Why are multiple engines different?

Neil Gould writes:

Perhaps you are confused over the meaning of the word "YOU" in my comment?

Maybe, although my reply would be valid in any case.

Because he is a pilot with a multi-engine rating, and you aren't even a
student pilot. DUH...

He hasn't performed the maneuver in question, therefore he doesn't
know if it can be done or not, irrespective of his rating or status.

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

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

Perhaps you are confused over the meaning of the word "YOU" in my
comment?

Maybe, although my reply would be valid in any case.

In your mind, only.

Because he is a pilot with a multi-engine rating, and you aren't
even a student pilot. DUH...

He hasn't performed the maneuver in question, therefore he doesn't
know if it can be done or not, irrespective of his rating or status.

You are wrong, yet again. Go back and read his comments. Perhaps it's a
reading comprehension problem that you're dealing with?

Neil

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

He hasn't performed the maneuver in question, therefore he doesn't
know if it can be done or not, irrespective of his rating or status.



I tried to lift 400 lbs. and couldn't do it. I can now pretty safely say I
can't lift 500 lbs.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I tried to lift 400 lbs. and couldn't do it. I can now pretty safely say I
can't lift 500 lbs.

If you had been unable to taxi on two engines, it would be reasonable
to assume that you could not taxi on one. But that's not the case
here, and so that analogy (the only one that matches yours) is
irrelevant.

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

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I tried to lift 400 lbs. and couldn't do it. I can now pretty safely
say I can't lift 500 lbs.

If you had been unable to taxi on two engines, it would be reasonable
to assume that you could not taxi on one. But that's not the case
here, and so that analogy (the only one that matches yours) is
irrelevant.

The question was whether one could _take off_ on one engine, something
that MSFS will let you do. Sylvain explained that the Baron couldn't even
be taxied well enough to take off unless you had more space than an
airport that can accommodate B-52s. Since it can't be done within the
space of such large airports (400 lbs.), it's safe to say that it can't be
done from airports avialable to GA pilots (500 lbs.). Gig's analogy is
quite appropriate.

Neil

Neil Gould writes:

The question was whether one could _take off_ on one engine, something
that MSFS will let you do. Sylvain explained that the Baron couldn't even
be taxied well enough to take off unless you had more space than an
airport that can accommodate B-52s.

But Sylvain has apparently not tried to taxi or to take off with one
engine, and apparently neither have you. So it's all just
speculation.

I tried it in the simulator, and it doesn't really work to any
practical extent. I fully expect that the real aircraft would behave
in much the same way.

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

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

The question was whether one could _take off_ on one engine,
something that MSFS will let you do. Sylvain explained that the
Baron couldn't even be taxied well enough to take off unless you had
more space than an airport that can accommodate B-52s.

But Sylvain has apparently not tried to taxi or to take off with one
engine, and apparently neither have you. So it's all just
speculation.

You only think that because you have no experience in real airplanes. I
fully understood Sylvain's explanation, and find it entirely satisfactory:
it can't be done in real life, because the available airports that are
completely inadequate to the task.

The only thing that is speculation is your notion that it can be done, and
there is absolutely no basis for that notion in the real world. BTW - he
*has* taxied the Baron with one engine, and it was the basis of his
opinion. If you read his post, you know that, and if you do know that,
then your above claim is quite curious.

I tried it in the simulator, and it doesn't really work to any
practical extent. I fully expect that the real aircraft would behave
in much the same way.

That you can't do it means nothing at all; you aren't even a student
pilot, so it shouldn't be surprising that you lack piloting skills.
Sylvain can do it, and he also flies Barons, so that says all that is
necessary.

Neil

Neil Gould writes:

You only think that because you have no experience in real airplanes.

No, I think that because it's true, despite any idiosyncrasy of human
psychology that causes people to deny it. Many skills and experiences
are not transferable to highly foreign contexts. Being able to hold a
plane in level flight does not equate to being able to taxi. Being
able to taxi or fly with two engines does not equate to being able to
taxi or fly with one engine failing. Furthermore, even speculating on
the unfamiliar scenario is fraught with risk.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

I tried it in the simulator, and it doesn't really work to any
practical extent.

ok, can you tell me how to make a movie (uploadable to video.google
or other similar places) from MS FS?

--Sylvain

Neil Gould wrote:
there is absolutely no basis for that notion in the real world. BTW - he
*has* taxied the Baron with one engine,

actually it was a Duchess.

--Sylvain