Have just read through 4 pages of this thread.
Surely it is not as confusing as you are all making it?
Personally I would say this.
We are talking about an early engine failure case here.
*If my company has a published Emeregency Turn procedure, I will follow it.
*If it does not I will do what I briefed.
*What I brief depends on the airport and what surrounds it, terrain wise.
*If I have an engine failure I am going to declare a mayday and can therefore go where I like. I will however tell ATC so they can move others out of my way.
* I will remain responsible for terrain clearance.
*In an emergency, noise abatement procedures can be ignored.
*If I was planning on going straight ahead then that is what I would brief. If there was any terrain ahead then I would brief that.
Surely everyone does that?
You look at the plate, you see what is around, you work out what you are going to do in an engine failure case and you brief it?
Why the confusion? Some people posting here sound like they only brief "straight ahead" or "emergency turn" procedures.
Surely good airmanship means you would say more than just "I will fly straight ahead"?
I would normally brief something like
"if we have an engine failure I will climb straight ahead to MSA (state), then I will ask for radar vectors back to the airport for an ILS (or whatever) approach. If we have more time or we require more time I will fly to XXX navaid and take up the hold".
What is so confusing? Its an emergency, we do what we need to and what we want to to ensure the aircraft remains safe. And we brief it in advance to avoid any confusion.
Or am I missing the point here?