I'm one of the pilots who Larry mentioned fly over waters almost weekly to the Bahamas. I also have a Master's in mechanical engineering from Caltech and spent a lot of time researching the very issues you're struggling with before I bought my first Skymaster. Incidentally, we have another thing in common: my daughter was 6 when I bought that airplane.
So, here are my views:
1. I agree with all that is said above and the rest of the points below are largely for emphasis/expansion (read: I don't have much more to add).
2. The reliability of the Continental IO-360 engines, after allowing for the ADs that have been implemented, is indistinguishable from that of other reciprocating aircraft engines. In short, they
don't fail more frequently. You hear about engine failures in Skymasters because the pilots
like to talk about them, for the simplicity of recovery.
3. Because the aircraft is so easy to operate and so forgiving, many of the accidents have occured because some pilots haven't given it the respect it deserves. They hop in and fly. No pre-flight check, no visual confirmation of fuel. And because they're built like a tank, many proceed into IMC when they shouldn't.
4. The fuel system is a bit complicated and needs attention. Mistakes here have led to accidents. Indeed, in a very brief published flight report on the aircraft -- I'm talking like one paragraph long -- they included this statement: "fuel system
requires familiarity" (emphasis mine). It's not a big deal, but most Skymasters have lots of fuel capacity with auxiliary tanks, and knowing how to manage the fuel system is important. I have a "Fuel Supply Management" page in my "backup" skymaster website at
www.SkymasterUS.com which provides the required familiarity and where you can go read the flight report I mentioned.
5. Because they look weird to some -- perhaps not macho enough -- Skymasters are cheaper than comparable aircraft. Some people who bought this cheaper aircraft soon discovered that maintenance costs are like for other twins, didn't have the money, and skimped on maintenance. Many a Skymaster has been bought like this, missing ADs, with poor annual inspections, etc. This has led to accidents.
OK, that's the technical stuff. Let me turn to the mundane. I wouldn't fly over water outside gliding distance of land in a single. And I wouldn't be caught dead in a regular twin, principally because I'm not sure that in a failed-engine-at-takeoff emergency I'm gonna do everything that needs to be done precisely to save my family. Not if you fly occasionally, not if you're preoccupied with something else (money, time delays, spouse hassles) at take-off. I want the extra margin of safety.
But the basic principles of flying remain. If you treat it for what it is -- a complex, high-performance, retractable-gear, variable-pitch-prop, twin engined aircraft -- and if you maintain it properly, and if you do thorough pre-flights, and if you stay proficient, then the Skymaster is indeed a very safe aircraft, probably much safer than other twins.
Ernie