take over, lower the nose, mixture rich and the engine fires back to life instantly?
Well that may have been the plan but it didn't work that time
.
They didn't have a windmilling prop, the prop stops windmilling at airspeeds lower than I'd personally be prepared to be in that configuration.
With the prop RPM close to or at zero, placing the mixture to rich will not restart the engine.
Does a Seneca 3 have impulse coupling or starter vibrator ?.
By allowing the propeller of the `failed` engine to windmill all the way around the circuit the injector lines were starved of fuel and when the instructor opened the mixture control to rich after touch-down for the touch and go, there was fuel starvation.
No, I don't think so.
I will not criticise the instructor you have spoken of above, with confidence I can say:
* I would not put myself into that situation, and,
* to date, I have not had a problem conducting multi engine training, using the time old tried and proven methods taught to me.
You are not comparing apples with apples are you, the situation you have described would suggest someone didn't think through the situation.
That accident appears to have more to do with the touch and go than the EFATO training.
The EFATO training was a great success, the continuation of circuit training after delivering the aircraft safely to the runway went poorly.
Also note that at RPMs below 1000 odd you may not be able to feather the prop.
Quote:
take over, lower the nose, mixture rich and the engine fires back to life instantly.
What beautiful confidence.
How so ?.