A big part of the problem in training of the engine fail scenario in ab initio flight instruction is, IMO, the fact that it is almost invariably directly linked to passing the flight test forced approach exercise.
This exercise starts with the examiner closing the throttle and announcing "simulated engine failure" so that is generally the way the exercise is presented in training.
The problem is this scenario, a perfectly normally running engine suddenly stops producing all power is the
least likely engine failure scenario in the real world.
Most real world engine failures, accident stats show around 80 %, are caused by an action or inaction on the part of the pilot with the majority involving carb icing and fuel exhaustion/mis-selection/contamination.
In addition for every total engine failure incident/accident reports suggest that there are at least 3 partial power losses.
The "AHH HAA" moment for me was a crash of a locally based C 172 flown by a newly licensed PPL. His engine failed over very unforgiving terrain. He made a successful forced approach to a nasty bit of a clear area. The airplane was wrecked and there were some injuries but everyone involved recover fully. The general consensus was his forced approach was pretty good and it was unlikely that any of us could have flown it in such a way as to get a better outcome.
But the killer detail was when the wreck was salvaged. It had 12 gals on fuel in the right tank and no fuel in the left tank and the fuel selector was set to left tank.
I talked to the pilot and he admitted that as soon as the engine failed he reverted to flight test mode. The engine never restarts in the flight test, it is all about flying the perfect forced approach. His instructor never emphasized the engine fail cause check drills and so he defaulted to flying the forced approach when all that was required was to turn the fuel selector 90 degrees and full power would have been restored........
This student was not taught by me, but he could have been. This accident made me start looking into accident stats for an indication of real world engine failures and forced a fundamental re-evaluation of how I prepared students for
engine power loss, not just how to pass the forced approach exercise on the PPL flight test
The result is I now teach the Forced Approach lesson in 3 parts
Part 1: How not to cause or abet in causing the engine to fail. This starts on the very first lesson with an discussion about fuel expressed in "time in the tanks". Every subsequent flight will start with the student telling me what duration the fuel load will give and it continues with adding detail to the " so whats" of the what and why of our actions in the pre flight inspection and the run up checks. Also introduced at a very early stage is checklist discipline including effective flow checks
Part 2: Attaining proficiency with all the emergency procedures. especially the vital actions memory drills for the big ticket emergencies including fire ( cabin and engine), EFATO, and loss of engine fire, and loss of visual references
Part 3: This is the actual forced approach lesson. It starts with the aircraft trimmed for best glide a suitable field selected and the aircraft pointed at the field. At this point the power loss cause check is carried out as touch drills. Failure to complete an effective cause check stops the exercise right there and results in a debrief and restart. The first few lessons will be the traditional full loss of power with a glide approach to a suitable landing area. After that I will mix things up by
- Initiating the loss of power by simulating an engine fire requiring an engine shut down
- Restoring full power when the cause check is done
- Instead of closing the throttle, reduce the RPM to a lower value, once with just enough power to sustain level flight and once with less than enough power to sustain level flight