The issue of 20% of power is not the problem. The problem is the -40% of power if you don't shut the dead engine down properly. A single engined aircraft would probably preferable if only because they do glide rather than fall and there is no degredation of control with the engine out. So long as you don't stall, your chances are actually pretty good regardless of water, forest, rough ground, etc. It is the though of a dead-stick at night that gives me the heebie-geebies.Look at the new generation of twins. Simple FADEC Diesel engined controls with auto-feathering and consumption of 50 lt/hr of Jet A1 makes it as cheap on fuel as C152!!! http://www.diamond-air.at/en/products/DA42/

"I have seen a couple if AAIB reports where the examiner forgot to reset the circuit breaker."Exactly. Pulling the gear breaker in a retract is about as smart as practicing an engine failure in a single by pulling the mixture to cutoff.When an examiner or instructor pulls silly stunts like that, they are taking a real chance that the simulated emergency will turn into a real emergency. You can simulate these things in a safer way, and still get the training benefit. Tim13

I don't really get your concerns-since he pulled the breaker:The gear would not come down!If I went and landed the plane in that condition:a) I am pretty stupid:( he is doubly stupid since he knows why the gear won't come downc) There are two pilots in the plane-and neither are checking for 3 green?!Regardless of your concerns the problem was located-and I considered it a good training experience. Pulling the mixture (I assume you mean in a single) is a different animal.Every year the accident reports are filled with many more pilots landing gear up (usually from distractions) than examiners pulling the circuit breakers-but I don't think that means that retractable landing gear is the culprit-I'd say the examiners/pilots who forgot to put the breaker back in (especially after just pulling it) fall into that same category.As one that has had more than my fair share of emergencies in my single I found it was the "combo" factor that could always get you e.g. more than one problem at a time. It certainly would be a shame to be stressed by an engine failure/instrument conditions, and land gear up because of not checking the circuit breakers during the stress of the situation.In any case-that was what happened on my checkride-don't shoot the messenger-and I guess don't take your multi/commercial/instrument where I did-cause he does this to every applicant:-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Assuiming you train on a regular basis-I'd take the 20% power over nothing....One of the things I use msfs for-a lot cheaper and less hard on the engines to fail-thanks to D Lee I even have a real Baron Quad to practice with!Yes the fadecs are cool-it is not just the new generation of twins that can get them. We are considering moving to fadec when our Baron's engines need to be replaced.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Having suffered three engine failures of varying degrees in twins I will add my bit ;-)The second was at 100 feet in the climbout at grosse weight and it was apparent to me that the bird wasnt going to climb if I shut the engine down.I reckoned the engine was still producing 30% power so I elected to keep it going until I had some clear air beneith me.Incase there was an almighty bang I kept one hand firmly on the prop lever ready to feather and eventually shut her down at 1000 feet agl.The engine was new and it was discovered that all the rocker shafts had been incorrectly torqued three of them having sheared.Having discovered that the engine manufacturers replaced the unit in a week with a brand new engine.A fighter pilot friend questioned any attempt at attempting a climb in a light twin with an engine failure.Most light twins will happily fly level all day with one engine shut down and his suggestion was to establish a level cruise even if 300 or 400 feet agl.Its the attempted climb which kills.At most airfields you can happily fly a 400 foot circuit or head out in a straight line in single engine cruise nudging it up with the trim.If there is terrain chances are you wont outclimb it anyway so maybe the high accident rate blame lies with the training in light twins which should look at other options rather than the dreaded blue line climb?With all the statistics on single engine versus multi I still feel a lot safer at night, over water, fog or hard IMC with two engines buzzing away.Some how I have a certain mistrust with all things mechanical ;-)Peterhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/130072.jpg

I can tell you what happens when you try to start a turbo Commander up with a smiley still in! Pretty stupid but then again we watched a Citation start up and begin taxi with the tow bar still hooked up. Made it to the run up before tower caught it.

>When an examiner or instructor pulls silly stunts like that,>they are taking a real chance that the simulated emergency>will turn into a real emergency. You can simulate these>things in a safer way, and still get the training benefit. >Why?The circuit breaker is no different than the gear switch. Why suppose this simulated emergency is going to turn into a real emergency? Do we all of the sudden have catastophic circuit breaker failures? It's common to use a push/pull circuit breaker for power interuption.I see nothing wrong, with the instructors actions. In the Seminole, my instructor would pull a fuel selector knob located between the seats to off. But I'd usually see his actions out of the corner of my eye, reach back & move the lever. I don't believe this is any more serious than the breaker.L.Adamson

Hi Peter,You didn't have a real engine failure in that Diamond now did ya? BTW how was it on one anyway? I am really looking forward to seeing some of the diesel engined Diamonds make their way to our shores soon.

L.Adamson I'm with Geofa on this one. I'd hate to have my instructor do any of those things you guys mentioned above while I

>L.Adamson I'm with Geofa on this one. I'd hate to have my>instructor do any of those things you guys mentioned above>while I

"I guess don't take your multi/commercial/instrument where I did-cause he does this to every applicant"No need to, been there, done that, with the MEI thrown in for good measure.I guess that we all just have different opinions of what we consider safe practices. Every year, people land perfectly good airplanes with the gear still tucked away, and all systems operating normally. Pulling the gear breaker is just an additional needless step, that starts you down the path to the gear up landing, in my opinion.Tim13

Very dissapointed from the initial claims of 206 kts at 12000 feet.Low level at 70% pwr saw no better than 127kts IAS higher level gives a TAS of little more than 155 kts or 50 kts down on the initial claims with a reflective drop on the fuel/range figures as well.Single engine took an amazing level of rudder pressure to such an extent that you felt you were about to break the peddles.For me it was a let down especially on the lack of speed although other aspects like the automation, checks and character of the aircraft especially its looks excelledPeter

>"I guess don't take your multi/commercial/instrument where I>did-cause he does this to every applicant">>No need to, been there, done that, with the MEI thrown in for>good measure.>>I guess that we all just have different opinions of what we>consider safe practices. Every year, people land perfectly>good airplanes with the gear still tucked away, and all>systems operating normally. Pulling the gear breaker is just>an additional needless step, that starts you down the path to>the gear up landing, in my opinion.>>Tim13TimReally its something any pilot can do especially if hes distracted by poor weather vis or other unusual events.Why the mass of bells and whistles which no one notices anyway.There should be a voice command attached to an altimeter/radar alt saying " GEAR GEAR GEAR" why such ancient technology like a buzzer for something which is so easy to overlook and has such expensive consequencies?peter

Like this?http://www.airworlduk.com/gearalert.htmlhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Thanks Peter... I knew you'd give me a straight scoop on it.