BEAGS: I didn't explain it too well.
In practise, from a failure at Vtoss in a Seneca 1, the average stude cannot get through the drills and start to climb without descending 100-150ft, even at training weights. Because of this I add a
height to the go/nogo decision; historically I've used 200ft.
As I wrote my earlier mammoth offering it dawned on me that it would be easier for the stude to have one height gate to deal with - following the KISS principle let's call it Ach. Engine failure below Ach, whether taking off or landing, leads to a landing. What do people think?
Why not just operate the a/c such that....
The aircraft should always be operated at/above Vyse on the approach until Ach so that a go-around can be flown without needing to accelerate if there's a failure. Following a failure at 500ft (eg) on the approach there are 3 choices:[list=1][*]Asymmetric go-around followed by pre-meditated asymm approach and landing[*]Continue the approach whilst trying to identify/verify/feather[*]Continue the approach without drills[/list=1] My humble opinion is that the safest option is #1. I know from experience that many people coc& up a simulated failure below Ach and reach horrendous attitudes whilst trying to reach the runway from 250ft, I dread to think what they'd do from 500ft.
OKTAS8: Great minds think alike (or fools seldom differ!).
'Agree totally: what DO you do below Vtoss & above Ach or vice versa? I discuss this and usually we end up agreeing that logically you can dive to increase speed, or bleed the excess speed whilst going through the drills.
The bottom line is that below Vtoss the actions are: control, throttles shut, lower nose. Once this is done you can use available power to reach the best landing area - in practise this MAY mean that you find you can reach Vyse and climb. Having just re-read the previous sentence it sounds too positive - has anyone found a better way of expressing it?
(BTW, my only real engine failure was a slow affair at FL100.)
HFD