Timeline for What are the pros and cons of single-engine vs. twin-engine?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2018 at 3:46 | comment | added | user959690 | Don’t forget that singles are proven safer. Every study done by the NTSB since the 60’s shows that an engine failure in a twin is more likely to be fatal than in a single. A twin with one engine out is a handful. I have a Mooney and an Aztec. | |
| Sep 15, 2017 at 13:28 | comment | added | elrobis | Terry, that's possible. He was flying in the 70's so I'm not sure how that factors in. Unfortunately it's not a conversation I personally had with him, but something my mom recalled him saying. It's also possible he was referring to an engine-out scenario like you alluded to. | |
| Sep 15, 2017 at 4:33 | comment | added | Terry | @elrobis In my experience multi-engine aircraft as a class are no more difficult to trim in the pitch axis than single engine aircraft as a class as long as both engines of the twin are operating. Of course, if you've lost an engine on a twin, trimming then becomes more of a problem in all three axes. Is it possible your granddad was referring to the need to keep the rpm of the engines in synch? That is difficult to do on older twins that do not have automatic propeller synchronization. | |
| Sep 15, 2017 at 3:37 | comment | added | jamesqf | For a lot of people, the extra cabin space of a twin is not a plus. It's like why I choose to drive a Miata rather than a Suburban. Likewise with speed &c: I can probably operate the low-powered single out of a lot of strips that couldn't handle a high-performance twin. | |
| Apr 26, 2017 at 16:52 | comment | added | mongo | The training element is underplayed here, and is the leading cause of single engine out fatalities in GA twins. | |
| Mar 14, 2017 at 14:28 | comment | added | elrobis | My granddad always said multi-engine aircraft were difficult to trim...that's not mentioned in this answer though. Is his opinion valid or..? | |
| Nov 8, 2014 at 3:34 | comment | added | voretaq7 | @WalrustheCat Continuing from the example in my other comment, if you expand the list of singles to include High-Performance aircraft you can find planes like the SR22 (310HP - 50 shy of the Seminole's combined horsepower) which will leave a Seminole in the dust in terms of both speed and useful load, and do so while burning less fuel. | |
| Nov 8, 2014 at 3:27 | comment | added | voretaq7 | @WalrustheCat There is absolutely a power difference, and usually a speed difference, but it might not be what you expect: the Seminole is a twin with 360HP that cruises at 162kts with a full-fuel payload of 543lbs, the Arrow is a 200HP single and cruises at 137kts with a full-fuel payload of 528lbs, and a Cirrus SR20 (also a 200HP single) will do 155kts with a full-fuel payload of around 550lbs. | |
| Nov 8, 2014 at 0:52 | comment | added | Walrus the Cat | This may sound naive, but is there no power / speed difference? | |
| Nov 8, 2014 at 0:51 | vote | accept | Walrus the Cat | ||
| Nov 7, 2014 at 2:53 | history | answered | voretaq7 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |