Err, can I be the one to put my head above the parapet to ask the obvious question?

How come a single engined military fighter maintained and flown regularly in active service might be considered less safe than a four engined aircraft which has not flown since 1993 and, with less than three months to go to the flypast, has not made it into the air yet?

i’ve no axe to grind either way, but it just seems curious to me.

Basically no matter how many engines you have all flights have to conform to the Rules of the Air regulations 1991. Unless given an exemption like those given to Police flights

Rule 5 govens height restictions and this says that you must be able to alight clear of congested areas ,city ,town or settlement in the event of a power unit failure. So to answer your question a SHAR losing an engine stands less chance of complying with these rules of the air than say a C130