[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but you know what they say, "the spare engine will only take you to the scene of an accident."
[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't meant as a bash on you JayB but ... that has got to be one of the most ignorant and moronic mis-truths in the entire aviation world and I really hate that it continues to persist.
The only time a multi-engine aircraft is inherently more "dangerous" than a single engine aircraft is when an engine fails immediately after takeoff – in the gray zone of 50ft AGL to about 500ft AGL) and then it's only such if the pilot isn't prepared or proficient. An engine failure at any other point in the flight is really, almost, a non-event.
What kills people or what "takes them to the scene of the accident first" is a non-proficient pilot. Someone who is proficient at flying twins greatly, greatly reduces the "danger" of a twin.
Answer me this ... what happens in a single when the engine dies? Yup, that's right, You are SOL. Now answer me this one? How many times have you had an engine quit on a single? Not too often. So why, then, does everyone assume that if you slap a second engine on an aircraft it's somehow magically transformed into a POS-timebomb just waiting to ruin your day?
We look for redundancy in every system on an aircraft: dual vac pumps are better than a single pump, dual radios (some of us carry transceviers because we're so paranoid about it), dual alternators, back up gear extension systems yet when we start talking about a second engine all of a sudden it's bad juju.
It just irks me because the people who generally espouse that stupid sayng are single-engine pilots who know very little about multi-engine operations.
Again, this is NOT directed AT you JayB ... just a rant.
[/rant]
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the saying "the spare engine will only take you to the scene of an accident" is merely a play on words describing the days of training in the Seminole's in Flagstaff, AZ during the middle of summer, where the hot and high conditions of temp/density altitude only allowed a negative climb value, zero if you were lucky, following loss of an engine. It's not that any twin is just going to up and explode following losing one engine, it's just that the remaining engine will only take you so far in these conditions.....albeit a little farther than a single-engine plane that's now a glider. I don't think he was knocking the twin planes or the pilot abilities.
[ QUOTE ]
but you know what they say, "the spare engine will only take you to the scene of an accident."
[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't meant as a bash on you JayB but ... that has got to be one of the most ignorant and moronic mis-truths in the entire aviation world and I really hate that it continues to persist.
The only time a multi-engine aircraft is inherently more "dangerous" than a single engine aircraft is when an engine fails immediately after takeoff – in the gray zone of 50ft AGL to about 500ft AGL) and then it's only such if the pilot isn't prepared or proficient. An engine failure at any other point in the flight is really, almost, a non-event.
What kills people or what "takes them to the scene of the accident first" is a non-proficient pilot. Someone who is proficient at flying twins greatly, greatly reduces the "danger" of a twin.
Answer me this ... what happens in a single when the engine dies? Yup, that's right, You are SOL. Now answer me this one? How many times have you had an engine quit on a single? Not too often. So why, then, does everyone assume that if you slap a second engine on an aircraft it's somehow magically transformed into a POS-timebomb just waiting to ruin your day?
We look for redundancy in every system on an aircraft: dual vac pumps are better than a single pump, dual radios (some of us carry transceviers because we're so paranoid about it), dual alternators, back up gear extension systems yet when we start talking about a second engine all of a sudden it's bad juju.
It just irks me because the people who generally espouse that stupid sayng are single-engine pilots who know very little about multi-engine operations.
Again, this is NOT directed AT you JayB ... just a rant.
[/rant]
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the saying "the spare engine will only take you to the scene of an accident" is merely a play on words describing the days of training in the Seminole's in Flagstaff, AZ during the middle of summer, where the hot and high conditions of temp/density altitude only allowed a negative climb value, zero if you were lucky, following loss of an engine. It's not that any twin is just going to up and explode following losing one engine, it's just that the remaining engine will only take you so far in these conditions.....albeit a little farther than a single-engine plane that's now a glider. I don't think he was knocking the twin planes or the pilot abilities.
