3 ms·

> A single engine is quite bad for survivability. Are you sure about this? https://www.quora.com/Do-twin-engine-fighter-jets-provide-higher-safety-Are-they-an

> A single engine is quite bad for survivability. Are you sure about this? https://www.quora.com/Do-twin-engine-fighter-jets-provide-higher-safety-Are-they-anyway-better-than-one-with-a-single-engine-jet https://www.quora.com/Do-twin-engine-fighter-jets-provide-hi... From my research it looks like the same is true in civilian aviation. Statistically twin engines are more dangerous. https://www.flyingmag.com/wrong-worry-twins-versus-singles/ https://www.flyingmag.com/wrong-worry-twins-versus-singles/

redis_mlc 7y ago
Single-engine fighters are ok for the Air Force, who fly high over land. Twins are preferred by the Navy and Marines, who either fly over water, or down low and get shot at, or both. The civil link you provided refers to "light twins" (ie. underpowered and used in GA) used in training and EMS. Not applicable to airliners, which can safely take off on one engine. Something to think about: all of my former twin instructors have been killed flying light twins. Four-engine airliners are actually preferred for oceanic routes for safety, but regulators now allow twins (ETOPS), for cost reasons. Source: commercially-rated airplane pilot.