Losing an engine ...

[chrixxer]

Is almost relaxing, when you have another one turning. Passed my PP-AMEL checkride (in a Duchess) yesterday. Plans TBD, but will definitely be getting the Mooney back in the air. (May keep it, but also take a partnership interest in a 340. Developing... (Eventually want to build a Velocity Twin with diesel engines.))

[Tim Jodice]

  On 5/16/2020 at 5:04 AM, chrixxer said:

Is almost relaxing, when you have another one turning.

Expand  

Owing a Baron for 3 years I would agree with almost relaxing. Like many I wanted to climb the GA ladder and go from a complex single to a twin. After owing one I don't think they are all that they are cracked up to be. 

In my opinion to truly have that engine be an asset not a liability you need to be on your A game. Not that you shouldn't be in a single but if you have an engine failure in a single and you have helmet fire/denial and don't do anything you likely are in control and simply lost altitude. 

In a twin if you have an engine failure and don't do anything for more than 4 seconds you are in approximately a 60 degrees bank and rolling rapidly. That is based on my experience in a Baron. 

When I had the Baron I trained twice a year and every time doing an approach on one engine I was reminded how hard it can be.

That said I miss the aggressive acceleration, about a1500 FPM climb while indicating 130 IAS and 1640 useful load. 

The route I do everyday is socially unacceptable to do in a single. Always over water for about 30 miles, sometimes IFR and sometimes at night.

So why did I go from a twin to a single? History shows pilots screw up alot more than the machine. After experiencing it what it is like to fly head down on one engine in a twin I decided that I have as much faith in one engine as I do in myself doing everything just right in the heat of the moment.

Another references point is insurance. I had the Baron insured for $60K and now have the Mooney insured for $140K. Hull value usually dominates premiums yet the Mooney costs me $400 less a year than the Baron. That was with almost 400 hours in the Baron and 200 in the Mooney. I asked why and she said claims on Barons are on average more expensive than Mooneys. 

At the end of the day it came down to money. In my experience a Baron is not twice as much to operate as a Mooney. Most people look at only hourly costs not trip costs. Based on MHT-ACK day after day a Baron is 45% more to operate. That is all in including engine reserves . For that it could carry another 600 pounds even after factoring in the additional fuel needed.

The trip is so short (120-130 miles) that the difference in trip time averages only 12 minutes or about 20% faster in the Baron. That works out to 350 hours in the Baron is 420 in a J model. 

If I needed the useful load and could not afford a single engine turboprop I would buy a twin again.

 

[carusoam]

Congrats Chrix!

And... great analysis, Tim. Thanks for sharing the details...

Best regards,

-a-

[Jerry 5TJ]

If I ever get a plane with two engines I don’t want a propeller on either one of them. 

[Jerry 5TJ]

Me either.  But a CJ3+ would be fine....

However, I find a SETP is cheaper to run than a Baron.  Ignoring CapEx. 

[chrixxer]

If I own my own twin, it'll be a kit, and it'll be running COTS turbodiesels I can just replace for $5K or so apiece... The Velocity folks are prototyping a Twin with derated (~280 HP / side) automotive diesels; they're also flying one built around DeltaHawk powerplants. At diesel engine fuel consumption rates (two DeltaHawks sip about what a single IO-360-A1A does in a Mooney), the reduced hassles and cost of being able to work on my own airframe, non-certified avionics, and commodity engines, I'm not seeing big downsides to a twin - especially one as relatively docile as the V-Twin. TBD...

[Guest]

Velocity suggest the single at under $300K and the twin at under $600K, assuming that at those prices you still have to build it.  Not exactly budget minded.

Clarence

[jetdriven]

And the fact that there are not really any auto converted diesels flying, not really any diesels of any sort flying. I would love to have a fusion powered Mooney  that burned 1 pound of water per year. But you know of wish was a horse.....

[carusoam]

Standby for the Raptor, the plane, not Alex... currently an Audi, taxiing around with a turbo diesel....

Getting pretty interesting...

Other than a few low powered auto conversions... I am not familiar with any successful high powered auto conversions...

The weight of the engine and trans is a challenge to be strong enough....

The velocity Twin has one nice thing going for it... close mounted center lines.... not spaced way out on the wings...  much better for single engine ops safety...

Pushers and prop health are always a question... lots of stones and sand get kicked into the prop arc.... by the wheels...

PP thoughts only...

Best regards,