Adam,
first of all, if you did not like the way the engine sounded or behaved (fuel press low e.t.c.) why on earth did you take this airplane on a long flight? For me, if the engine of all things is not “feeling” right, particularly combined with a possible indication of trouble, that airplane and me ain’t going anywhere together…
In a plane like that, I’d have my own anxiety attacks. However, in a SEP which is in good condition, where I know the engine and the airplane? I’d have no problem taking it, in fact I do that all the time.
Didn’t that school have a multi for rent? Or someone else around there? Some nice Seneca or the likes? If you are uneasy in a Single, then why do it?
I’ve flown twins (PASE/BE55) in my time and I’ve had my short stint on jets and to go back after all that to a “measly” single takes a bit of an attitude adjustment. It is again the question, do I fly what I can afford or do I windowshop for the rest of my life?
Old question, for my mission, if money did not matter, what would be my choice?
Frankly? I’ve had this window shopping experiences for years and
then my choice of airplane would be a Citation. Either a modified 501 (LR tanks, upgraded avionics) or something like what Jason flies. Or maybe a fully equipped EA500/550.
Why? Simple. Two fans, fly above and through most weather, get there fast, still being able to land at reasonably short airfields and because I love to fly jets.
For obvious reasons, I can’t do that. While prices to buy are not that bad (there was a 501 for sale in flyable condition for less than 200k recently), the cost of flying and upkeep would kill me after the first traffic circuit…
Next choice? Either a SET or a MEP like a nice Seneca or Twin Commanche. Why not? Same reason.
So I am happily flying my SEP. It does get me there, not always but most of the times.
Whereas risk awareness with age is concerned I’d agree, it does increase and some people will indeed stop activities they used to enjoy because of that. It may have to do with the fact that they have seen too many things youngsters tend to overlook, it may be because of a sense of responsibility people did not have when younger and single (family? professional? personal? ) which all can make people feel that their life is now “owned” by something or someone else. Clearly, there is a good reason for this and it is to an extent also reasonable. The question is to which extent.
Would I do extreme sports with a high risk of injury or death today, that i am about to become a father? Not likely. Will I continue to fly? Definitly. But I may be double careful and keep an even better record of my maintenance and engine performance. But I would do the same thing for a twin. Or a jet.
Bad maintenance, careless flying and or being over your financial or intellectual means do kill people. But I’d rather fly a SEP I know well than some “shagged” old twin which I do not. With many of our experience levels at GA, twins are not necessarily the much safer option. OEI flying has to be trained and the training standard maintained, which is also no easy feat.
IMHO, given the limitations we all know SEP flying does have, I would think it is not that much riskier on the total overall. If I look at people like Jack Weigand or Flaemming and Angela Pedersen or other earthrounders in SEP’s, then I think they do demonstrate well that a well kept SEP can do stuff most of us will only ever dream of.
Archie, SET commercial ops in IFR are more widely accepted these days hence Textron’s next ‘King Air’ is a PC12 lookalike.
Here is a good accident review from Canada on whether authorising SET IFR has made sense.
https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp185-3-07-feature-3772.htm
Is a co-pilot not better for risk than an extra engine.
How many accidents was crew related and how many engine related?
There is a reason why commercial air travel for the general public cannot be done IFR single engine…
Except in one or two very controlled circumstances.
The reliability requirements to expose the general public to Single Engine IFR are extremely high.
Whether you want to accept the risk privately… up to the individual. But don’t you need to be a bit adventurous anyway to be a pilot…?
Peter wrote:
You need a bit more than a “twin”. Speak to any King Air or lower-end bizjet pilot and they will tell you that you are not welcome to use the toilet. And if somebody does a Number Two it’s a hugely messy job. A CJ4 pilot friend of mine says the externally serviceable toilet on the CJ4 is great otherwise he has to carry the whole thing out through the cabin, with rubber gloves, etc. Privacy is just a curtain so everybody can hear and smell it. People don’t talk about this aspect much
I’m sure you all have read this before but it’s always an eye-watering read:
Peter wrote:
You should have left it on the N-reg, Timothy
Or never moved it off the G in the first place? 
Yes, the only additional hassle is an annual check ride – which is no bad thing.
You should have left it on the N-reg, Timothy 
Adam,
Peter,
In mine they just have a curtain and a TravelJohn! But, you know what, that’s a lot better than not having a curtain and a TravelJohn :-)
