Folks,
I would have thought (how naive of me) that the number of fatalities we have on record during EFATO training, alone, would be enough to illustrate we have a serious problem.
A quick and dirty analysis says we kill more students and instructors in dual twin training than dual single training ??
Obviously, many of you on this thread still haven't joined the dots ??
As to the most recent accident at Camden, read the ATSB report, and then decide whose description of events was the more credible.
The ATSB leaves that up to you!
Although (curiously) not mentioned in the report, eye witnesses reported that the Twin Comanche's right engine was feathered, and in the pics in the report this seems to be so ----- was this smart ??
Was this training flight in conformity with the CAAP?? - NO
Was this flight in conformity with the "informal compliance instructions" of CASA YSBK?? - YES
Was this a great display of airmanship and CBS (aka common bloody sense) - What do you think??
The pilot (instructor) must be the greatest pilot since Pontius, from 400', stalled, rolled through 120 degrees, spun, recovered vertical nose down and recovered (with full tips) to wings level and almost "normal" attitude --- all in 400', in a Twin Comanche ---- or anything else, for that matter??
It's only a short report (sadly), make up your own mind.
Isn't it about time we stopped killing people "practicing" maneuvers for which the aircraft is not certified --- and often contrary to the AFM -- AFM compliance which is required by law --- despite anything said to the contrary by CASA FOIs.
Tootle pip!!
PS 1: -FTS, no, I wasn't referring/alluding to you ------ but please ignore the "recommendation" of a ratbag FOI ---- and just do as the NTSB/FAA says, anything more is a lousy risk/reward equation --- but rational risk management has never been Australian aviation's strong point ----- as born out by the record, there for all to see.
PS 2: Another ripper from CASA YSBK was "demanding" that the stall/attitude warning and stick pusher on Metro III/23 be disabled and the aircraft pulled into a full stall, to "comply with the CAO". It took a very strongly worded letter from the aircraft manufacturer to pull the plug on this suicidal nonsense.
PS 3: I worked for an airline whose rules suited me just fine --- shutting down an engine (except in a genuine emergency --- and before you ask, this was before simulators better than the Link IV ), was prohibited below 3000', and then only in daylight, VMC. Given said airline's reputation for training excellence and safe operation, is there a message here?? ---- all their aircraft ARE certified to continue after an EFATO at V1 or after.
PS 4: Craig Butson's ( Polar Air) troubles all started after a refusal to operate to the instructions of an FOI --- instructions that were contrary to the CAAP and all the other CASA recommendations about precautions to be taken during any asymmetric training.