Bill,

If this works for you, I think that is one aspect. However, there is too much evidence in the numerous Lancair accident profiles to suggest that a blanket recommendation that a turnback to the airfield at low level after a complete engine failure is massively unwise. I consider low level to be not less than 500’. If terrain and or development is an issue, it’s got to be higher than 500’. I don’t want to drop in uninvited.

As much as I don’t like to disagree with my fellow listers, I must to do so on this matter, as it is too important especially for new entry/inexperienced Lancair pilots to accept without understanding the fact that they are flying so close to the edge in such a manoeuvre there is NO room for error, pilot induced or not. Such an error can almost be guaranteed to produce a visit to the mortician.

To suggest that timid pilots ( I’m one), can practice this manoeuvre “without risk” is downright dangerous, especially if you are suggesting this practice at low level.

The accident profiles of Lancairs even without an apparent turnback indicate the stall/spin scenario is extremely high, and to be candid, suggesting the manoeuvre be a part of normal EFTO briefing is, in my view, folly.

Scott ( Grayhawk) is correct I believe, in his suggestion that a mindset along the lines he suggested is vital as to how to deal with any failure after take-off. I believe however, that the environment aspect shifts from airfield to airfield, and it is necessary to profile the landscape into the mindset for each one. In some cases, where houses are snuggled into the fence line, it’s almost impossible to know beforehand the best case for the situation, but you can be sure there will be a street or road under somewhere ahead, with limited lateral manoeuvring to reach it, which has at least some better chance of forced landing than a low level turnback.

Cheers.

 

Dom

 

VH-CZJ