"Mxsmanic" wrote in message

Now if you have three or more engines, perhaps the situation is
different. I once read that Boeing would demonstrate its 727 to
prospective buyers by taking off and setting one engine to idle as the
aircraft left the runway. The aircraft never even skipped a beat,
apparently.

Having flown a 727 for some time, I wouldn't quite say it never skipped a
beat, but it is a marvelous airplane that (in most models) does quite well
on two engines. But more to your point, in the above paragraph, you are
referencing a transport category aircraft, in which it is standard procedure
to continue the takeoff with an engine failure after V1 -- indeed, it is a
matter of regulation. This does not apply in the Baron to which you
referred.


But if you don't have the false sense of security, you're still better
off, right?

No. That's the point.


I guess one can do the numbers. If the change of an engine failure is
one in 1000, then the chance of losing all power in a single is one in
1000, and the chance of losing all power in a twin is one in
1,000,000. The chance of losing 80% power is slightly less than one
in 500 in a twin, though (because the more engines you have, the more
likely you are to lose at least one).

You know, Mx, now you're becoming argumentative (again). You can play all
you want at manipulating made-up numbers. You come here and ask for
information and advice, then argue over the validity of the response. You
would do well to remember this small point: You do not know what you're
talking about. We do.