I know this....it sure was nice last night when my left vacuum pump ate itself and I was able to safely continue my night IMC flight to my destination.
I also have two vacuum pumps.

I know this....it sure was nice last night when my left vacuum pump ate itself and I was able to safely continue my night IMC flight to my destination.

So excluding those who just got the AMEL and then never use it, for the twin pilots who use it is there any supporting data that shows that they are not practicing engine outs? Sometimes I wonder if this argument (which is used often) is a reaction to twin accidents and trying to rationalize why it happens by saying "oh it's the pilots fault he wasn't proficient enough". "That would never happen to me I practice all the time".
I also have two vacuum pumps.![]()
brian];1680260 said:Question : does the picture change if the mission moves from personal transport to business hauler?
Much of this seems to be moving back to training. Personally, a twin would be out of the question if flying family. (I have to be honest with myself- I won't keep up with the training.)
For business, the picture changes- including the need for a skilled professional pilot and much more...
Another thing I've heard of before which bears repeating is the avoided accident where an engine is caged in flight, and no emergency was declared, or the flight was an emergency flight but came to a successful landing at an airport, thus no statistic was generated. This is an anomaly that is very hard to quantify, but represents some part of the twin-is-safer mantra. Maybe it's balanced out by the riskier flight profile though. Sometimes stats don't account for real life, and empirical evidence must be accommodated.