In the Flight Safety Australia article, the captain of the Gimli Glider made the point that in Air Canada they were given no training on what to do if both engines fail on a twin jet. He saw this as a failing in pilot training. He said that "year after year, pilots attend training and learn the same stuff" - his feeling was that pilots should get more of these unusual situations. He said that if they had practiced in the simulator even once, it probably would have made it easier for the pilots to fly the aircraft deadstick.
He said that a few months after the incident Scandinavian Airlines had made it mandatory for pilots to perform a successful dead stick landing through the simulator before they were endorsed to operate any newtype of aircraft. I agree.
This type of lateral thinking seems beyond the airline industry in Australia and more so, beyond the CASA regulators who think these things only happen overseas - therefore outside the Australian comfort zone. So in the simulator here, we see the age old CASA approved engine failures at V1 ad nauseum, plus the predictable insistence on rigid cockpit "support calls". It really does not matter if you crash vertically in the simulator providing you don't forget to say "1000 to go" before hitting the ground. As Captain Bob Pearson says - pilots should be required to practice these unusual situations like the dead stick landing in the simulator. He is so right.