Quote:
Surviving pilot told ATSB investigators the mixture was cut
How could you possibly be certain of this ?, is there proof ?.
Just to clarify the above comment. It's a long time ago now but I interviewed the survivor by phone to Canada after he had been following earlier Pprune discussions that followed some time after the accident. He contacted me by Pprune PM service; hence follow up phone discussion. Yes! Pprune OZ is read in Canada, too.
I had a blazing row with the pilot responsible for the last fatal at Camden, about two weeks before that accident. The subject of the row was a very close go, virtually a rehearsal for the final fatal crash. We all know the PIC was a high time instructor, but he was an accident looking for somewhere to happen. Finally, it did.
The very close go? Was that in a Cessna 310 where the navigation light on the wing tip was shattered with contact with a tree or bushes during a very low level mixture cut also at Camden? There was no incident report filed as far as I know but it was a mighty close call.
Another incident I recall was written up by Mac Job in the former Aviation Safety Digest. Chieftain departing out of Port Lincoln at night with PF under training. The check pilot cut a mixture after take off but never got around to opening the mixture again in order to set the throttle at zero thrust to simulate a feathered prop. The aircraft was unable to maintain a positive rate of climb because of the excessive drag from the windmilling prop and the crew never saw the gently rising terrain they flew into.
Looking now on the bright side of this discussion of mixture cuts versus throttle closure to simulate engine failure after take off in a twin. I note that to date, 6863 Ppruners have viewed the posts since September 2011- as well as the usual suspects who have contributed their views. If nothing else, it means a lot of pilots have now seen both sides of the argument, which is a good thing.