------- seems CASA now has it covered, but maybe no one reads CAAPs
Seabreeze,
People read the CAAPs alright, but then ignore same, because "they know better".
More particularly, "some" FOIs make it quite clear that the CAAPs are ONLY advisory, but "the law" must be complied with, and the various CAOs "require" an "engine failure" ----- and generally conducted in aircraft NOT certified to survive an engine failure on takeoff.
"The Law" does not recognize zero thrust, goes the twisted black letter law logic.
As far as industry pilots are concerned, just have a look at the number of posts on other threads that still not only condone pulling mixtures or shutting the fuel off at low level, but positively encourage same ----- and some of them go on to become FOIs, with the same attitude, now reinforced by their "authority" as an FOI.
What I observe on a regular basis illustrates that we have collectively leaned nothing from the steadily rising toll of fatalities ---- including the Brazilia in Darwin.
Tootle pip!!
Re. the Camden fatal mentioned, the PIC was well known for doing what he did in this accident, that finally took his life. He had been counseled on the subject ---- but the accident proved that it is not easy to teach an old dog new tricks.