THM I was agreeing with the statement that twins are safer. My point is that singles aren't as dangerous as many like to think. How does one explain the many operators out there who run singles, and haven't had engine failures ?? Lucky ?? Maybe, but I bet they have great maintenance programs, and pilots who pay attention to limitations. Without those it doesn't matter how many engines you've got. With the reliability of modern engines is a twin really necessary. As I mentioned, there are ops when it is preferrable to use twins, but not for all ops. Do you need a 212 to lift an 350 kg (770 lbs) diesel engine ?? A 206, 500, AS350 will do just nicely for half the price (give or take). If you want to be ridiculous, one could ask why all helicopters don't have 3 (like the EH-101) or 4 engines. Just in case you know.
Oh BTW not all airliners have twin engines. The Pilatus PC-12, and Cessna Caravan have only one, and they are used quite frequently in remote areas. Airliners also have dual, sometimes triple systems redundancy. Something most helicopters do not have. Does your 212/412 collective have a redundant hydraulic system ?? What if you have a #2 hyd failure, and a bad batch of fuel, so that both engines flame-out ?? (I know it's far fetched) What would happen to your RRPM ??
My thoughts
Cheers