Ibra wrote:
I think off airport landing in a SEP is well survivable as long as you are visual at 1000ft agl and have some time to sort yourself up, if cloud-base is less than 300ft agl, it has the same chances of survivability as any EFATO at 300ft agl from unfamiliar airfields ?
The challenge is actually to a very large extend psychologic! There are very few examples of SEP with power failure that hav been actually flown until they hit the ground that ended in a fatal crash. Yes, there are some terrains in high mountains that are factually unlandable (but there still is often an option to glide to a “crashable” terrain). The vast majority of such events actually result in a good but not a very good landing (as per common definition one where the pilot can walk away from but the plane can’t be used for another try…).
In the vast majority of fatal crashes after engine failures, the pilot didn’t manage to fly the plan until it hits the ground but stalled it significantly before that.
Not saying that it’s easy…
The SEP with a constant speed propeller published glide ratio may be optimistic. If the engine failed due to loss of oil pressure the propeller governor will lose pressure and the propeller will move to fine pitch. A 10:1 ratio will then go to 6:1.
Malibuflyer wrote:
In the vast majority of fatal crashes after engine failures, the pilot didn’t manage to fly the plan until it hits the ground but stalled it significantly before that.
Yes surely in VMC the stall comes from trying to “stretch it” to better terrain or a paved runway, in IMC going for an ILS with engine off follow the same logic…
I flew in one tight grass strip where one local instructor did me a check and asked for glide approach from downwind to the airfield even talked about 180 back to the runway after EFATO on his brief: personally, not being very familiar with type & airfield, I found it hard to land there even when engine power was available plus two farm fields nearby were far more luxurious in comparison on all “field selection” aspects: wind, size, shape, slope, obstacle maybe their surface was a bit rough? or his neighbour farmer would be pissed off?
The endless talk later was about: 50% getting killed trying to make the runway with 99% chances being unscratched VS 99% pilot survival landing off runway with 50% chances getting scratched, in both scenario the probability of pilot/aircraft getting scratched while pilot staying alive remains the same 
Airborne_Again wrote:
The 9° slope should have normal indications. The 6° slope would have reversed indications. IIRC.
There was a study done after an incident with a 737 at Eindhoven in (I think) 2013. The Dutch safety people did a number of tests and found that signal reversal will sometimes occur at the false 6 degree, but will always occur at the false 9 degree.
This picture shows it a bit if you remember your blue and yellow 150/90hz beams 
I knew there was a good reason for me to prefer LPV approaches…what is the false slope on those !?
I think the false LPV glide path that cuts throw terrain in cold days, of course it’s only apply applicable when flying at -100deg C temperatures with LPV degradation
Unless you have totally lost the plot, it is impossible to end up on a false glideslope.
I reckon the idea of flying an ILS with engine out is surely a joke I would try to glide to the nearest airport within glide range, fly to the overhead, and fly a tight spiral until visual, and then land.
Peter wrote:
Unless you have totally lost the plot, it is impossible to end up on a false glideslope.
I’m not so sure. If you are paying attention then you shouldn’t let it fool you, I agree in that sense, but there are quite a few places that will vector you in on the high side, and I think it’s not uncommon to see yourself ‘on glide’ especially a little bit further out. The important thing is to recognise it and ignore it. I think the older convention of always capturing the glideslope from below is long gone what with CDA enforcement, and this is one of the risks.
Does light GA get continuous descents? I have never seen one. I have had very tight vectoring – inside the GS intercept – however.
Ibra wrote:
I think the false LPV glide path that cuts throw terrain in cold days, of course it’s only apply applicable when flying at -100deg C temperatures with LPV degradation
You are thinking of Baro-VNAV? I can’t see how temperature would affect the LPV glide path.
