Re low hours - no, of course not what you'd choose, but that's what you're quite likely to get especially from local airports in rented light twins and singles. And that being the case, best it's in a simple and relatively undemanding single than a complex piston twin with perhaps less than ideal performance and nasty habits even if you do manage to remain flying after the engine failure. A piston twin is by far the most demanding and potentially hazardous of all the types we've been discussing in the event of an engine failure. The hazard of CFIT is presumably similar over all of them so it is the failure case that counts. And the stats say, "Don't choose to be in a singlepilot twin piston in a donk stops".
There's nothing much wrong with low hours pilots anyway. The operator, his insurers and the local Authority all consider them experienced enough or they wouldn't have the job. Who is the customer, as a non expert in aviation safety to gainsay those three good opinions? I'd be far more concerned to know if he'd been in the flying club til midnight the previous evening, or whether the engines on the piston twin that I couldn't avoid were Lycomings or those fragile geared Continentals - even more so in the tropics where dirty dives from above the turbulence are de-rigeur and shock cooled engines are thus commonplace.
Personally I'd be happy with a C206. Better (safer, bigger) a C208. Going bigger (and $$$) a Twotter. Low and slow is why I'd not choose a C406. Safety is why I'd not consider a piston twin.
Low hour pilots don't worry me too much, they've not had time to get complacent, jaded, gung-ho or develop bad habits like some of the older ones. Not always of course, but it's a consideration.
Is that reasonable?
Last edited by Agaricus bisporus; 21st Dec 2012 at 17:00.