This is getting quite amusing as a bystander here , but to put some sanity into the HV argument who can answer the following probability questions from actual information
1. chances of any engine failing at any point in the flight regime
2. chances of engine failing within HV curve
3. chances of a mechanical failure at any point
4. chances of mechanical failure within HV curve
5. chances of pilot error within any point of flight regime
6. chances of pilot error within HV curve
Once we know this information a sensible risk assessment can be made so ANFi can argue his point with actual information
Yes there is a risk to everything we do but ......
Before I get shot down too much I have had an engine failure at 100 ft 30 kts coming into land. Have had miss running engines requiring a landing 3 times in 7500 hours
I have taught my daughter to fly and yes into the H/v curve you have to to get a PPL. Flown my wife in and out of the H/V curve in both singles and twins, as i believe the risk of engine quitting is remote.
Yes you can argue what you want that a twin is better than a single but you could also argue what happens if the combining gearbox decides to take a break ??? Could have 3 engines doesn't make any difference. Again what is the probability of that.
It is all about weighing up risk and everyone has a different view. I would suggest that the pilot is the biggest risk not the machine.
Incoming