No it is not less for a twin.

Three engines or more drops the minimums to one half mile GENERALLY. But specific airports still may not support the lower minimums due to things like surrounding terrain features, trees, poles and , of course, the length of the runway AND the approaches to the runway. If you can't return and land on the runway you are departing, you shouldn't be departing at all.

The key thing to remember is that landings are mandatory. Takeoffs are not. Good judgement will keep you alive

I measured the main runway (the one that is paved, I see the other one now is grass) at work with Google Earth. Don't know how I got over 8,000 feet. Just measured the paved runway in Google Map here and its about 4,300 feet which matches this published info...

http://www.airnav.com/airport/9v9

Update
https://www.keloland.com/news/local...crash-reached-peak-altitude-of-460-feet/

Thanks Prn. Still sounds like ice/frost to me. What awful conditions ! Really sad !

A tragedy for sure. I read the preliminary report, had to look up empennage.

Cockpit stall warning came on 1 second after takeoff, sounds like they had trouble from the get-go. But like what happens so many times it was probably more than one problem combined with another problem(s) that caused the ultimate crash.

I know what a "stick shaker" is, but what's a "stick pusher"?

That 7MPH wind is suspect.

Stick pusher is the automated system that is trying to push the nose down to avoid imminent stall.

Pretty clear that the plane wasn't ready to fly. But, he may not have had enough runway left to get it stopped and so chose to horse it off anyway.

My guess is that the torque from take off power and the aerodynamic stall is what cause the un-commanded roll to the left. Looks like he tried to correct it but aileron response is terrible in a stall. Almost to the point of being ineffective.

Now if there really was a wind shear these poor folks had no chance. The stall recovery response is very much the opposite from recovery in a wind shear. So if he was in a stall condition (pretty clear) and hit a shear, there was no way he was getting out.

Did you notice that temperature and dew point were identical at take off ? I don't see how he was NOT building ice at the time of takeoff

Note too that he was on runway 31 and the wind was @ 020. That's 70 degrees OFF the nose. Almost a 90 degree crosswind. If the wind was indeed 7mph he could handle that but 40 mph would be challenging

I used to suffer from "get-home-itis" when I was younger; no more.
I'm always ready to bivouac, always feel right about it when I do it.

Usually I'm out alone, or at least when others are present I'm more or less in charge. That makes it easy when it's necessary to make the decision to stay put. When you're with a group of people (usually greenhorns) it's often difficult for some people to stand firm on the right decision.

Sad situation, so many needless deaths.

I sat out there that night the truck was rocking from the wind that’s a pretty big difference for just a few hours.

As the saying goes

Theres old pilots
theres Bold pilots
but theres no old bold pilots/

Every once and a while I fly with one of the few "old bold pilots". Only by necessity though.
He's crashed a couple of times, don't really know how he's survived so long.
Another one would be the late Bob Harte, cancer got him, not his plane.

Another opinion on this crash.

https://www.keloland.com/keloland-c...-plane-crash-report-concerned-about-ice/

4,277 Lbs is what it said he had left for fuel, people and gear. I would guess he was about maxed out weight wise, add a little ice and she won't fly. He just put on 150 gallons of fuel on top of what was left. 12 people and gear add up pretty fast.