Why are multiple engines different?

Dale writes:

Perhaps it's because if you screw the pooch on those "few procedures for
the failure of an engine" you will be dead.

But a lot of procedures can result in death if they are improperly
executed. It's not clear to me what the key distinction of multiple
engines might be that would justify a separate certificate.

Some of those procedures are pretty much guaranteed to result in death
for a single-engine plane, so anything one can do with multiple
engines would be an improvement.

The only thing that would keep you from getting your initial certificate
in a multi would be money. (insurance and the nerve of your CFI may
factor into this also)

So someone will do it if you put the money down?

Would learning and getting a license for a multiengine aircraft also
implicitly allow one to fly single-engine aircraft?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The only thing that would keep you from getting your initial certificate
in a multi would be money. (insurance and the nerve of your CFI may
factor into this also)

So someone will do it if you put the money down?

Would learning and getting a license for a multiengine aircraft also
implicitly allow one to fly single-engine aircraft?

I have heard of a few people that took their training in twins and have
never flown a single. They cannot fly a single without the rating.

Greg B wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The only thing that would keep you from getting your initial certificate
in a multi would be money. (insurance and the nerve of your CFI may
factor into this also)
So someone will do it if you put the money down?

Would learning and getting a license for a multiengine aircraft also
implicitly allow one to fly single-engine aircraft?

I have heard of a few people that took their training in twins and have
never flown a single. They cannot fly a single without the rating.


I posted a few weeks back about an ATP friend of mine in that situation.
He trained in the military, only in twins, and does not have a single
engine rating (making him a really bad potential safety pilot!)

They can do the pilot operations and get an endorsement and
solo, just no passengers.
61.31 (3) Have received training required by this part that
is appropriate to the aircraft category, class, and type
rating (if a class or type rating is required) for the
aircraft to be flown, and have received the required
endorsements from an instructor who is authorized to provide
the required endorsements for solo flight in that aircraft.



"Greg B" wrote in message
...
| "Mxsmanic" wrote in message
| ...
| The only thing that would keep you from getting your
initial certificate
| in a multi would be money. (insurance and the nerve of
your CFI may
| factor into this also)
|
| So someone will do it if you put the money down?
|
| Would learning and getting a license for a multiengine
aircraft also
| implicitly allow one to fly single-engine aircraft?
|
| I have heard of a few people that took their training in
twins and have
| never flown a single. They cannot fly a single without the
rating.
|
|

Mxsmanic wrote:
Dale writes:


Perhaps it's because if you screw the pooch on those "few procedures for
the failure of an engine" you will be dead.


But a lot of procedures can result in death if they are improperly
executed. It's not clear to me what the key distinction of multiple
engines might be that would justify a separate certificate.

That distinction has been written in blood over the decades, as have
most of the regulations in aviation... they are the result of bad outcomes.