Working day, no problem the aircraft is equipped for it, and so are the P2 and I; days off-no chance, too much like hard work:=

Back in 1974 I did my IR at Kidlington prior to me perhaps having a successful career in civil aviation. I was flying the Short Belfast at Brize Norton at the time but I was also CFI of an RAFGSA Gliding Club and had an interest in an RF-3. I was also flying Cessna 206 and BN Islander for the jumping beans.

I think that might just give me the qualifications for giving a balanced view.

One day I flew the Cessna 206 from Weston on the Green to Kidlington to refuel. I did not get above 400 feet on the short hop.

At the pumps I met a chap filling up his Cessna 172.

"Hello mate" said I "where are you headed"?

"Leeds/Bradford" said he.

"Do you know that the cloud base here is 500 feet - God knows what it is at LBA".

"Ah" said he "but I have an IR".

"So do I" said I "but it so far has not showed me how to pick a field when the engine stops and the cloud base is less than 800 feet".

Some people think that an IR prevents them from having an engine failure.

I have a friend who is a stone mason.

It's quite a good risk.

I fly a certificated, well maintained aircraft powered by an single agricultural Lycoming. I've had it for over 30 years and some thousands of hours. I've flown it to several continents, and across various oceans.

I can't say it's never given trouble in flight but it's never failed to get me to an airfield.

The fraction of time I fly it at night or in hard IFR is quite small. I don't seek out these conditions but if they turn up I just go.

The aircraft doesn't know it shouldn't fail today more than any other. It's unlikely it will fail on any day, it's VERY unlikely to choose a bad day since there are not that many really bad days.

Bill

As with so much in life it is a case of picking one's battles and picking one's risks.

I am happy to fly over the Alps above a solid overcast, but the exposure is only about 30-45 mins and happens barely a few times per year, and is less than 1% of my airborne time.

The risk is further improved by the fact that one is flying at a very low power setting (a non turbo engine) so the stress on everything is a lot lower than during any preceeding climb and lower altitude flight.

And maintenance needs to be done on a money-no-object basis, with a zero tolerance for defects. If the engine as much as coughed on a flight, I would have the fuel system inspected and would probably replace the fuel servo as a precaution, before further flight. This is why I do not fly other aircraft.

But if I was doing flying which has no decent escape route all day every day then I would probably take a 737 :)

Same with flying at night. I do it but only here and there. Night time is just 1.5% of my day time. Night flight is the most worrying for me because there really is no escape route - short of wearing NVGs :)

The problem with a piston twin is that one pays heavily on the hourly operating cost for the spare motor, and the only "modern" option - a DA42 - has a couple of engines which are thoroughly proven to be dodgy. Practically everybody I know who has a DA42 has had so many problems with it that I simply wouldn't do the long trips I do.

Or, if you had a Cirrus, pull the chute!