Hey Jim,

I did not get the original e-mail you wrote but picked this up in a copy back...

> The OV-10 was a very bad airplane, but the 337 was
> a death trap.  The guys I talked to universally hated it.  
> Lose an engine and you're going down.  No if's and's or
> but's.

Are you referring to the O-2, the military version of the 337?

If so the O-2 is a very different airplane. It's empty weight was substantially higher due to many beef ups for military use and then it's max gross weight was kicked up by another half a ton. So it had a lot more weight to carry around with the same amount of horsepower. In fact it is so different from the 337 that it is not even certified. Whenever you see one notice that it is an "experimental"

The true 337 though at it's certified max gross weight will climb nicely on one engine and will maintain a descent airspeed too. 337 pilots have a saying: "When we loose an engine we don't declare an emergency, we declare an inconvenience" :-)

The 337 POH even allows single engine takeoffs under certain circumstances no other conventional twin can even think about that one! :-)

Either way though, O-2 or 337, a turbo 3-rotor like Ken and I were talking about will put out way more horsepower than that stupid TCM TSIO-360 Cessna ruined their airplane with.

> If all you're looking for is safe SE operations, a Cozy or
> Velocity twin pusher would fill the bill.  You'd have more
> than enough rudder authority to fly it safely and even
> comfortably in any engine out conditions,

I can't speak about a Cozy but I have 96 hours in a Velocity XL and it does not have much rudder authority as it is let alone with an asymmetrical thrust situation.

Rob