"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Aw come on, you missed the most obvious utility twin. The Cri Cri.
:-)) Economical on gas too:-))
Someone mentioned that one, But that is an interesting one! g

I think I remember seeing one with two engines on each pod. So, how many
here have ever flown an aircraft with 4 honkin' engines? g

That would make some sense. Two to maintain flight, and 4 for takeoff and
climb.

I think it would probably need to have tip tanks and wet wings, though!
:-))
--
Jim in NC

I have personally wasted more time with a scratch pad than I really care to
admit--exploring the concept of a multi engine homebuilt. In the end,
except for a few special cases like the Cri-Cri or the Air-Cam, I doubt that
there is enough of a market to develope a kit.

Basically, if you demand the ability to maintain altitude with one engine
inoperative and you eliminate the constant speed props that make multi
engined aircraft competitive; then you make no gain in speed or payload
compared to an equivalent single using a climb prop. You do gain usefull
load, but it goes into added fuel; and you gain gross weight, but it goes
into the additional engine, fuel, and structure.

Alternatively, if you add in the costs and complexity of the parts that
normally make multi engine viable, such as constant speed props; then the
cost and the build time increase dramatically. In the end, a used and type
certified twin makes more sense--unless it simply does not exist for the
proposed mission.

Peter