Why are multiple engines different?

cjcampbell writes:

There is a considerable difference between multi-engine and single
engine flying. Engine failure is only the beginning. Fuel systems are
much more complex, as are electrical and other systems. It affects even
the cabin heating system. Even taxiing is significantly different.
Neither is is just a few procedures for the failure of an engine; the
fact is that an engine failure in a twin will have you over on your
back in seconds if you don't watch it. This is especially true in the
Beech 58.

The trouble with flight simulators is that they don't really feel like
airplanes. If you want to simulate an engine failure with your Beech
58, try this: turn the heat in your living room all the way up, but
pack your feet in bags of ice. Take a several cold tablets so that you
are feeling dizzy and disoriented. Have a screaming two-year old
kicking the back of your chair while a couple goons shake your chair
back and forth. Without warning, two more goons will grab your controls
and try as hard as they can to turn them in the direction of the failed
engine, while your own arms and hands are tied to the arms of the
chair. Another goon will bounce your monitor up and down very rapidly
until it breaks, and all the time the stereo will be turned up as loud
as it will go with engine noise and a controller constantly giving you
instructions. All that will not be quite as tough as a real engine
failure, but it is a start.

So I have the same question as Mark: Why do people buy or fly twins
if they are so horrible compared to singles?

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
cjcampbell writes:

There is a considerable difference between multi-engine and single
engine flying. Engine failure is only the beginning. Fuel systems are
much more complex, as are electrical and other systems. It affects even
the cabin heating system. Even taxiing is significantly different.
Neither is is just a few procedures for the failure of an engine; the
fact is that an engine failure in a twin will have you over on your
back in seconds if you don't watch it. This is especially true in the
Beech 58.

The trouble with flight simulators is that they don't really feel like
airplanes. If you want to simulate an engine failure with your Beech
58, try this: turn the heat in your living room all the way up, but
pack your feet in bags of ice. Take a several cold tablets so that you
are feeling dizzy and disoriented. Have a screaming two-year old
kicking the back of your chair while a couple goons shake your chair
back and forth. Without warning, two more goons will grab your controls
and try as hard as they can to turn them in the direction of the failed
engine, while your own arms and hands are tied to the arms of the
chair. Another goon will bounce your monitor up and down very rapidly
until it breaks, and all the time the stereo will be turned up as loud
as it will go with engine noise and a controller constantly giving you
instructions. All that will not be quite as tough as a real engine
failure, but it is a start.

So I have the same question as Mark: Why do people buy or fly twins
if they are so horrible compared to singles?

A lot of the time it just gets down to people having more money than
sense.

cjcampbell wrote:
So I have the same question as Mark: Why do people buy or fly twins
if they are so horrible compared to singles?

A lot of the time it just gets down to people having more money than
sense.

another point is again: insurances. You won't get to fly the
big pretty multi- unless you can show a number of hours in
multi-... so they fill a niche as trainers and time builders.
Besides the fact that it's fun, I mean, all these additional
buttons and levers and dials and things that can go piiiiing...

--Sylvain

Sylvain wrote:
cjcampbell wrote:
So I have the same question as Mark: Why do people buy or fly twins
if they are so horrible compared to singles?
A lot of the time it just gets down to people having more money than
sense.

another point is again: insurances. You won't get to fly the
big pretty multi- unless you can show a number of hours in
multi-... so they fill a niche as trainers and time builders.
Besides the fact that it's fun, I mean, all these additional
buttons and levers and dials and things that can go piiiiing...

That's one reason why I like flying twins. It really impresses the
people who don't know anything about airplanes! Although I've got to
say, the additional buttons and levers and dials and things really
scared the last person I took flying. g

cjcampbell writes:

A lot of the time it just gets down to people having more money than
sense.

There wouldn't be any trace of sour grapes in this, would there?

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
cjcampbell writes:

A lot of the time it just gets down to people having more money than
sense.

There wouldn't be any trace of sour grapes in this, would there?

Not at all. I am a multi-engine instructor.

cjcampbell writes:

Not at all. I am a multi-engine instructor.

But do you own a multi-engine aircraft?

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

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

cjcampbell writes:

Not at all. I am a multi-engine instructor.

But do you own a multi-engine aircraft?

And, the significance of that would be....???

Neil

Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

cjcampbell writes:

Not at all. I am a multi-engine instructor.
But do you own a multi-engine aircraft?

And, the significance of that would be....???

Neil



Obviously those of us who are multi-engine instructors but don't own
twins have never flown a twin because we don't own one. The logic made
perfect sense to me, what's your problem? g

Neil Gould writes:

And, the significance of that would be....???

It has quite a bearing on one's finances.

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