2 Points:
Above, someone cites a pilot who lost one of two engines for not making a 180 and landing at the nearest possible airport. There are reasons to continue a flight, on one engine, to the destination or a more suitable field.
Example: Numerous 1800 - 3000' strips are underneath you, and your Aerostar just lost the left engine. Thirty-five miles away, you have a 9000' runway with firetrucks, an ILS, etc. Oh yeah, the weather is MVFR and it's 03:30 in the AM.
I'm not saying the dude who almost ran his tanks dry is in the right. I'm just saying that ATC suggestions aren't always the most prudent, and there aren't any blanket rules that apply to all situations.
This brings me to my second point.
The 709 ride:
Because some FAA types have real flying experience and others don't, they may have trouble differentiating between brainy and retarded actions. This variability means that some dummies can get through a 709 ride with commendations for wearing polished boots to the ship. Other, sharp guys will be zapped because they didn't land with full flaps in wet snow.
In short, you don't know what you're going to get or whether you'll get. You could have a sharp guy or a beaurocrat with wings in the cockpit with you.
Finally, I've never taken a 709 ride. All my information is second hand from friends who have been required to go on 'em. Take all this with a grain of salt.
Above, someone cites a pilot who lost one of two engines for not making a 180 and landing at the nearest possible airport. There are reasons to continue a flight, on one engine, to the destination or a more suitable field.
Example: Numerous 1800 - 3000' strips are underneath you, and your Aerostar just lost the left engine. Thirty-five miles away, you have a 9000' runway with firetrucks, an ILS, etc. Oh yeah, the weather is MVFR and it's 03:30 in the AM.
I'm not saying the dude who almost ran his tanks dry is in the right. I'm just saying that ATC suggestions aren't always the most prudent, and there aren't any blanket rules that apply to all situations.
This brings me to my second point.
The 709 ride:
Because some FAA types have real flying experience and others don't, they may have trouble differentiating between brainy and retarded actions. This variability means that some dummies can get through a 709 ride with commendations for wearing polished boots to the ship. Other, sharp guys will be zapped because they didn't land with full flaps in wet snow.
In short, you don't know what you're going to get or whether you'll get. You could have a sharp guy or a beaurocrat with wings in the cockpit with you.
Finally, I've never taken a 709 ride. All my information is second hand from friends who have been required to go on 'em. Take all this with a grain of salt.
You expect REAL knowledge and info from a totally anonymous board? What, do you work for the FAA or something?! 
