Mxsmanic wrote in
:

John Gaquin writes:

Surprisingly, I don't think the record bears that out, or at least
not nearly so much as you might think. As I posted earlier, it is
the decision making that tends to bite people concerning a failure in
a twin. In a single, the biggest, most crucial decision is made
for you as soon as the engine fails.

But with a single, your only option is to find a place to land,
quickly. If you have two engines with one running, you should have an
indefinite period of flight left during which you can look for a more
suitable landing spot (the assumption still being that you will land
ASAP once the engine has failed).


This is not necessarily true. A light twin such as the one I trained in
(piper seneca) at 4000 pounds the absolute ceiling is 20,000 msl. With
one engine out, the absolute ceiling becomes only 6,600. That is on a
standard day. If you understand density altitude then consider
mountainous terrain on a HOT day. I trained in Phoenix and on a hot day
with one engine shut down I would sometimes still be loosing 100 feet
per minuet at 5,000 feet MSL. That put me 3,500 feet above the ground
and still loosing altitude.

Then there's loosing an engine on climb out after takeoff. My charts
say at sea lv on standard day (15C, and 29.92) and max weight, you will
get about 180 FPM climb. At 4000 ft a zero climb rate. If there are
obstacles you may not clear them. This is part of your preflight
planning in a multi-engine airplane.

My instructor always said the working engine only helps you get to the
crash sight. I'm not sure I like that, but it stresses getting the
plane down at the nearest safe place and all the importance of the
decision making that goes along with it.