I am not an expert but I do not believe that most of the issues have been designed out. A lot of people have been killed due to the challenging OEI handling, which is a big part of the FAA special training requirement. My view is different; I would rather fly an aircraft that does not require special training and the skills of Chuck Yeager in his prime.
What was in the past is not really relevant, is it?
Not many of the design flaws (or rather peculiarities) of the MU-2 could be fixed by ADs. The real fix was to mandate proper pilot training. But many of the underlying problems remain and will continue to catch pilots.
Like the roll control by spoilers, that makes crosswind landings into short runways rather demanding.
Or the lack of crossfeeding capability of the tiptanks which means that fuel has to be dumped in the event of an engine failure. It’s bad enough to lose an engine, but even worse if you lose your remaning endurance at the same time.
Or the very demanding single engine climbout characteristics: You are not allowed to retract the flaps below a certain speed but may be unable to reach that speed under certain conditions – which is rather multi-engine-piston behavior than one would expect from a METP.
… not to forget the very high wing loading and the resulting unwillingness to fly slow. 11.000 Pounds (long model) and a wing that’s about the size of a C-150 is all you need to know!
