Spot on Helimutt.
Part of my training was to fly with no tacho. (needles) visible and to manage RPM you did just that, reduced RPM very gently by raising the lever (remembering that there is a lag) and when you get a 'beep' lower it slightly. Have to say that RPM awareness without ref. to tachs is MUCH easier in 300's, even a two hour improver can hear the difference, much harder in R22 but not impossible.
I have to say that I totally agree with the view that the most important thing is for the student to get to a good height (10 ft or less) with low forward AS (it slides best foward!) and it is then unlikely that serious injuries will be sustained (as far as can be predicted) whatever pilot action follows (or not).
Too many low time pilots and students have the wits scared out of them by instructors (although they'll rarely admit it) demonstrating EOL after EOL like a kid with a new toy. They'll sometimes develop an aversion to the word "Autos" when most of them are terminated 'full on to the ground'. (Oh god, not again....!) Too much focus appears to be placed on engine failure when it is far more likely that the student will get himself into vortex than to suffer this.
(Two accidents very recently in NZ may well have been due to vortex condtions but no engine 'failures' (more often poor carb heat management is the cause of stoppage anyway) appear to have occurred for a much longer period).
Sure, some EOL's should be done, and dual of course, but how many demonstrations of full vortex recovery are done during PPL? 1 or 2 maybe, (if any) reinforced by 5 or 6 from incipient stage? I say this because I beleive the number of both emergency procedures should be about equal and whilst there may be need for more vortex recoveries, less EOL's full on to the ground would bring much benefit -
Less stress on the Helis.
Perhaps less insurance (dream on...!)
Less risk of rollover and all the associated dangers of EOL.
Students much happier to enter auto, control RPM, choose agood site then get the most crucial part done well without fearing the ending and perhaps performing poorly throughout the approach because of that fear.
What's the point of embedding an aversion to a life saver?
The focus should be only centred on getting to that ideal height/speed right through training and one day, maybe during a future check ride it may be allowed to just slip onto the ground as easy as pie, no fuss or drama.
And yes, the Heli IS expendable over one's life and I think that less would be lost overall if 'full on' EOL demo. were rarer. Maybe more unlucky vicitims of engine stoppage would survive if they were taught with more attention paid to getting to less than 10 ft and almost zero AS.
Anyway, just my view.