Multi Training - Shutting Down An Engine

[Beefitarian]

[accent=Gaelic]IT'S NOT A SKIRT YA GIT! IT'S A KILT!! [/accent]

[5x5]

[accent=Gaelic]IT'S NOT A SKIRT YA GIT! IT'S A KILT!! [/accent]

Aye laddy, but when you've got knickers underneath, it's a skirt, Nancy.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Remarks
When I shut down the engine to simulate failure, the student panicked and sprayed me with urine while allowing the aircraft to enter a spin. Taking control with my left eye stinging and closed. I heroically recovered but could not maintain altitude. I landed gear up in a field striking a fence. Aircraft damaged beyond economic repair.

.

[Airmanship Police]

So if you're flying along, shutting an engine down and can't restart it, wouldn't that be considered a real engine failure now? No emergency declared? No firetrucks or anything in case he botches the landing?

Seems a little negligent to me. And if I was the student, I would make a complaint to the CFI, wouldn't pay for the lesson and would NEVER fly again with that instructor!!

[Doc]

So if you're flying along, shutting an engine down and can't restart it, wouldn't that be considered a real engine failure now? No emergency declared? No firetrucks or anything in case he botches the landing?

Seems a little negligent to me. And if I was the student, I would make a complaint to the CFI, wouldn't pay for the lesson and would NEVER fly again with that instructor!!

NEGLIGENT is putting yourself in a position where you might have to end up declaring an emergency, when no emergency should have occurred in the first place
There is NO reason this archaic practice should still be in place! None! TC themselves have killed some of their own pilots doing EXACTLY this.
I guarantee I have had more engine failures than you have.....and there is NO reason to demonstrate an actual shut down in training. None.
It is a very stupid, dangerous and unnecessary practice.
And before you take up arms to defend the practice as safe, I can name three pilots, all of whom had more experience than most here who DIED doing exactly this. GROW UP TC!

[Colonel Sanders]

What I have noticed about inexperienced people
(e.g. low-time pilots) is that:

they don't know, what they don't know

This may sound obvious, but the implication of
the above is that they don't know when they are
taking on a boatload of risk, and doing something
that has a measurable probablility of severely
injuring or killing them.

Something might not look scary, when in fact it
most certainly is.

Other times, something might look scary as hell,
when in fact it is not.

Experience teaches you many valuable lessons -
if you pay attention, and survive. Many people
do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqmomTUVsAw

[Doc]

Purposely coming in on one engine is a stupid idea, for several obvious reasons.

However, doing an in-flight shutdown (and restarting it before starting an approach) is good experience. Also, if I recall correctly, it is required for the multi-engine rating.

So you can't restart it, therefore you are purposely coming in on one engine, which is, as you stated "a stupid idea...." Brought about by the stupidity of "purposely" shutting it down in the first place??
How would this be a "good experience" to anyone? Another shining example of TC stupidity!

In an effort to establish one iota of credibility on your behalf, how many actual inflight failures have you, personally had, and how did a training shutdown assist you in your ultimate survival?

[Doc]

Sorry kids

I can't stand stupidity.

I have NO use for those who condone it.

Shutting down a healthy engine just to "show" some student what it's like is folly.

It's why we have simulators.

[Colonel Sanders]

Doc: unfortunately, generations speak different languages.

What you said: "Don't be stupid"

What they heard:

[Doc]

Doc: unfortunately, generations speak different languages.

What you said: "Don't be stupid"

What they heard:

Methinks you are correct. Frightening.

[iflyforpie]

My first in-flight shut down (during my multi-rating) nearly resulted in a single-engine landing. Other than looking at the prop and thinking 'this is cool', it did not give me a fuzzy feeling and felt no different performance-wise than setting zero-thrust.

We don't shut down the engine on singles so that we can experience a 'true' forced approach, so why would we do it on anemic and cantankerous piston twins?

[Colonel Sanders]

My first in-flight shut down (during my multi-rating) nearly resulted in a single-engine landing

My in-flight engine shutdown DID result in an engine-out
landing, during my multi training.

I was not impressed.

[Doc]

There are those who will argue that anything mandated by TC, is both safe and intelligent. Pity. Legal is not always safe, and illegal is not always dangerous. WHY is this still a requirement?? It has no value, and has the potential to really bite you in the ass. Perhaps the supporters of the practice need to view that video one more time? Keep in mind....your "INSTRUCTOR" probably has 25 hours of multi engine time. There's a confidence builder.

[Big Pistons Forever]

For the record TC no longer requires an actual inflight shut down as part of the initial ME rating. I stand by my comment that any instructor that performs an actual in flight shut down today, is being very stupid.

[TC Aviator]

BPF is correct. TC no longer condones or requires that a student for the Multi-Engine Class Rating have experienced an in-flight shutdown and restart. The change occurred in early 2010 and was long overdue. Whatever might have been learned by the experience was not worth the risk involved.

[Colonel Sanders]

Stopping the prop on an engine on a twin is
a bit like stopping the prop on an engine on
a single.

You're making one heckuva commitment.

I'm not saying it's always a bad thing, but
it's very high risk, and I'm not sure it often
passes a basic cost/benefit analysis, as TC
Aviator opines.

Fundamentally, it comes down to people not
understanding risk, and unknowingly taking
on a lot more than they can sometimes handle.

[Beefitarian]

My instructor had me shut down the engine on a nice day in a 172 decades ago. It was a total nonevent. Admittedly it was neat and interesting but... No training value in my opinion.

If it had not started we would have landed in a field. Maybe good forched approach experience but then what?

Best case we would have had to walk some where to find a phone. I did not know people that just owned personal cellular phones back then.

Worst case we'd crash hard. Maybe die, or one us could lose an eye and our medical. I bet TC would never let me try to be like Roscoe.

[Ehlectric]

Also, if I recall correctly, it is required for the multi-engine rating.

It used to be required. It's not required any more.

This is correct, how we practice coming in on one engine, is just a throttle cut and then a simulated feather when called for.

[ragbagflyer]

I've found a lot of value in in flight shut downs whether in a twin or a single, piston or turbine. I've never shut down in a place where I couldn't land on a runway or body of water. Without a high level sim (FlightSafety) doing it on the ground just isn't the same. The mind doesn't react the same way as when is actually happens in reality, and after seeing it happen in reality once or twice it becomes MUCH less intimidating and easier to get on with the task at hand. You also see first hand what zero thrust feels like. I personally never would have guessed that loosing the exhaust thrust on a feathered Caravan would double the sink rate. I'm not even sure that the sim demonstrates that does it?

Would those of you hear arguing against shut downs also argue against helicopter schools that practice autos right to the ground? Perhaps there is more risk in actually shutting down an engine, but our jobs are full of risks. I think a few more dinged trainers is worth a few less smoking holes in the ground filled with passengers.

How often do we hear people lament the dumbing down of aviation? Well this is it folks! We are already well on our way to having a whole generation of 'pilots' who are deathly afraid of the machines that they are supposed to be in control of.

[triplese7en]

It seems everyone on here is vehemently against shutting down an engine on a training flight. I do agree that there are risks associated with shutting down an engine in flight but there are also risks associated with stalling and/or spinning an aircraft... should those not be included in the training? In the US, spin training is not required to get a private license, as far as I know. I'm not exactly sure where I stand on the matter. An engine can be "simulated" failed but there is a difference between simulated and actual—just the same as there is a large difference between simulated IMC and actual IMC.

Every time a new engine is put on a Metroliner it requires an in-flight shutdown before being released to the line. Line pilots are the ones that do the test flight and shutdown the engine. If there is a malfunction then they possibly will be landing single engine. Are these line pilots "stupid" for shutting down the engine?