In article SoaringXCellence writes:
On Wednesday, May 14, 2014 6:03:19 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:

But I thought that the engine had died? Is this just training to pass th=
e PTS? What if the right wing had dropped in the stall?

The more correct term is "Approach to landing stall" it does not pre-suppos=
e that the engine has failed. There have been several DPEs in the area tha=
t follow the PTS, but all admit that the true power off, approach to land s=
hould be just as you imagine: trying to stretch the glide from a failed eng=
ine. THat does seem to be the real problem to solve.

I believe the issue is that, while engines are quite reliable, pilots still
get distracted and too slow in the pattern. Having them know how to recover
from the stall and immediately get climbing is important.

Power off gliding to maximum range is less important - the power planes
generally don't have polar charts that show the effects of weight on their
glide, and don't mention minimum sink at all.

There is another task for the commercial pilot rating that requires a preci=
sion 180-degree power off landing. Many power pilots have a real challenge=
making it happen and need many attempts to learn how to do it. Glider pil=
ots do it every landing!!

It seems to be an expected ability of ASEL private pilots, though, to be
able to make the field on a check ride, BFR, or at other times the instructor
is getting bored.

"Your engine just quit." Shortly later, "your flaps won't extend".

It might be more difficult for the pilot who is number 4 for landing when
abeam the numbers, and the pattern extends one or two miles downwind.

Alan