Larry,

Ease up on us single engine flyers in the west.

Good point, but I’m not planning on landing on a mountain peak. The high stuff is only about 40nm wide at it’s widest when crossing the Sierras, and there are suitable runways on either side. Like I said cruising at FL270 and FL280, in all sorts of winds, I’ve never been out of glide range of an improved runway.

I think the worst case is I do the math wrong and make one too many 360’s while trying to lose altitude and end up a mile or two short of a runway.

I carry a Garmin inreach with me. I wonder how long it would take for a rescue. If they have my position, why won’t someone come to rescue me? I get they aren’t coming on foot in hostile terrain, but I assume they’d send a helicopter. I turn the inreach on and put it on my belt loop each flight. If the spinny thing stops I plan to hit the emer button on it right after declaring an emergency with ATC (which is after setting glide speed, loading the approach for my intended runway in both the aircraft navigator and iPad, and pointing the airplane towards the FAF). I can’t mitigate all risk, but I think I’m taking reasonable precautions.

Larry,
I don't have the data for other SETPs, but you are attempting to mitigate a risk that no one has died from in a PC12. In over 7 million flight hours.

What's interesting is there have been several die due to a engine failures in King Airs.

Larry doesn’t know what he doesn’t know.

So you mitigate risk by pretending it can’t happen?

It's never what you worry about that will get you. So many ways to die in a turbine, twin or single, why worry about the least likely one. So many "ifs" have to align in order for an engine failure in a Pilatus to become fatal. You're flying a twin turbo grenade that is more or less guaranteed to blow up in the next 10,000 hours or so. All forced landings are a crapshoot even over the best terrain. Statically speaking you are still considerably more likely to die in your aircraft, no matter the weather and route choices than if Jason decided to fly circles at night around the Matterhorn for the rest of his life in his Pilatus. As to water crossings, well if it happens, I can think of hundreds worse ways to go than going off into hypothermia lala land. Nobody lives forever. Live a little.

It's never what you worry about that will get you. So many ways to die in a turbine, twin or single, why worry about the least likely one. So many "ifs" have to align in order for an engine failure in a Pilatus to become fatal. You're flying a twin turbo grenade that is more or less guaranteed to blow up in the next 10,000 hours or so. All forced landings are a crapshoot even over the best terrain. Statically speaking you are still considerably more likely to die in your aircraft, no matter the weather and route choices than if Jason decided to fly circles at night around the Matterhorn for the rest of his life in his Pilatus. As to water crossings, well if it happens, I can think of hundreds worse ways to go than going off into hypothermia lala land. Nobody lives forever. Live a little.

No but if you wanted to mitigate all risk there would be no Beechtalk

Andrew

By that logic, you're "pretending" you aren't going to get hit by a falling meteor right now.

I love to research things. My research on the PC12 shows millions of flight hours vs. accidents that have actually happened. Engine failures don't cause PC12's to crash. I train for engine failures at Simcom every year as well as a FEW other issues that CAN come up in the airplane. For the most part emergency procedures in the Pilatus are very few. There's not much to do if something goes wrong because there isn't much that can go wrong. It's a very simple machine compared to an old prop twin with a million things to go wrong.

I'd rather be flying in an airplane with "less to go wrong" than one with "lots to go wrong". Every new airplane design nowadays has "less to go wrong" than it predecessor.

You're in that group of people that cast a wide net in categorizing airplanes. "Single", "Twin", etc. There's so much more to the story. Don't you want to know the whole story? Or do you just want to hang your hat on how many engines an airplane has and call it a day? I'd call that "being lazy".

This being the case, why is there an FCU in the first place?

This being the case, why is there an FCU in the first place? Why not eliminate that point of failure? Can you expand on this a bit?

This being the case, why is there an FCU in the first place?

Hey, I taxied past a Cirrus Vision Jet yesterday. It sure looks funny through a wide angle lens

https://www.dropbox.com/s/apqj6zy7yauq9 ... 0.mp4?dl=0

This being the case, why is there an FCU in the first place? Why not eliminate that point of failure? Can you expand on this a bit?

You bypass the torque limiter when you engage the MOR.