Isn't it a known fact that there are more fatalities from this 'sort' of training than actual engine failures?
I think you will find there is more to training accidents in twins than closing the mixture. Quite often it involves risks being taken at low level (that could be simulated at higher altitudes), not setting correct zero thrust settings, instructor failure to promptly correct student errors just to name a few. Check the CAAP on Multi-Engine training for more info.
Granted, for either single or twins, mixture cuts are unaccceptable at low level, but if you are worried about the engine not starting when fuel is reintroduced, there are bigger issues at play.
Seneca 1 Manual Operating Tip 15:
Experience has shown that the training advantage gained by pulling a mixture control or turning off the fuel to simulate engine failure at low altitude is not worth the risk assumed. Therefore, it is recommended that instead of using either of these procedures to simulate loss of power at low altitude, the throttle be retarded slowly to idle position.
AV8tr and OS, at higher altitude, there is no issue.
A37575,
Archerfield procedures where Pyro trains (not my AD) have a "Code 1" request where you can simulate EFATO as long as recovery is made with enough room before the airfield fence (essentially). I'm sure you can do this with 1400m on the main runway. The idea of a practise EFATO with my students is to have a suitable area available and see if the student can exercise the judgement and actions necessary to make the selected zone (or another suitable one if they so choose) under a pressure situation. In my view there is definitely benefit to be gained from this exercise. If your throttle is at risk of breaking from being advanced and retarded I think you need to find a new LAME. Can you qoute the source?
It is common for some instructors
Bit of an oxymoron but agree with your logic on this one....not with mixture at low level.