Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Jim Stewart writes:

Have you ever read how to conduct engine-out
training in a real GA aircraft, let alone
experience it?

I've discussed it with pilots, and I know of the problems and false
sense of security that improper simulation in a real aircraft can
provide. Simulation on the ground is more accurate.


No, it isn't, fjukkit.




Engine-out training is typically done by pulling
the throttle to idle, not shutting down the
engine.

When real engines fail, they don't just throttle back to idle, they
stop.


No, they don't fjukkwit.




It's a bit like practicing "landings" without ever actually touching
down.

In the country, the plane is flown down to about
50-100 feet off the deck, depending on terrain
and obstructions, followed by a climb-out and
evaluation of landing site selection and approach
speed and altitude.

So a large part of the experience is missing. In real life, the
landing doesn't end at 50 feet above the ground. And it doesn't
matter much how well you handle it to that point if you mess it up
thereafter.

Good grief, you are an idiot.


This is why simulators are useful. In the simulator, you can fly all
the way to landing, and learn and pratice things that may prevent you
from being killed if it ever happens in real life. But that's too
dangerous in a real airplane.

Engine-out training is one of the most interesting
and satisfying flight training drills there is.

I think that's a matter of opinion.


No, it isn't.



I've never felt that it's particularly dangerous.
But then, I fly and you don't.

How many engine-out emergencies have you experienced?

I thought you knew all about it?

About the curriculum for private pilots? No, I haven't examined it in
depth.

There's not much difference in drag between
a prop in front of an idling engine and a
stopped engine, at least not on my plane.

That's not what other pilots have told me. But perhaps your plane is
different.


From what, every other airplane flying?

You are a moron.


Bertie