shafferpilot
Active Member
twins largely get a bad wrap. They get into trouble because manufacturers convince would be pilots that the plane should fly perfectly fine on one engine... that's simply not the case. However, there are certainly times when some remaining thrust makes the difference between making an airport and landing off-field. The accident rate of twins is slightly higher than that of singles largely because of the temptation to try and fly the pattern back to the pavement when one engine fails on climb-out (a mistake unless you really are a pro). Actually, if single engine pilots really pushed to do the good ol 180 degree turn on engine failure, the accident rates would likely be identical. Luckily, training emphasizes landing off field straight ahead rather than spinning into the ground while trying to turn around... I'd suggest the same concept in your twin, but with one remaining engine, you might be able to make it to an airport out in front of you instead of ending up in a field. Climbing in a twin with one engine out is just about the stupidest thing to even try and do, so in my opinion it's nearly criminal to even publish those numbers. Maintaining altitude and jamming hard on the rudder to keep it straight can work. Keep that speed up, and don't tempt fate.
Ultimately, choosing a twin because of "safety" concerns already shows a lack of realistic judgement. Stick with the relative simplicity of a single and if the engine fails, concentrate on flying the plane and getting on the ground it one piece. However, if a twin is what you want because it fits other needs like range, performance, price, or aesthetics; than that is the way to go. BUT be very critical of any "it's gotta be twice as safe" thoughts. They will get you into trouble.
BTW B-17 pilots, while incredibly brave aviators, recieved so little instruction that the REAL stories of returning with severely damaged aircraft are very few and far between. And even those stories are likely embelished beyound anything based in reality. No offence intended, just a reality check
Ultimately, choosing a twin because of "safety" concerns already shows a lack of realistic judgement. Stick with the relative simplicity of a single and if the engine fails, concentrate on flying the plane and getting on the ground it one piece. However, if a twin is what you want because it fits other needs like range, performance, price, or aesthetics; than that is the way to go. BUT be very critical of any "it's gotta be twice as safe" thoughts. They will get you into trouble.
BTW B-17 pilots, while incredibly brave aviators, recieved so little instruction that the REAL stories of returning with severely damaged aircraft are very few and far between. And even those stories are likely embelished beyound anything based in reality. No offence intended, just a reality check