Considering a Twin Engine Piper – Pros and Cons
Twin engine Piper aircraft offer both advantages and challenges for pilots considering moving up from a single engine.
A practical and honest examination of the pros and cons of flying and owning a twin-engine Piper.
Few single-engine pilots have not looked longingly at a sexy twin from time to time. To pilots who are used to only one fan in front, the twin seems cool and exotic. As someone with thousands of hours flying a twin, I will let everyone on a little secret: They are cool!
Of course, cool does not equal practical. And while some are fortunate enough not to worry about practicalities, most people considering upgrading their ride are the practical type. I will sort through the myths, pitfalls and rationales for upgrading to a twin-engine aircraft.
Twin Engine Piper Ownership Challenges
These days, a pilot curious about purchasing a twin usually starts on the internet, often asking questions on one or more of the popular forums. Usually someone will chime in with the blanket statement that twins are twice or three times as expensive to operate as a single.
Someone else is bound to chime in that insurance is impossible for someone without significant twin time. Another will quote Richard Collins’ contention that twins have a fatality rate per accident that is four times greater than that of a single-engine aircraft.
Collins is correct on the statistic, but it’s misused as an anti-twin argument. Collins’ statistic appears to compare all single-engine crashes with all twin-engine crashes. This is misleading in two respects. The first is that twins have a higher stalling speed on average than twins. Thus they crash at a faster speed. A set of statistics that does not differentiate a Piper Cub from a Cessna 421 is, in my opinion, flawed.
The statistic is also flawed in that it does not account for the number of engine failures in a twin that do not result in a crash and end in a safe landing at an airport. Those incidents are not tracked and are usually not reported.
When a Twin Engine Piper Makes Sense
Having said that, a twin-engine aircraft is costly and might be overkill for some pilots’ needs. If one’s main use for an airplane is to look at scenery and for the odd hundred-dollar hamburger, then the cool factor is all you are really getting for your airplane-owning dollars—and you’re definitely paying extra for it.
Certain missions do argue for a twin-engine airplane, however. Pilots that make frequent flights over water or remote areas—especially at night—are probably safer in a twin if they keep their skills current. For frequent operations in low IFR conditions, twins offer redundancy and capability that most singles do not offer.
Business-related travel, or the need to get back home for business purposes, are the kinds of flights where a capable airplane is more critical. Local flying or traveling with no particular deadlines to be anywhere, such as retirees often enjoy, diminishes the need for weather capability and redundancy.
Twins can usually carry a bigger load than can the average single, unless the single is turbine-powered. But turbine singles are a whole other level of cost and complexity; beyond the scope of this discussion.
Twin Engine Piper – Advantages of Redundancy
Much of the potential safety advantages of a twin-engine aircraft come down to redundancy of propulsion and systems. This is of benefit to anyone using an aircraft for travel when timeliness of completing a flight is important.
Electrical system – Electrical system redundancy is of greatest importance when flying in IMC conditions. This is particularly true when low IFR eliminates the option to hold a compass heading and descend through the clouds to VFR underneath.
Anyone who has shot an ILS to minimums when the nearest VMC is a couple of states away knows how desperate the situation would be without electric power for key navigation equipment. Even in decent weather at night, electrical power is more than a convenience. Many are the stories of pilots flying home with a flashlight held in their mouth.
More and more, modern high performance singles are offering backup alternators that will provide a second source of power. These backup systems vary in capability. If the alternator fails on a single, even if you have a backup alternator you will only be able to run some critical equipment. Twins have the built-in redundancy of dual alternators and can usually run most or all of the equipment on the output of just one alternator.
Engine redundancy – While modern high performance singles offer much-improved systems redundancy, albeit often at a much higher cost than an older twin, even the most tricked-out Cirrus SR22 offers no propulsion redundancy.
Most all twins will fly on one engine, giving the pilot many more options when it comes to selecting a location and manner of landing after the failure of one engine.
While an aircraft parachute such as those installed in a modern high performance single can save lives, in open water or extremely rugged terrain, the parachute mostly just alters the angle and speed of impact after losing an engine.
For pilots based on an island or who need to regularly cross large bodies of water, the second engine can literally be a lifesaver. One common example in this country are the pilots who need to cross Lake Michigan on a regular basis.
In addition, night flying over much of the United States does not offer appealing options for a dead-stick landing. Many flight instructors sardonically explain the hazards of night dead-stick landings by advising their students, in mock seriousness, that as they are gliding down in the dark that they should turn on the landing light when getting close to the ground. Then they tell the student that if they don’t like what they see, they should turn off the landing light.
Out in much of the west and most of Alaska, even daylight is not much help when it comes to trying to find a place to make a survivable crash landing. Over dark, inhospitable terrain, a second engine is a great comfort and should provide a higher level of safety.
Twin Engine Piper and Weather Capability
Weather capability – Twins have traditionally been a better choice for reasonably all-weather operations. For decades, if you wanted the equipment for weather penetration, a twin was your only option. De-icing equipment was only available on twins. The same was true for weather radar.
Improvements in technology have made high-end, high performance single-engine aircraft much more weather-capable. TKS anti-icing systems, pneumatic de-icing boots, lightning detectors and the ability to obtain Nexrad have all helped improve the all-weather ability of some high performance singles—but at substantial cost, as these aircraft are usually fairly new.
Still, twins are best suited for onboard radar, also the old-fashioned pneumatic de-icing system does not rely on a limited store of fluid, which can be difficult to obtain when away from base unless one is only flying into the major reliever airports that are geared to accommodate the business flyer.
Twin Engine Piper Performance and Load Capacity
Larger loads – Horsepower is what picks up big loads. With few exceptions (and without getting into the turbine market), singles are limited to slightly over 300 hp.
Piston twins can double the horsepower which can translate into more speed, more useful load, or a combination of both. Even if you can fill the tanks on your single and punch out into weather with three passengers, your passengers are not likely to be too comfortable doing so.
Twin Engine Piper Pilot Responsibilities
In addition to the added financial commitment that a twin engine Piper requires, obtaining the safety benefits requires a greater dedication on the part of the pilot/owner.
Training – Many singles can be flown by the proverbial seat-of-the-pants. Twin engine Piper aircraft, with their higher wing loading and the ever-present possibility of being put into an asymmetrical thrust situation, must be flown by the numbers.
Twins require more thought on every flight, as the pilot has choices to make if an engine fails. For this reason, an instrument rating and regular recurrent training are nearly mandatory. This is particularly true for the novice twin driver. This is an area where insurance companies have some say.
Insurance – Contrary to some of the wisdom dispensed on the internet, the newbie twin driver can get insurance. It will come with strings attached and a hefty price tag for at least the first year. A VFR-only private pilot will have the fewest options and pay the most for insurance. Many insurers believe that an instrument rating should be the minimum level of licensing for a new twin engine Piper pilot/owner—and I believe that, too.
Piloting differences – While everyone focuses on the engine-failure-after-takeoff scenario, it is likely that other aspects of twin engine Piper operation cause more grief. Depending on what a new twin driver has been flying in the past, the twin may offer significantly higher approach and landing speeds.
Costs – Corresponding to the increase in complexity that a new twin owner will experience, there is a concomitant increase in expense. The rules of thumb spouted on the internet or around the coffeepot at the local pea patch are of less value than runway behind you or sky above you. The increase in cost going from a Cherokee 140 to an Aztec will be in whole-number multiples. The increase in cost from a Comanche 260 to a twin engine Piper Comanche is maybe a third more at most.
Is a Twin Engine Piper Worth It?
If the additional costs and commitments are not deal-breakers, and if one’s typical mission will benefit from the redundancy and capability that twins can offer, then upgrading to a twin can be an eminently reasonable decision.
By committing to continuous multiengine training, reviewing accident case studies, and practicing emergency drills regularly, pilots not only keep themselves safe but also uphold the reputation of professional airmanship. In the end, two engines are only safer than one when the pilot is prepared to handle the moment when one of them fails.
In conclusion, while upgrading to a twin-engine Piper brings both advantages and responsibilities, proper preparation and training ensure pilots can fully enjoy the benefits of redundancy, safety, and capability.
For those who want to dive deeper into the practical side of multiengine skills, also read our article about twin engine training, where we cover drills, safety tips, and real-world scenarios that every pilot should know.
What are the main advantages of owning a twin engine Piper?
he biggest advantages include redundancy of engines and systems, greater load capacity, and improved weather capability. A twin engine Piper can safely continue flight after one engine fails, carry more passengers or cargo than most singles, and operate with equipment like onboard radar or de-icing systems.
Why is insurance more expensive for new twin engine Piper pilots?
Insurance companies view twin engine flying as requiring higher proficiency. New twin owners, especially without an instrument rating, are considered higher risk. This results in higher premiums in the first year and may also require additional dual instruction hours before solo operation.
When does it make sense to upgrade to a twin engine Piper?
Upgrading makes sense if your flying involves longer trips, frequent night or IFR operations, or flights over water and remote areas where redundancy adds safety. For pilots mainly doing local leisure flights, a twin may be unnecessary due to the added cost and complexity.