Randy,
I guess we are on the same page then. I agree with you totally - singles aren't as dangerous as many think. However, twins do have a little edge in that one-in-a-million (figurativley) situation. While it's bad for people to forget that there is that advantage with the twins, it's equally bad for people to think that singles are dropping like flies. I apologize if what I said was misinterpreted.
As for that diesel engine, a 212 would indeed be quite overkill. But that's not to say that a 427 or 206LT (if there are any left) couldn't do it and still have that friendly little increase in options if the engine should go south. Say you are floating around about 100m from putting an air conditioner down on a roof when you get an engine chip light - with a twin, you might be able to coast the load down onto the roof in the general vicinity of the insertion point (say right next to the bracket) on 2.5 minute OEI power, rather than either setting the thing down in the mud in the best case or dropping it to it's death in the worst case if you were in a single. Or maybe continuing on the chipping engine while it destroys itself as you gently set the AC down on the roof and prepare to glide down to the parking lot and shut down.
Your comment about the EH's and 4 engined ships brings up a great irony for the pro-twin people. Pro-singles say "a second engine isn't worth the extra money", and I bet pro-twins will say 3 and 4 aren't worth it as well. The chances of an engine failure are out there, but the chances of two or three are down right silly. Plus, loosing 2/3 engines wouldn't be pretty unless you had a HUGE gap between OEI power and MCP AEO power. Going from 1134shp to 1025shp (in the case of my girl) isn't quite as big of a hit as going from 3x to 1x in the case of a double engine failure in a triple. A double failure would put me on the ground ASAP while that EH or 53E might be able to limp along a few miles before it runs out of altitude or 2.5 minute power.
Pilatus PC-12s aren't terribly popular as airliners as far as I know. They are primarily marketed as exec ships, and I don't think they are a smash hit there none the less. The Caravan is a rare specimen that runs along the lines of the Beaver and Otter, but it still has yet to find a place outside of very small scale operations (outside of FEDEX). I doubt the Boeing 787 and 797 will be powered by one mammoth GE90 sibling, nor will the EMB120s and Saabs be replaced by a caravan on steroids. I doubt the MI26's successor will have a single engine either - in the case of that and the airliners, they are too big to be able to auto or glide down into someone's backyard or onto the beach... but that doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer a 427 over 407 just because I can
Mike