All that aside I've never had an instructor or ATO do a surprise move, there's no need to, they can advise they are going to and then do it.
Reckon? I flew half an hour of continual FLWOP's once (no dramas) but when I set up the aircraft to create the engine failure on the way back to the aerodrome without prior notice, everything fell apart.
"Siht! What's happening??!?"
"I think we've just had an engine failure..."
"Whadda we do? Whadda we do? Whadda we do??!!"
It's turning into a sad state for aviation when we refuse to conduct emergency procedures because we're scared the student will fcuk it up. How do you expect students to learn if you have to give them two minutes notice the engine will fail?
A little pressure can produce much different outcomes.
I will prep my students by reviewing the EFATO actions immediately before the take-off of TGL that it will occur and then announce the action with "engine failure". Still interesting how many need to be prompted to close both throttles when one fails while still on the runway in a twin.
Sure, it can be argued that the ATO's judgement may have been deficient in conducting the exercise under less than ideal conditions, but this was a CPL candidate, not a 50hr PPL. The failure was dealt with correctly by all accounts and the failure was initiated above the TOSS, which in itself has a safety margin over the stall.
I rue the day when the industry accepts the student dictating how the instructor will conduct assessments.