Think he means like how to conduct the actual simulation, haha. What speed? How far along the runway? Aural command to conduct it or cutting an actual engine? etc...etc...
That is correct. Some instructors will simulate an engine failure by closing one engine to idle at approximately 50 knots into the take off roll. This has the danger of causing a massive yaw before the average candidate can prevent it; plus the added risk (it has happened) of the pilot under test delaying even for a second of closing the throttle of the other (live) engine. There is no room for an error by the candidate or the instructor.
The side strain and possible structural damage on the landing gear can be significant and the probability of the testing officer having to salvage the situation is high. The instructor might know which throttle he intend to retard to "simulate" the engine failure but the candidate won't know until it happens.
Because there is no margin for error in this exercise the candidate must react instantly to apply the correct rudder as well as rapidly close the live throttle to idle. The risk of mis-handling is high and the risk of damaging the landing gear if the candidate is slow to control the yaw, is IMHO, quite unacceptable.
If the flight test exercise only requires the instructor to call "stop" which in turn only requires the candidate to close
both throttles and brake to a stop, then that is fine.
Now to another subject contained in the Flight Test Form. Item 40 requires a candidate to demonstrate a short landing in his light twin. As the Vref speed for the type of aircraft, AUW and configuration is published in the AFM and is approximately 1.3VS for the configuration, there should be no difference in airspeed regardless of available runway length. Therefore a "short" field landing speed should by definition be the same as a normal landing i.e. not below the AFM speed. Thus the requirement to demonstrate a "short" landing is superfluous as technique doesn't change.
On the other hand if "short" landing means plonking the wheels on the landing threshold, and mashing the brakes which may not have anti-skid systems then that introduces a new hazard. Burst tyres. Who pays?
There is no requirement during a type rating (eg Boeing 737 or Airbus) to demonstrate a "short" landing; because there being no such thing. So what is the CASA rationale requiring demonstration of a "short" landing in a light twin? Does that mean knocking off 10 knots on final below Vref to make it a "short" landing and thus invalidating the AFM speed?
Pprune readers constructive comments welcomed