Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian J  You could "if" a whole lot of scenarios with any type of airplane.
I dunno man - I certainly respect you attitude of safety, and support a PIC's decision in respect to safety. However, if I were the CP I would tell you face to face that it is your job to fly ..... IMC in a Caravan. |
I'm of the same opinion.
First off, if you want an objective evaluation of which activity is more risky, you need only ask an insurance company for a quote. Regardless of your gut feeling, the insurance underwriters have VERY CAREFULLY evaluated which activity causes them to pay money more often. Actuarial science has conclusively shown that pilots in light twins die far more often than singles. Having seen the reliablity of the PT-6 and the redundant systems in the Van, I belive it to be MORE reliable than a piston twin.
Wether or not you feel safe flying IFR in a single is your call. However if you take a job flying singles for a 135 IFR company, then you don't have the right to complain that you are not comfortable with it.
Being a comercial pilot is all about fmaking a flight even though you are "not completely comfortable". Flying in the middle of our comfort zones is what private pilots get to do. When we take money to fly, we obligate ourselves to meet the demands of others. If you honestly do not feel that a flight can be safely made, then don't fly it. However, you must also accept the consequnces that may arrise.
I wasn't comfortable flying through moderate turbulance into OKC last week, in fact it was freaking scary, but that's my job.