Andi
My efatos in the 42 have all been simulated. Unlike some twins the performance is sufficient to enable the aircraft to climb positively at mtow and perhaps even more importantly the handling is docile. However the point i was making previously is there is only a small surplus of power; over use of the controls and failure to keep the aircraft balanced will erode the surplus that is available and the aircraft will quickly cease to climb. Over mtow and i guess there is no margin, unlike for example an aztec where you barely notice the loss of an engine such are the performance reserves. I have had a real engine failure in the cruise which is a different kettle of fish.
As to the reliability of the engines / aircraft i am not sure how much evidence there is to back up some of the assertions. There is little reason to think the engine is any less reliable in 42s compared with 40s. I read of very few 40s suffering engine failure, events which would almost always be reported, even if a failure in a twin might go unreported. If anyone has statistics to the contrary that would be interesting.
Thats not to say that such is the monitoring of the engines that more potential issues might be flagged in flight that with other conventional engines and this in part might explain some aborted flights.
As to simulated engine failures in twins i dont see what evidence there is for this action being harsh on a 42. The engine is water cooled and so long as the engine has not been running at a high power setting prior to the shut down why should this be any different to a ground shut down after giving time for the turbo charger to cool. I would agree a shut down from a high power setting would be unkind, albeit par for the couse given the number of 42s one sees roll up on the apron followed by the pilot immediately switching off both engines. I had an engine failure on my initial multi in so far as we couldnt restart the engine; so i would agree an intentional in flight shut down is a risky strategy. I think in a 42 this is less true because the restart is very straight forward and difficult to get wrong. Moreover the aircraft handles far worse with one engine at very low power settings than with the engine shut down and prop fethered. On the other handle with the conventional six levers, twin mags and often difficult injected big sixes it does seem to me the pilot has much to learn from an inflight restart. However, how often will a pilot shut down an engine and subquently elect an in flight start? The excercise is to give experience of flying the aircraft on one engine and experience of how to shut down the engine in the first place. Does the engine need to be actually shut down in flight to give this experience, probably not
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 31st May 2012 at 23:01.