Beech Baron 58. I made this move with about 550 hours. There are a few issues that I have learnt through twin ownership. Firstly the aircraft costs a lot more to run then my 210. Fuel is almost double and maintenance is a lot more. The aircraft though is really lovely to fly with a lot of extra power. In order to fly a twin you must have excellent training (usually 10-15 hours) and I believe in taking an instructor up every 6 months. This is not nessecary it is just a comfort zone for me. Twin flying is really a fantastic move up and once you are completely on top of the aircraft you will never look back. I would however avoid turbocharging if I were you as I believe it is a huge extra expense. Motors never reach TBO, and the fact the Baron has naturally aspirated motors was a driving factor in me moving to a twin. I believe if you cruise in the low altitudes 8000-11000 feet a normally aspirated machine will be just right for you. I wish you all the best in your future flying and I hope you become a competent and above all safe Multi-engine pilot