Nipper 2 wrote:
At first sight, it seems strange to be using a single-engined machine in a highly risky SAR environment but a quick look at the Eurocopter data sheets seems to suggest that at the kind of altitudes these guys are working at (up to around 12,000 feet) the second engine is not much use - if the lights go out on one, the remaining engine barely has enough grunt to keep you flying.
Some would say that in mountainous terrain the difference between “barely flying” and not (flying) after an engine failure might be rather significant. As the years have gone by, I believe I have learnt to appreciate the difference between:
1-1=0
2-1=1
There may however be some other aspects that could play a role in this:
1) Do the twins have the required AEO performance at that DA?
2) Could it be that a twin is considered too expensive?
3) Tradition/culture?