Engine Failure on take off - do you teach it?

[flap flap flap]

In the JAA PPL syllabus there is a requirement to teach this, - does anyone actually do it? I have over 1,000 hours teaching in the R22 and I wouldn't dream of even doing a demo of this.

Does anyone teach this in the R22? If so, what approach/method do you use?

PS - by "take off" I mean when you are transitioning from the hover to forward flight.

[flap flap flap]

It was demo'd to me on my FI course, but I really don't feel comfortable teaching it. Probably because my employer would sack me if a heli got bent up. Same reason I don't do EOLs to the ground. Can't afford to lose my job.

[relyon]

Can't see what the problem is. It depends on your speed when the engine fails but it's a 'skids level' run on landing if suitable ground. If not suitable ground it's a 'skids level' run on landing. :ok:!!! No chance of a go around, LOL
I suggest you communicate with Gerry Friesen of British Columbia helicopters (http://www.bchelicopters.com/). IIRC, he had a R22 carburetor body failure at 150' on a maximum performance takeoff. Instant power loss at [arguably] the worst possible place and time. Still can't see what the problem is? Yeah, I'd have a hard time keeping my eyes open through that too.

Bob

[Gomer Pylot]

I've had an engine failure on takeoff on every checkride I ever remember taking, and had plenty of them in training. If you're not teaching them, you're shortchanging your students.

[Bravo73]

Heard about our safety evenings? :ok:

It might be a bit far for fff to travel for one evening... :p

[R22DRIVER]

I would teach them alot during CFI training in the US. As Gomer says, if you dont teach it, one day that might be where it quits on them.

Just remember to brief your student thoroughly, be prepared and above all only do it when you are comfortable. If all the precautions are thought about and acted upon it can be no less dangerous that the full down itself.

I would only suprise my students with a thorttle chop when i knew they had the maneuver drilled down to pure motor skills. I never got caught out and always had nice, smooth successful landings - All in an R22.

I only had 1000 hours when i was teaching these, but im so glad i did, because i now have piece of mind knowing that one day of it happens to myself or one of my students, they now stand a better chance of walking away.

Oh and in training i would previoulsly lower the collective slightly just before roll off to get the MAP to 21" -Any higher was out of my comfort zone.

Remember its not IF it happens, its WHEN it happens.

R22 :ok:

[chop_chop]

I had the throttle chopped on me at about 100ft on take off, following warning. Jees, was I not prepared for the effect it had!

[tegwin]

What is the correct procedure for a total loss of power in transition from hover to flight at around 100 feet in an R-22?...(40kts for climb out with max power applied)


Logic suggests that its going to be a case of getting the collective down, pushing the cyclic forwards to gain some airspeed (perhaps might struggle to reach 60kts) and prepare for a run on landing with limited peddle control...:sad:

Oh, and switch off the fuel and call a Mayday:}




Im sure we would all be more confident if we could practice engine offs to the ground, but I guess the cost of all those bent helicopters is not worth it:ouch:

[Bladecrack]

I've had an engine failure on takeoff on every checkride I ever remember taking, and had plenty of them in training. If you're not teaching them, you're shortchanging your students

Gomer,

Im interested to know what type you are talking about?


I did teach EFATO's to students in the R22, but only to a hover recovery, cos if they can get it to hover height maintaining airspeed and RRPM that is survivable. Unless you are a Robinson test pilot that does this every day it would get bent very quickly. In an R44, or B206 etc. its a different matter, they have the required inertia to do it safely.

[Bladecrack]

Tegwin,

40 kts is not the recomended climb speed, look at the avoid curve!! If it all goes quiet at 40 kts and 100 ft, and you push the cyclic forward the RRPM will decay rapidly! :=
You will not achieve 60 kts!! You should hold what airspeed you have and cushion with the collective for the last few feet.:\

BC.

[BlenderPilot]

Those that brag about doing those during their checkrides and training are almost certainly talking about doing them in Bell 2 bladed helicopters where it becomes a fairly simple and easy manuver . . . . . lots of intertia, even in the 407 that has lower intertia it's not so complicated, but . . . . in an R22 I'm sure it's a whole different story, that rotor will to zero in a nanosecond!

[Arm out the window]

No, don't push forward!
I haven't done them in R22s, but have practiced numerous engine-offs all the way up the transition slope in Squirrels, and they can be done easily.
Of course, if it happened without forewarning when fully loaded it might be a different story!

The basic principles are easily seen if you consider the opposite 'ends' of your transition from hover to steady climb:

Taxiing auto - freeze collective, keep tracking the way you're heading, settle, cushion.

Steady climb - Lower collective smartly and fully, adopt auto attitude and IAS, wait, flare, level, cushion.

In between, there's obviously a sliding scale of things you do, 'morphing', if you like, between the two extremes.
At 20 kts and 20 ft, say, you'd be able to get the lever down a bit and flare a bit, giving it away when the tail's nearing the ground to run on (or hook in really hard to get zero speed if the ground's not favourable).
At 40 kts, 50 ft (for example), you're probably going to be able to get the lever fully down and get a decent flare in too.

[GeorgeMandes]

If you are ever at Bell, and your instructor softly says "FL" long on the radio, you are about to get one. While "FL" may mean Florida to some, it means forced landing in that part of Texas. Not being the sharpest knife in the drawer, it took me three or four of these before I figured it out. Of course, I didn't let on, so I am always listening for it, and especially prepared on a flat disk departure from spot 1 on lane four at the Bell practice area. The FL that did surprise me was off the elevated platform there, two years ago.

George

[before landing check list]

Back in 82 the US Army did not teach it, back then I did not know any better either. PHI in 89 taught you engine failures from everywhere. The 206 was easy with all that blade inertia. I have never had a failure however I do feel more confident now. And yes I teach it.

[aclark79]

I teach these now, in a CFI course, or rather I should say I demonstrate these now and let the student do one or two. We don't teach them so that our students can do them with proficiency, rather we want to expose them to what it will be like. They get to do it, but not over and over till its second nature.

150 ft min agl, 60kts min airspeed, so even then its not a 100 ft 40 knot situation. I personally will not do them from lower/slower.

No pitch pull, no pushing forward for airspeed. Thorougly briefed and demonstrated before hand so as to avoid any confusion. I do this with each CFI student I've taught and I think I would be doing them a disservice if I didn't.

If you mean a hover to forward flight then its essentially a hover auto with forward movement, you should ideally be skids aligned with movement and shouldn't pose to much of an issue.

[Arm out the window]

They are also something that can be worked up to, ie start with taxi autos and get a little higher and faster each time.

Although we don't lower the collective or flare in taxiing autos, you will find once you've got that little bit of height and speed it feels natural to do so, which is a good thing because you need to!

Not fully, of course, but more so the higher and faster you get.

[topendtorque]

A couple of years ago, one of our drivers had one just after take off, reaching for the coffee mug, fifty feet, thirty knots, early wet season time, cool morning, just over a massive river with mobs of trees – silence – a very experienced gent, luckily, threaded down through a miniscule gap and landed on a sandbank, beside a startled croc. Well so he says.

However there was no cause found and it took a good while to fly it back out. Carby Ice? Probably.

Practice autos on take off? Very good idea! Another good idea is to check your Carby Air Temp just after you take off and are winding off power especially in a humid environment.

Initially we used to teach autos at either super low level, any air speed, or then at and above three hundred feet, any airspeed.

Then one day quite a few moons ago, a certain Departmental examiner says to me, “Vy is it zat, vu do not them from ze vun huntret feet?” Heil Hitler.

I thought, bugger me, I don’t know, and said so. He says, “Vell dis is vere you are in the mashine all day, vot?”


I thought, and here I am supposedly checking him out, an ex army, quasi German, then departmental answer to that nemesis of many of us Herr Trewenick.

I almost said Heil Hitler.

But that night Herr Holga, all six foot ten of him failed in a backward auto out of the back of the mini moke, just after he had stood, straight arm saluted and stated that, “I Vill review the troops.”

He survived, bless him. Surely he would have remembered our hospitality for some time.

[Gomer Pylot]

I don't want to offend anyone, but if you're a Robbie instructor, and you can't do a successful auto during takeoff, then maybe you shouldn't be a Robbie instructor. The chances of an engine failure during takeoff are probably higher than at any other time, and you have to be able to deal with it just as you have to be able to deal with it in cruise flight. Turning a student loose to solo, who has never been shown an engine failure during takeoff seems to me to show less than perfect judgment. I've never flown a Robinson, but I have flown TH55s and AS350s, and they lose rotor RPM in a heartbeat. You have to learn to deal with it, though.

[vaqueroaero]

If you are ever at Bell, and your instructor softly says "FL" long on the radio, you are about to get one. While "FL" may mean Florida to some, it means forced landing in that part of Texas. Not being the sharpest knife in the drawer, it took me three or four of these before I figured it out. Of course, I didn't let on, so I am always listening for it, and especially prepared on a flat disk departure from spot 1 on lane four at the Bell practice area. The FL that did surprise me was off the elevated platform there, two years ago.

George

Thanks for letting the cat out of the bag there George!!

Regards from the "English Fella"

[FairWeatherFlyer]

A couple of years ago, one of our drivers had one just after take off, reaching for the coffee mug, fifty feet, thirty knots

One thing that was corrected in my flying was reaching for the radio at 200-300ft to make a change. The LPC examiner, oddly one that i considered to be a mediocre teacher and procedurally lax, mentioned that you should only take your hands off the controls at a decent height from the surface. It was a good point and one that had never been conferred by anyone else, AFAIR.

[Heli-Jock]

Gomer Pilot
I've never flown a Robinson, but I have flown TH55s and AS350s, and they lose rotor RPM in a heartbeat. You have to learn to deal with it, though

If you think the squirel looses rrpm in a heartbeat, you should really see what happens in a R22 on take off with 24" manifold pressure being pulled from the engine, while hurtling along the runway at 45kts around 10 ft off ground and out of the avoid curve! :=
Even at 150 ft and 24" manifold pressure, i for one, would make sure having 60kts on the nose, that the manifold pressure was reduced to 20"-21" prior to shouting "Practice engine failure". Even at that, teaching this to various pre PPL H will somewhere down the line,:{ have consequences
Do you really think any pre PPL H, could carry out that manouvre safelly time after time? And i for one, would not like to sit next to the student trying to learn it on a regular basis, as it would be a matter of time before the aircraft would be bent and i'd be looking for another aircraft and for that matter a student.
I like to have a cup of tea on a de brief after flights with students, not a stiff brandy and then never see the student again!

I'm with vital actions on this one.

HJ

[flap flap flap]

Nice to see other people are as reticent about this maneuver as me. The JAA syllabus does say "demo only" to a student.

I'm going to give it a whirl soon with a student, at 20", 300 ft AGL and 60kts.

I'll report back how it goes...

[Bladecrack]

I don't want to offend anyone, but if you're a Robbie instructor, and you can't do a successful auto during takeoff, then maybe you shouldn't be a Robbie instructor

Gomer,

Hmmm, to say that, then in the next breath state that you have never flown a Robbie... :hmm:
I concur totally with Vital Actions and Heli-Jock. there is no comparison between a 350 and R22. You could yawn while doing the Times crossword and sipping your coffee while doing this exercise in a 350, whereas if you get it ever so slightly wrong in an R22, you better hope some paramedic will be strapping you to a spinal board and rushing you to the local A&E PDQ after extracating you from the mangled remains of your R22... :rolleyes:

BC

[Gomer Pylot]

So what do you think happens to the poor student who has the engine quit on takeoff while solo, and has never even had the maneuver demonstrated? :ugh:

[R22DRIVER]

Bottom line is if a student on solo has any kind of engine failure i think they would be toast.
No matter where the failure occurs i can pretty much say out of the last 100 students ive had for stage checks - none of them would succesfully land an R22 if it went quiet.
Risk management is the key - how many students will go through that 'Lack of experiance' period without a failure Vs those that would get a failure..

Again showing these on a daily basis is a very risky business but i feel if a student has seen one a couple of times they MIGHT stand a chance of walking away.

I for one would question if i could land an R22 unscratched from an enigine failure until i had 500 hours in it. Until then its all about walking away from a wreckage.

R22

[somepitch]

that should be the new marketing slogan for robbie schools:

"if the engine quits, don't sweat it, you're toast anyway!":E

[oldpinger]

:hmm: a training aircraft that is nearly impossible it seems (no I haven't flown them) to auto safely during takeoff.:ugh: Who said anything about duty of care to your 1st solo student.....

Lucky it's cheap to run, doesn't apear to have many other redeeming features in that role.

[flap flap flap]

At the risk of thread creep... after teaching in the 300, the R44, and the R22... I don't think the R22 is a good training heli at all. It feels 'unstable', constantly wants to pitch up and roll, is hard to auto, very unforgiving.

Yes, students get used to all that, but even so...

I notice that people on trial lessons more often take up the PPL after flying the 300, compared to the R22. It's a shame the 300 is more expensive and hardly anyone operates them in the UK.

[Gomer Pylot]

I agree that a solo student isn't likely to make a perfect landing after an engine failure, from any flight regime, but he should be able to walk away from the bent metal. Otherwise he shouldn't be solo. An instructor, though, should be able to do a successful auto if he initiates it himself. If he can't do that, then he needs to do some thinking about his choice of vocation.

[Heli-Jock]

Walking away from the bent metal would be fine for the student on a slol, "IF" he succesfully entered auto in the first place! !
I'm with R22 Driver here. Out of the students i've flown with or checked out, unless you are very familiar with the R22 and have few hundred hours under your belt and frequently practice auto's, i very much doubt if any of these pre PPL H's or PPL's would enter auto on an engine failure in flight.
I think a high percentage would be toast after it all went quiet:}

However we should remember that there, (as far as i am aware after a visit to Robinson California in Nov 2006), have been only 2 recorded engine failures in they're aircrafts since 1973! Not a bad record in my book. According to figures they showed us, it has the best statistics for a lack of engine failures in any helicopter to date.

I would aslso like to say that any PPL H's out there with minimum time on type should always have an instructor on board if they intend sharpening up they're reflex's on auto's.

HJ

[VeeAny]

The duty of care angle is interesting, how many R22 instructors would be comfortable suffering an engine failure after take off on an instructional sortie ? How many would be comfortable teaching it to a Power Recovery and subsequent hover ?

Most other types (homebuilts excluded) feel like they have a reasonable chance of the aircraft surviving an EFATO, if flown within the limits in the Flight Manual.

Maybe a good reason for training in a helicopter that was designed for it in the first place (not a dig at R22s, just an observation). Its not the R22s fault that we use them for purposes that they were not originally designed for.

[VeeAny]

Robinson may well be able to say that only 2 engine failures have occured, but a quick look at the accident figures, gives a different view if you include things that caused the engine to stop like broken fuel vents, and engines stopping for reasons not directly related to the engine itself (Carb Icing) the figures are different.

From the UK alone
At least two blocked fuel vents, one instance valve sticking causing engine power loss at night which was fatal. Another which caused a write off. At least 5 suspected carb icing instances that I can think of which lead to the loss of the aircraft, 2 of which may have contributed to fatal accidents.

The engine doesn't need to fail or even stop for the airframe to be involved in a crash.

I'll provide some links later if anyone is interested.

[Cullear1]

Hi VEEANY yes I would be interested in those links please, many thanks

[Bladecrack]

EFATO's should certainly be demo'd to students by instructors, they are not impossible to do, they just take a high level of skill and proficiency to do safely. The chances of a solo student doing one for real safely would be slim, but if they initiated an auto properly the end result should stiill be survivable.

As VeeAny said, the R22 was NOT designed as a training helicopter. Anyone who trains in one should bear in mind that although they may be cheaper than other helicopters designed for training, you have to accept the higher risk.

BC

[VeeAny]

Cullear1

A link to the accident reports that I can filter out for engine related things in R22s.

http://www.griffin-helicopters.co.uk/accidents.asp?manufacturerkey=&ACType=R22&OrderBy=Date+DESC&acregn=&Cause=&detail=engine+power+%7C+engine+fail+%7C+carb&Filter=&exclude=practi+%7C+sim&since=&until=&Day=&Month=&Year=
[I'll move this to the helicopter safety site soon, so expect the URL to be changed shortly].

Also the engine events page from helisafety shows quite a few, not necessarily EFATO but valid nonetheless. http://www.helicopter-safety.org.uk/genericaccident.asp?keyword=Engine%20Events

Remember that this not just engine failure but anything that caused engine power loss or engine stoppage in an R22, the consequences being similar for all of them once airborne.

GS

[FauxZ]

I've seen it demo'd once, to a full down, in an R22. There is NO way you could teach any student with less than 100 hours to accomplish this in the R22 without destroying the AC. Even getting a pre-solo student to comprehend what just happened would be a monumental task. Perhaps if all you did was EFOTA all day, every day.

Simple fact is the Robbie's engines are more reliable than most turbines, the average student (in the US) on the "1000 hour" program has fewer than 20 hours of solo time in those 1000 hours. Half of those X-C. Your chances of a mechanic forgetting to torque down a pitch link are greater, and we don't train for that. Why? Risk management 101.

In the US, SFAR 73 exists exactly for comments like Gomer's. Pilots who have never flown an R22 do not have an appreciation for the low inertia of the rotor system. This is why there were so many early accidents with RPM decay. I certainly agree it is irresponsible to not seek out this training in the R22 if you intend to operate them regularly, however it should be performed by a high time, well seasoned instructor as part of an advanced training course.

You'll note that "high time," "well seasoned," and "advanced training" have little to do with most R22 training.

[Whirlybird]

So what do you think happens to the poor student who has the engine quit on takeoff while solo, and has never even had the maneuver demonstrated?

OK, so how often has this actually happened?

Does anyone have the statistics for EFATO in the R22? What about those for EFATO with a student pilot in command? What are the actual odds?

It's probably taboo to even suggest this, but am I the only person who thinks that maybe we spend far too much time worrying about engine failures in difficult-to-survive situations, when they very rarely happen? Meanwhile low hours pilots regularly kill themselves flying into power lines, flying in unsuitable weather, or just...flying badly. Human error kills far more pilots than engine failure in the R22 - no I don't need the stats to back it up; I'm sure! So do we even need to be discussing this any further?

[170']

Flapper

I'm not an instructor but fly with some very low time co-pilots at times. And the things I stress on this issue are just the basics. I'm not talking during bush operations, but when we have the option to do it more safely, I try to take it...well, much of the time ;)

I stress keeping the disc as flat as possible with minimum power, keeping the airframe close to level for minimum attitude adjustment in case we experience an 'event' and need to set down.....If we are in on an airfield and taxiing to holding for example. Keep any available line between your knees and use it as an aid to keeping straight during the 'event'...Using the knees as a gunsight. I had one or two check airmen comment over the years such as..."Get on the centerline" but once explained it was accepted...I continue the early part of the takeoff with the centerline (if any) between my knees or the other guy doing it with his legs.

If the failure happens and you screw up the collective cushioning, you might get a 'lively' event to tell your mates about, but you will generally keep it on its feet...And thats gonna get you an A+ right there!

Tracking straight is obviously the most critical issue during transition from hover to forward flight. Keep the wheels or skids going in exactly the same direction as the mast...A student can screw up the rest and will generally have a survivable event. But no matter how great the 'cushioning or settling is' if your going westbound on a southbound bus it could end in tears...

I know this is flying 101, but if you reinforce this or similar every time with your students, I think you've met your 'duty of care' adequately without repeated exposure to you, the studes and the airframe if the machine has a super low inertia system...And if you demonstrate critical failure regularly, and regardless of how current or skilled you are. Eventually the odds could get you, and we all know! One Oh ****! ruins all the attaboys :eek:

Just an opinion and good luck with the opposing views.

170'

[topendtorque]

An absolute excellent post 170.
this is the clincher for any doubters.

you've met your 'duty of care'


And it's to yourself you have demonstrated it as well as the student, but doing it you've also enjoyed contributing, I bet.

They say that NOT anyone can make a horse, and it's a tad more difficult with our species, but pure crystal when you see the demonstration of your efforts rewarded.

Although we all use different terminology.
I will say;
keep the lever down as far as possible alla time so's you have heaps to pull up.

Where you say;

keeping the disc as flat as possible with minimum power


I will say, If at low level and an uncomfortable height always try for airspeed attitude potential.

Where-as you say;

keeping the airframe close to level for minimum attitude adjustment


all schemantics.

particularly the reference at low level to always having a spot in sight etc.

Had the great privilege of checking out our newest pilot the other day, a thorough gentleman with possibly 15K hours, he lapped it all up better than any newbie.

BTW before then he had only ever done a VRS and recovery excercise with Frank's school went he went visiting some years ago.

That says heaps to me. I hope they are still doing it.

I remember reading some years ago that the F/W highest engine failure incidence was on the first power alteration after take off. disregarding carby ice , it certainly makes sense. however I think most rotary gaffs are for other reasons.
tet

[Billywizz]

FFF

most prudent operators wouldn't let newly qualified instructors do EOL's to the ground due to the lack of experience and the risk of bending the machine, same for EFATO. I would check with your CFI before "trying one out with a student to see how it goes"
I'm also surprised that you are asking this forum how to teach failure after T/O when this should have been done on your instructors course. Why have you not taken the oportunity of doing these exercises when you do an LPC with a more experienced examiner or go out and do some with your CFI ?

[flap flap flap]

Update:

I tried demo-ing one yesterday with a student. With 10 gallons on board... got to 250-300 agl, 60 kts, reduced power to 20" then rolled off the throttle and entered auto. Ground comes up awful quick. You got to be on the ball, but there is enough time to flare and do a power recovery, albeit with the horn blaring. I certainly wouldn't do it any slower or lower or heavier, and I certainly wouldn't let the student have a go at one as there ain't much time during the maneouver to f*ck up.

[Billywizz]

fff 11 April
I am an experienced instructor with over 1,600 hours, not a PPL newbie. And, no I would never attempt IMC in an R22

fff this post 16 April
In the JAA PPL syllabus there is a requirement to teach this, - does anyone actually do it? I have over 1,000 hours teaching in the R22 and I wouldn't dream of even doing a demo of this.

Confused?

[flap flap flap]

What's so confusing? I have 1,600 hours total, over 1,000 in the R22, the rest on other types.

[Billywizz]

fff I was asking the question of you.

You claim to be experienced and don't know if engine failure after T/O is taught, you then say you wouldn't dream of doing one, but after seeking advice from unknown sources on the internet you demonstrate one three days later.
On another thread you stated I do quite a few off airfield landings with my students, just pick a field/area, make sure there's no-one around and go for it. If someone reports you, just say you were doing "emergency training", not much the CAA can say against that. Confined areas is in the JAA syllabus, hardly anyone has ever been prosecuted over rule 5 in a heli, and how many members of the public are able to prove how close you were anyway?
All JAR training is to be carried out at licensed airfields including confined areas. Are you aware of 'Duty of care' to your students, let alone any insurance implications of your actions

[flap flap flap]

I have never met ANY 'standard PPL' FI who teaches this maneuver in the R22, nor ANY R22 PPL who has had it demonstrated to them, hence I asked the question.

I have a lot of experience of teaching in a non-JAA environment, and I wanted to know what other JAA FIs thought of this maneuver.

I don't touchdown on off-airfield landings, and the flight always starts and ends at a licensed airfield, hence it's legal.

I didn't demonstrate the EFOTA it on the basis of posters here, I did it from my experience of doing thousands of autos in the R22.

[DBChopper]

It's probably taboo to even suggest this, but am I the only person who thinks that maybe we spend far too much time worrying about engine failures in difficult-to-survive situations, when they very rarely happen?

I couldn't agree more Whirly. It does seem like a taboo subject but it certainly shouldn't be. I have less than 200hrs total time and I feel that an inordinate amount of my training has been spent plummetting to the earth not really knowing whether I or the instructor is really flying the thing, when statistically I am more likely to fly into cumulo-granite. Now actually, I am very unlikely to fly into the ground as I am such a big coward when it comes to flying when there is anything other than just sky in the sky, but my point is, as made by Whirly, that surely we should be training with more emphasis on the accidents that are actually happening rather than the ones that exceptionally rarely do.

Don't get me wrong, PFLs and EOLs are a vital part of the training process and yes, I have had an EFATO demonstrated along with low-level EOLs and they were hugely useful as a demo, but I do think we do engine-off in the circuit to death (no pun intended) with students who, with such low experience, are unlikey to really peg them.

DBChopper

[Batidora]

An interesting thread, which seems to reflect the different experience levels in the industry. Firstly I only know of one true engine failure taking place with an R22, the rest have been down to pilot handling skills, normally related to lack of CARBHEAT.

Students should be taught to transition within the limits of the avoid curve, and be able to deal with engine failure throughout all stages of the transition. That includes the initial stages of transition below 10ft.

In the initial phase below 10ft I demonstrate a gentle flair whilst lowering the lever, level the R22 and run on landing.

My students rotate at 45kts and select a 60kt attitude, therefore by 80-100ft they are at 60kts. If an engine failure takes place in this short period, the student has sufficient speed to end up in autorotation at 40kts.... not perfect but a constant attitude and leaving the ship with a flat profile... the same speed you should be using for autos at night...

Once at 60kt the student needs to get used to the large movement required to lower the lever to the floor... I control carbheat and call the verbal warning "practice engine failure GO" the student lowers the lever immediately to to the floor and enters auto, I close throttle, they check up lever as required. I normally practice this at 300ft.

Would NOT suggest that you close throttle before lowering the lever. I teach this to both my PPL and CPL students.

Another thought... what would you do if engine failed during towering take off.....

[jellycopter]

"It's probably taboo to even suggest this, but am I the only person who thinks that maybe we spend far too much time worrying about engine failures in difficult-to-survive situations, when they very rarely happen? "

I had the turbine let go in an AB205 (UH1) at 150ft and 60kts at in a full power climb.

I had the exhaust valve stick open effectively stopping the engine at 60kts and 100ft, just as I'd reduced power to 'reduce stress on the engine'.

Self-same failure occured to student of mine the day after we'd completed his FAA type transition where Engine Failures formed a large part of the training. As a 200 hour TT PPL(H) with about 6 hours on type, he stuck it on the ground without a scratch!:D

There's only one substitute for training, and that's more training! These failures do occur and should be practiced regularly in a well-controlled manner. I'm just glad I don't have to practice these that often in the R22!

JJ

(Edited to correct PP Grammar)