Instructor with spi simulates engine failure at takeoff. Crashes.

Attributes
ACN	249573
Time
Date	199308
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : t66
State Reference	TX
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	landing other other
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : cfi pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 298 flight time total : 1650 flight time type : 1200
ASRS Report	249573
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot instruction : trainee
Qualification	pilot : student
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : insufficient time
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

After executing a touch and go on runway 12, the throttle was retarded to simulate an engine failure on climb out at approximately 200 AGL. The student held or increased pitch attitude, and airspeed diminished rapidly. I (the instructor) told the student to pitch down. I then lowered the pitch and applied full power. The rate of descent was slowed, but not stopped, and the aircraft touched down approximately 70 ft from the departure end of the runway in a plowed field. The problem arose from simulating a failure at too low of an altitude and from failing to maintain proper airspeed. The corrective action of decreasing pitch and increasing power was applied but it was applied too late to enable recovery. My decision to fail the engine at that particular location was improperly influenced by my familiarity with and overconfidence with the aircraft. My (false) confidence in the student's ability also contributed. Had the event occurred at a different airport, we would have landed on the runway and no damage would have been done. Or if we had been at a higher altitude, we probably could have flown out of the near stall. Of if I had immediately applied power instead of the short delay.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR WITH SPI SIMULATES ENG FAILURE AT TKOF. CRASHES.

Narrative: AFTER EXECUTING A TOUCH AND GO ON RWY 12, THE THROTTLE WAS RETARDED TO SIMULATE AN ENG FAILURE ON CLBOUT AT APPROX 200 AGL. THE STUDENT HELD OR INCREASED PITCH ATTITUDE, AND AIRSPD DIMINISHED RAPIDLY. I (THE INSTRUCTOR) TOLD THE STUDENT TO PITCH DOWN. I THEN LOWERED THE PITCH AND APPLIED FULL PWR. THE RATE OF DSCNT WAS SLOWED, BUT NOT STOPPED, AND THE ACFT TOUCHED DOWN APPROX 70 FT FROM THE DEP END OF THE RWY IN A PLOWED FIELD. THE PROB AROSE FROM SIMULATING A FAILURE AT TOO LOW OF AN ALT AND FROM FAILING TO MAINTAIN PROPER AIRSPD. THE CORRECTIVE ACTION OF DECREASING PITCH AND INCREASING PWR WAS APPLIED BUT IT WAS APPLIED TOO LATE TO ENABLE RECOVERY. MY DECISION TO FAIL THE ENG AT THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION WAS IMPROPERLY INFLUENCED BY MY FAMILIARITY WITH AND OVERCONFIDENCE WITH THE ACFT. MY (FALSE) CONFIDENCE IN THE STUDENT'S ABILITY ALSO CONTRIBUTED. HAD THE EVENT OCCURRED AT A DIFFERENT ARPT, WE WOULD HAVE LANDED ON THE RWY AND NO DAMAGE WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE. OR IF WE HAD BEEN AT A HIGHER ALT, WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE FLOWN OUT OF THE NEAR STALL. OF IF I HAD IMMEDIATELY APPLIED PWR INSTEAD OF THE SHORT DELAY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.