Lonewolf 50
Firstly multi-engine pilots are not "idiots" in my view and, while how you arrived at such a conclusion may be fascinating for some, it holds no interest for me. The comment itself was delusive and the connection, however made, does not reflect my own belief. Secondly, my career is well known among those with whom I have served and I feel no obligation, or interest, in qualifying this to you. My comments will stand or fall on their own merit.
My observation is based on the fact that in multi-engine operations (MEO) the process of response to an engine failure contrasts with that practiced in single engine operations. This contrast centres about the need to verify the engine failure in MEO and which process involves steps which (for the previously stated reasons) are unrequired in a single.
This consideration accounts for how it may be possible to encounter a delayed response to the control of Nr in a double engine failure scenario in a twin engine helicopter (something I have witnessed numerous simes in the sim). Bleating on about Nr control is irrelevant in this context because my previous comments presuppose this as a trained response. In other words, Nr control in response to a total loss of power, is axiomatic, or supposed to be, and which was (for me) not the issue. It is what tends to happen before Nr is controlled that I am highlighting.
If you cannot appreciate that in MEO there is a need to "verify" the malfunction (not at the expense of responding to Nr control, but which consideration in the specific scenario mentioned may in fact lead to just that) and that this same process of verification is more readily accomplished in singles, then clearly there is nothing more I can say to help you appreciate my observation.
Last edited by Grenville Fortescue; 17th Dec 2013 at 16:10.