e-mails

It was not my intention that we become embroiled in a lengthy  bitter debate. However the website has produced some vociferous responses. If anyone wants to make comments you can contact us at  office@singleturbine.org.uk and they will be published here.

Apologies to DR I am going to publish your e-mail anyway because it shows a complete lack of understanding of the issues involved.

To: "SETA" <office@singleturbine.org.uk>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 10:19 PM
Subject: Bollocks


> Your comments about single turbine aircraft being safer than two is absolute
> bollocks. If the engine stops I suppose you are going to claim that the
> aircraft can still maintain the climb.
>
> It is organisations like yours that do a huge disservice to general
> aviation.
> >
> David R.
>
Dear David.

No I am not going to claim that a single engine aircraft  that has the unfortunate experience of an In Flight Shut Down (IFSD) by some magical means is  going to maintain altitude. However you need to understand that IFSD with the new generation of turbines is now  a rare occurrence. The problem  for the hysterical observer like yourself is that  engine failure is a simple definable event which evokes a very primaeval response without  consideration of the facts. The reality is that in twin engine aircraft IFSD is a very complex event  requiring a high degree of management  that can have uncontrollable outcomes which can often lead to fatalities. I can  only  hope to persuade you,  before you condemn single engine operation, to consider what are the current reasons for aviation fatalities in light aircraft rather than focusing on issues that are quantifiably and demonstrably insignificant. Unfortunately my experience to date is that people like yourself have very fixed views and are either unable or simply not prepared to look at the science behind the operation of  single turbine aircraft.  PW