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