The reason I fly a twin...

[stratobee]

Two days ago I flew my GF up to a conference in San Francisco. Perfect example of when a twin is the only choice for piece of mind for me.

Late start. Night flight. Clear skies. Climb up to 12000ft and clear the mountains around LA on my way north. After the mountains: the whole Central Valley all the way up to SF are covered in low convection fog. It's a beautiful sight with the cities we pass glowing like soft halos under this giant white duvet of fog. It goes on for as far as one can see. I tune in some of the ATIS's on the way: visibility 0,5miles. ceilings at 100-200ft, mist etc. In fact, I get nervous about our destination airport and have the controller check for me - so far so good. I land uneventfully after 1hr 45 min, drop her off and then head back in the pitch black night.

On the way back I play the game - what would I do if one quit in the twin? Well, my single engine ceiling would not clear the mountains to get back into LA where the WX is clear, so that option was out. The other option was to go back to SF where the WX was clear still, although worsening by the second. The third option would be to try a landing at any of the airports below me with 100-200ft ceiling and mist. Would you want to do an ILS into 100-200ft ceilings with one engine out? The answer is obviously no.

But an even more unfathomable faith would be to try to do it in a single with an engine out. The mere thought of it gives me the shivers. That extra money I pay for the second engine is worth every penny as peace of mind in my book.

 

[WingNut42]

It's all about figuring out the mission we choose to fly and balancing the costs with the risks. In your scenario the twin does seem to offer an additional measure of comfort.

 

[RotorAndWing]

 

[OkieAviator]

Seems like that makes sense.

 

[sixpacker]

The third option would be to try a landing at any of the airports below me with 100-200ft ceiling and mist. Would you want to do an ILS into 100-200ft ceilings with one engine out? The answer is obviously no.

Why not? I'd definitely do it in my Malibu with its one and only engine out and I'd survive. I've practiced this. Makes one think doesn't it?

But an even more unfathomable faith would be to try to do it in a single with an engine out. The mere thought of it gives me the shivers. That extra money I pay for the second engine is worth every penny as peace of mind in my book.

Some would say it needs unfathomable faith to do this death defying trip you described in a clapped out piston twin instead of a twin turboprop. Especially if you can't do the ILS on one engine.

 

[CharlieTango]

When the central valley has fog look to the east or west for fields above.

From 12,000' you wold have options, or cruise higher on a bad day/night.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Run it out of fuel, the way most pilots crash, and your options are worse. But yeah fly whatever makes you happy(or you can afford.) Your mind will justify the details within milliseconds after the airplane choice decision is made.

 

[dell30rb]

Why not? I'd definitely do it in my Malibu with its one and only engine out and I'd survive. I've practiced this. Makes one think doesn't it?

It is slightly disturbing the Malibu crowd practices a dead stick ILS on a regular basis. I don't think the pilatus or TBM folks do.


Not saying it is a bad idea. I flew over a large area of widespread low IMC last week. I was cruising smoothly on top at 180kts groundspeed and looking at foreflight showing a bunch of pink icons at all of the airports around me. Cirrus has a parachute, twins have another engine...

My best bet is to trim up slow and spiral down right over the biggest airport I can find. In LIFR that would be pretty dodgy, but give me 800ft ceilings or better and I could likely make that 100% of the time.

 

[txflyer]

Wholly depends on the mission.

In this case, I would not go ... not in my single.

I don't care how good looking she is ...

 

[rbridges]

It's a beautiful sight with the cities we pass glowing like soft halos under this giant white duvet of fog.

are men allowed to use the word "duvet" in a sentence?

 

[Banjo33]

Wholly depends on the mission.

In this case, I would not go ... not in my single.

I don't care how good looking she is ...

If she were good looking enough, I'd do it in a glider...

 

[Hank S]

Sounds like a good option was to stay the night in SF, and head back to LA in the morning when the coastal fog is clearing up. Besides, a night with the GF away from home is better than a night alone with the GF away, right?

 

[txflyer]

If she were good looking enough, I'd do it in a glider...

Men have been dying for eon's over a piece of squatch, so I'm not surprised ...

 

[kgruber]

are men allowed to use the word "duvet" in a sentence?

If they ate "kishe" for breakfast!

 

[stratobee]

Sounds like a good option was to stay the night in SF, and head back to LA in the morning when the coastal fog is clearing up. Besides, a night with the GF away from home is better than a night alone with the GF away, right?

No choice, I'm afraid. Had to be on a job at 6AM the morning after. Good thing I did find out that my new AV100's synced nicely to the phone: The Cure helped me stay awake as I tapped on the yoke all the way back.

 

[frfly172]

I flew a twin,then the mission changed,now I'm very happy in my two seat single. Being retired I can afford the single without a problem.

 

[James331]

No choice, I'm afraid. Had to be on a job at 6AM the morning after. Good thing I did find out that my new AV100's synced nicely to the phone: The Cure helped me stay awake as I tapped on the yoke all the way back.

With that thought process you could have a 4 engine jet and you'll still end up killing yourself.

At least you are calm under your delusion that having another engine makes you that much safer, sounds like your linch pin shall be yourself.

The "no choice" line.... I'm a EMS pilot and I don't even think like that, also being that scared to fly a single engine ILS.... No bueno

are men allowed to use the word "duvet" in a sentence?

The OP was going to San Fran, OP could be a woman with her GF?

Run it out of fuel, the way most pilots crash, and your options are worse. But yeah fly whatever makes you happy(or you can afford.) Your mind will justify the details within milliseconds after the airplane choice decision is made.

Bingo

It is slightly disturbing the Malibu crowd practices a dead stick ILS on a regular basis. I don't think the pilatus or TBM folks do.

Engine failures are part of our 6mo check rides, also the PC12 will do over 2nm per 1k.

 

[dell30rb]

Engine failures are part of our 6mo check rides, also the PC12 will do over 2nm per 1k.

I have no doubt that an engine failure is part of your check ride. Engine failures are part of anyone's check ride.

Do you have a procedure for a dead stick ILS? If so, how does that work out. I can think of ways it might be done, but curious how they are teaching it.

The mooneys have about the same glide ratio.. 2nm per 1k feet

 

[Alexb2000]

So which is the worst of two evils:

Flying in conditions where a mechanical failure could end badly. Night, over low IMC, over hostile terrain, etc.?

Or

Not flying any trip with any suspect conditions and thus losing proficiency when you do fly?

I choose the former, because I believe no matter how carefully you plan you will still end up flying in less than perfect conditions, so you might as well be proficient. For me it's that or just give up the game, which is where a lot of guys end up.

 

[stratobee]

James.

'No choice, I'm afraid' was a response to "Why didn't you stay the night?", hence the quote before that. Because I had prior arrangements I needed to meet. There is no other interpretation.

 

[James331]

James.

'No choice, I'm afraid' was a response to "Why didn't you stay the night?", hence the quote before that. Because I had prior arrangements I needed to meet. There is no other interpretation.

The interpretation is simply you demonstrated poor PDM.

Problem is you DID have a choice to stay the night and cancel, rent a car, etc.

When you think that you had no choice but to launch, that thinking WILL get you killed given enough flight hours, regardless of how many engines you have.

 

[dBrad]

Ouch, it's getting rough in here. I'll just chime in to say that the reasons I'm in the process of purchasing a twin are very similar. It's not that I don't trust singles anymore, but the game has changed for me. I now have a family and keeping them safe when they are onboard is more important than it used to be when it was just me. I chose to go on some dodgy missions by myself in years past, but I don't have that luxury(?) anymore. If we end moving back to a single someday I would seriously consider a chute.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Well, my single engine ceiling would not clear the mountains to get back into LA where the WX is clear, so that option was out.

What is your SE ceiling in the Aerostar with just you onboard?

 

[sixpacker]

It is slightly disturbing the Malibu crowd practices a dead stick ILS on a regular basis. I don't think the pilatus or TBM folks do.

Actually we don't. It wasn't part of my initial training or in recurrent. We just do the usual engine out and spiral to a field and land.

Thinking about what I'd do in IMC with an engine out is a personal thing for me. The fact is flying with a single engine over areas with low ceilings, mountains, water, etc you really do need to think and practice how you would deal with issues. With a single engine your primary defense is altitude. It gives you more options. That doesn't work over large bodies of water of course there you need another plan in case things go wrong (raft?), or get a twin.

 

[dans2992]

I'd happily fly the OP's flight in my single. Considering the odds of a failure, and the cost/benefit of flying a twin, it's a risk I simply choose to take.

 

[James331]

Same here, that second engine is more the illusion of saftey for hobby pilots, especially ones with poor decision making abilities.

I've flown IMC with lowish cielings in my single, I do apply some 135 rules onto my own IFR flying though, add to that the ability to land on water and I'm not super concerned.

Figure if all else fails I could line up with a good sized lake (quite a few around here) and set up for a glassy water landing. I've played with glassy water IMC 00 landings with foggles and a friend, it works but eats up alot of water.

 

[Dav8or]

I live in one of those glowing towns in the valley under the duvet. In my little burg the ceiling has been zero and visibility about 100-500 ft for most of the week. We have had a few periods during the afternoon when the visibility got up to maybe a mile.

Single or twin, an ILS approach would likely end badly here. I recommend not flying above the tule fog in any single. I would do the twin, but only if there were clear skies, or high ceilings I could reach outside the valley. I think counting on your ILS skills when it's clouds on the ground is pretty optimistic and could lead to you "dying while doing what you love".

 

[stratobee]

The interpretation is simply you demonstrated poor PDM.

Problem is you DID have a choice to stay the night and cancel, rent a car, etc.

When you think that you had no choice but to launch, that thinking WILL get you killed given enough flight hours, regardless of how many engines you have.

Wait, wait, let me get this straight. So I should have stayed the night and left in the morning when I really would be out of any options should I get a technical malfunction or the wx deteriorate? By giving myself extra time I was somehow showing example of bad decision making skills?

Or wait, should I not have done the trip at all because I flew above a fog layer with marginal approach weather beneath? Would that have been greater decision making?

 

[James331]

Wait, wait, let me get this straight. So I should have stayed the night and left in the morning when I really would be out of any options should I get a technical malfunction or the wx deteriorate? By giving myself extra time I was somehow showing example of bad decision making skills?

Or wait, should I not have done the trip at all because I flew above a fog layer with marginal approach weather beneath? Would that have been greater decision making?

By stating you had to go, you were showing poor decision making skills.

Unless you mis-wrote that statement, I really don't see how this is so confusing to you.

 

[sarangan]

Having flown at night over mountains in a single-engine, and even over water, I have to ask, how many SE accidents have resulted in fatality due to mechanical failure of the engine (other than pilot error)? Of that, how many could have had a better outcome if the route had been planned differently? I am not saying I know the answer, just asking the question.

 

[stratobee]

By stating you had to go, you were showing poor decision making skills.

Welcome to aviation - it's the whole point of it. There would be no aviation without having to be somewhere at sometime.

 

[James331]

Welcome to aviation - it's the whole point of it. There would be no aviation without having to be somewhere at sometime.

Sure, it's all about travel.

Saying you NEED to fly is still foolish, I make my living flying aircraft and our company will come down FAR harder on a pilot for taking a flight when he shouldn't have, vs a pilot who turned down a flight for whatever reason.... And the company only makes money when the plane is flying.

Your mindset will kill you and your passengers given enough hours, many aviators with far more hours, far higher licenses and far more capable aircraft have met their maker pushing to make a flight because of "having to be somewhere" rather be late than dead.

 

[DavidWhite]

Sure, it's all about travel.

Saying you NEED to fly is still foolish, I make my living flying aircraft and our company will come down FAR harder on a pilot for taking a flight when he shouldn't have, vs a pilot who turned down a flight for whatever reason.... And the company only makes money when the plane is flying.

Your mindset will kill you and your passengers given enough hours, many aviators with far more hours, far higher licenses and far more capable aircraft have met their maker pushing to make a flight because of "having to be somewhere" rather be late than dead.

Yup, you can always go tomorrow.

 

[cirrusmx]

why is a single engine ils a no no? If done correctly they are a non event. just be careful with the go around in case of the missed, but then again with an engine running you habe the option to go to the best suitable airport. I would definitely would have made that flight.

 

[DavidWhite]

why is a single engine ils a no no? If done correctly they are a non event. just be careful with the go around in case of the missed, but then again with an engine running you habe the option to go to the best suitable airport. I would definitely would have made that flight.

There's a runway at the bottom of every glideslope. Single-engine I would never attempt a go around, you'll find the runway eventually. Even 100' OVC 1/8mi you'll find the runway.

 

[Hawker800]

Most twins have two engines because they can't fly on one.

 

[cirrusmx]

There's a runway at the bottom of every glideslope. Single-engine I would never attempt a go around, you'll find the runway eventually. Even 100' OVC 1/8mi you'll find the runway.

a succesful single engine go around depends on several factors such as type of plane, hp, weight, altitude, temperature, etc. given decent and appropiate conditions a sse missed can be done safely. i would not discard a go around if needed or if the runway environment is not in sight. but then again on ils runways you can pretty much spot them almost all the time.

 

[James331]

a succesful single engine go around depends on several factors such as type of plane, hp, weight, altitude, temperature, etc. given decent and appropiate conditions a sse missed can be done safely. i would not discard a go around if needed or if the runway environment is not in sight. but then again on ils runways you can pretty much spot them almost all the time.

Also runway length.

Shooting a LPV (basically an ILS) to a short runway, a missed might be the best option, shooting it to a 10k runway you could set up for a controlled 150fpm decent once you get 100' or so and wait for it, if needed in an emergency.

 

[Richard]

If they ate "kishe" for breakfast!

'Quiche' is what you are looking for.

The length of my curlies doesn't depend on what others think. To the OP, I would think cross feeding is close to the top of your concerns when OEI. Depending on type aircraft is could be a non starter or a total mind melt at the moment.

As someone here as mentioned, sliding east or west is the viable option when the central valley is blanketed in advection fog (Tule fog).

Numerous airports are available the length and breadth of the valley. To the east there are suitable airports which may be reporting clear and with inst app. To the west there are even more options. The Santa Lucia range is not so high as to prohibit the coast from being among your viable options.

I've played the 'what if' game plenty. Along that same route even. Except for icing or low fuel state I have yet to conjure a scenario where I would not go.

 

[Richard]

why is a single engine ils a no no? If done correctly they are a non event. just be careful with the go around in case of the missed, but then again with an engine running you habe the option to go to the best suitable airport. I would definitely would have made that flight.

For my multi engine add on I was pinked slip because I told the examiner that under no circumstances would I be attempting a single engine go around. My reason was because I didn't think I had the required skill. I thought I was being authoritative and showing command. After some strong words in the Chief CFI's office it was arraigned a flight later that day would complete the check off and it did not include the OEI go around except for leveling off at TPA.