The reason I fly a twin...

cirrusmx said:
If done correctly they are a non event.
Click to expand...

Name something which is not a non-event of done correctly.

A go around or missed approach is because something wasn't correct. Now you're down there and trying to climb and clean up and such.

A King Air EMS pilot with whom I was acquainted destroyed the aircraft and everyone inside when attempting a OEI missed approach on a non-precision app in fog at a central valley airport. He clipped the roof of a barn and impacted a telephone pole 1/4 nm beyond the MAP.
 
dell30rb said:
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.
Click to expand...

We do.....but whatever your bias is.....IDGAF!!!:dunno:

Have a nice day.
 
stratobee said:
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.
Click to expand...
You didn't answer this, so I'll ask again- how bad us the single engine ceiling in an Aerostar? My NA Baron with just me and 3/4 fuel is around 8500-9000. I would think an Aerostar would easily clear those mountains on one engine.
 
Richard said:
For so lightly loaded that seems awfully low. For curiosity sake, do you carry dead weight in the aft for that loading configuration?
Click to expand...

No, just me (200 Lbs and 600 lbs fuel). I was using a worst case - 25-30C OAT. This time of year it is s bit better.
 
TEFLONSEAN said:
We do.....but whatever your bias is.....IDGAF!!!:dunno:

Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

No bias here.

I remember awhile back Doc Bruce mentioned that the Malibu training featured a dead stick ILS. It was also mentioned earlier in this thread by someone who I believe is a malibu pilot.

I would like to know details on the procedure. Nowhere during my private, instrument or commercial ratings was flying an ILS dead stick covered. I always figured if I had my (only) engine fail in IFR conditions, my best bet is to trim up slow and spiral down over the biggest airport in gliding range. If I could plan and practice flying an ILS with the engine out, that would be swell

Having a great day,
Ren
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
I remember awhile back Doc Bruce mentioned that the Malibu training featured a dead stick ILS. It was also mentioned earlier in this thread by someone who I believe is a malibu pilot.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've read that claim made by the good doctor too especially on the red board. He is wrong. It is not a standard training item. There was a presentation at one of the MMOPA meetings where this was discussed and somehow that got misconstrued by the PA46 haters out there, including the doctor. To me it is a challenging fun test to see how you can do. Try it yourself. I'm sure your plane can glide really well too. Try it out! Maybe someday you will be glad you tried it.

Is that a Global Swift in your avatar? That is one of my favorite planes! I don't understand why we can't just appreciate all flying machines instead of being at each others throats because we have made different choices in what we want to fly. If you want to fly a twin, great go ahead, enjoy. But don't come on here telling us in our single engine aircraft that we are somehow deficient or retarded.
 
sixpacker said:
I don't understand why we can't just appreciate all flying machines instead of being at each others throats because we have made different choices in what we want to fly. If you want to fly a twin, great go ahead, enjoy. But don't come on here telling us in our single engine aircraft that we are somehow deficient or retarded.
Click to expand...

I didn't. I was very clear about saying why I chose to fly a twin. It was about my personal choice in a certain scenario and that was the whole point of the OP. Instead I got the usual guys accusing me of poor decision making, etc, etc.

Look how civilized it is over at Beech Talk where you have to post under your own name. I really think POA should consider it. It's far too much big di*k swinging here and it makes it a less useful forum.
 
Last edited:
sixpacker said:
Is that a Global Swift in your avatar? That is one of my favorite planes! I don't understand why we can't just appreciate all flying machines instead of being at each others throats because we have made different choices in what we want to fly. If you want to fly a twin, great go ahead, enjoy. But don't come on here telling us in our single engine aircraft that we are somehow deficient or retarded.
Click to expand...

Yes it is a swift. Thanks for the clarification on the engine out ILS. If you happen to have a copy of the presentation, I would be interested in seeing it.

The plane does glide pretty well, and there are lots of public airports here in the Southeast to glide to.

Day VFR in a single at any reasonable altitude - if the fan quits you have lots of options. You're likely to be able to make it to a paved airport. Flying when the weather is solid IFR, this gets pretty tough.
 
stratobee said:
I didn't. I was very clear about saying why I chose to fly a twin. It was about my personal choice. Instead I got the usual guys accusing me of poor decision making, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

I don't think it was poor decision making. I understood the point you were making. I think some people were just getting hung up on your choice of words. Not unusual here.
 
stratobee said:
Look how civilized it is over at Beech Talk where you have to post under your own name. I really think POA should consider it. It's far too much big di*k swinging here and it makes it a less useful forum.
Click to expand...

I've seen Beech Talk get a bit rough and snarky at times too.
 
In NexGen PC12, with the Honeywell Apex, you can build your own approach to any runway. In the sim they teach setting up either a 6 or 8 degree glide slope and configuring for landing on intercept and riding it down.
 
stratobee said:
Look how civilized it is over at Beech Talk where you have to post under your own name. I really think POA should consider it. It's far too much big di*k swinging here and it makes it a less useful forum.
Click to expand...

sure thing stratobee :rolleyes2:
 
Dave Theisen said:
In NexGen PC12, with the Honeywell Apex, you can build your own approach to any runway. In the sim they teach setting up either a 6 or 8 degree glide slope and configuring for landing on intercept and riding it down.
Click to expand...

That's great.

I'm convinced I need to come up with something.
 
Dave Theisen said:
In NexGen PC12, with the Honeywell Apex, you can build your own approach to any runway. In the sim they teach setting up either a 6 or 8 degree glide slope and configuring for landing on intercept and riding it down.
Click to expand...

Sounds a little like that Xavion ap. It plots highway in the sky hoops to fly though to any airport you can glide to. It sounds like a cool ap and if I were flying a lot of missions like the OP, I would really consider getting it and paying the annual fees.

http://xavion.com/
 
dell30rb said:
No bias here.

I remember awhile back Doc Bruce mentioned that the Malibu training featured a dead stick ILS. It was also mentioned earlier in this thread by someone who I believe is a malibu pilot.

I would like to know details on the procedure. Nowhere during my private, instrument or commercial ratings was flying an ILS dead stick covered. I always figured if I had my (only) engine fail in IFR conditions, my best bet is to trim up slow and spiral down over the biggest airport in gliding range. If I could plan and practice flying an ILS with the engine out, that would be swell

Having a great day,
Ren
Click to expand...

My Malibu insurance approved training conducted by a prominent Malibu instructor involved no such procedure.
 
Richard said:
Name something which is not a non-event of done correctly.

A go around or missed approach is because something wasn't correct. Now you're down there and trying to climb and clean up and such.

A King Air EMS pilot with whom I was acquainted destroyed the aircraft and everyone inside when attempting a OEI missed approach on a non-precision app in fog at a central valley airport. He clipped the roof of a barn and impacted a telephone pole 1/4 nm beyond the MAP.
Click to expand...


lets say a seneca or a baron with only a pilot, no passengers, zero cargo and half fuel, ie a lightly loaded twin, cold temperatures below standard and at a low altitude field can easily do a single engine go around climbing at 400 fpm or more. if you are loaded at max gross, hot and high then thats a different story.
 
Richard said:
Name something which is not a non-event of done correctly.

A go around or missed approach is because something wasn't correct. Now you're down there and trying to climb and clean up and such.

A King Air EMS pilot with whom I was acquainted destroyed the aircraft and everyone inside when attempting a OEI missed approach on a non-precision app in fog at a central valley airport. He clipped the roof of a barn and impacted a telephone pole 1/4 nm beyond the MAP.
Click to expand...

securing a failed engine in cruise at night and continue to land at a suitable airport instead of dead sticking a single engine airplane into a night off field landing. a correctly executed go around is a non issue.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Of course. Just like both engines, performance is typically better in colder weather than hot.
Click to expand...

Heh, I could have worded it better. I was hung up on what seems an awfully low SE ceiling. It would be even lower at higher temps. :eek:

In that case, large tracts of land in the western states would be drift down territory.
 
cirrusmx said:
securing a failed engine in cruise at night and continue to land at a suitable airport instead of dead sticking a single engine airplane into a night off field landing. a correctly executed go around is a non issue.
Click to expand...

I would argue your point. Securing the engine (properly) is no guarantee other than perhaps prolonging the glide. Not that mine or any other pilot's personal mins should become your own but the OEI is something I have already decided to avoid. I guess that is what I am saying. To be so far into the corner of the box with but a hope to claw out of it if need be.

BTW: In the oral portion I told the examiner I would accept the landing in lieu of a OEI missed. I reckon the type terrain one most often flies over factors heavily in the decision making. If for sake of argument we picked a flat field in flat wide open country at sea level as a datum then I might change my opinion. Unless I'm over the swampy states in ISA I'll stick with my opinion of avoiding the OEI rejected landing.

I hesitated to add the following because I had forgotten the type aircraft. Now I remember it was a C-336. An ATP checkride I rode along as a silent observer. With the front engine secured it was pretty darn sketchy OEI missed approach. Aprt field elevation around 350 msl, a summer night, OAT around 25C with half tanks. What should have been the 'non-event' wasn't. I distinctly remembering after landing the three of us parted with nary a word said. I waited in the truck while the pilot and DE had debriefed. Not a word was said while I drove him back to his home. Shaken and stirred. The ATP candidate was a USAF FE away on leave to finish his ATP. He had complained of a sleep deficit several times prior to the flight.

That kind of stuff has a habit of sticking around.
 
Last edited:
I've done a OEI missed at minimums on an ILS with maybe a 500 ft overcast in a lightly loaded 310 pretty close to sea level. Nothing makes you start calculating climb rate and terrain faster than being in the soup with a poor climb rate.
 
Richard said:
Heh, I could have worded it better. I was hung up on what seems an awfully low SE ceiling. It would be even lower at higher temps. :eek:

In that case, large tracts of land in the western states would be drift down territory.
Click to expand...

Compared to most trainer twins, I'd say it is decent performance for not having turbos.
 
Hank S said:
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?
Click to expand...

Depends on your wife. :wink2:
 
I think your decision making was fine. Sounds like you had some options (especially in your twin) and were keeping tabs on the weather. The mistake I notice many pilots make is departing on a flight in conditions with NO back-up plan, no safe way out and total disregard that anything might fail on them during the flight. The Malibu guy boasting that he would fly a dead stick ILS to mins is extremely far fetched. Twin vs. Single debate..... Would you rather lose an engine at 200ft departing Chicago Midway at night/IFR in a single or a twin?

stratobee said:
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?
Click to expand...
 
hkyplr18 said:
The Malibu guy boasting that he would fly a dead stick ILS to mins is extremely far fetched. Twin vs. Single debate..... Would you rather lose an engine at 200ft departing Chicago Midway at night/IFR in a single or a twin?
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's either internet bravado, or the type of attitude that gets people killed by taking chances based on perceived skills. Dead sticking an ILS to minimums in a real emergency is bull crap IMO.
 
Dav8or said:
Agreed. It's either internet bravado, or the type of attitude that gets people killed by taking chances based on perceived skills. Dead sticking an ILS to minimums in a real emergency is bull crap IMO.
Click to expand...

So what's the alternative? Close your eyes and go to your special internal place? :lol: Pull the chute? I don't have one of those...

I don't know about you but if I have a real emergency I'm going to go out trying and if that means trying to get to the airport even though it is at minimums then I'm going to try to do that.

As for me, and the twin versus single debate I fly as high as I can up to FL250. If my single engine goes out the first thing I'm doing is putting my oxygen mask on, the next thing I'm doing is setting up for a landing at an airport within a 50 mile radius. I always plan my trips with that in mind.

Personally I will scrub a trip before taking off if the destination weather is close to minimums so I wouldn't have even been in this situation in the first place.
 
I agree that giving up at the first sign of engine failure is dumb but in your words you said, "I'd definitely do it in my Malibu with its one and only engine out and I'd survive. I've practiced this". The chance of actually pulling that off even by the best of pilots is pretty slim, but I would try it too in an emergency if that was the only hope.



sixpacker said:
So what's the alternative? Close your eyes and go to your special internal place? :lol: Pull the chute? I don't have one of those...

I don't know about you but if I have a real emergency I'm going to go out trying and if that means trying to get to the airport even though it is at minimums then I'm going to try to do that.

As for me, and the twin versus single debate I fly as high as I can up to FL250. If my single engine goes out the first thing I'm doing is putting my oxygen mask on, the next thing I'm doing is setting up for a landing at an airport within a 50 mile radius. I always plan my trips with that in mind.

Personally I will scrub a trip before taking off if the destination weather is close to minimums so I wouldn't have even been in this situation in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top