20230823012929A

The flight was operated as a part 91 training flight in order to prepare the student pilot for the private pilot asel practical exam. During preflight, the student noted the fuel level at approximately 18 gallons, which comported with the readings on the fuel quantity gauge. The flight originated from spanish fork at 6:30AM after a normal runup with no engine anomalies noted. The flight continued westbound in a climb simulating the initial legs of a cross country flight. The student leveled at an indicated cruising altitude 8,500’ MSL. After leveling off, the student executed an enroute checklist which included leaning for cruise. He stated that he had leaned to 25F rich of peak RPM, at which time I noted that the EGT gauge indicated slightly over 1250F. Terminating the simulated cross country flight, training continued with a series of clearing turns prior to executing several steep turns. Altitude reached 9,000 ft MSL over the course of these maneuvers. The next training objective was ground reference maneuvers which would require a lower altitude. The instructor stated he retarded the throttle to simulate an engine failure and asked the student to demonstrate procedures to be followed in the event of engine failure. The student handed the instructor a checklist asking the instructor to reference the emergency checklist while the student began to trim the aircraft for descent. The instructor pilot stated that the student pilot handed him a checklist that he was unfamiliar with and was distracted by trying to orient himself with the checklist. The student pilot advanced the mixture. As the simulation continued, the instructor prompted the student to demonstrate an emergency descent, such as might be executed in the event of an engine fire. This led to a short, diving turn, approximately 180 degrees of heading. Thereafter they continued with the forced landing drill. As the simulation continued at roughly the point of the “downwind to base” turn, of the student’s intended landing point (adsb reports a pressure altitude of 5,700’ at this point, ground is approximately 4900’), the instructor suggested “clearing” the engine by advancing the throttle. Some roughness was encountered at this point, which was alleviated with a small decrease in fuel mixture. With the apparent availability of engine power, the instructor decided that it was safe to resume the simulation into the final turn. Subsequent to the final turn and a recitation of memorized final items for an off-field landing, the instructor told the student to terminate the simulation. The student advanced the throttle at a pace which I estimate would have reached a full throttle setting in 1.5 seconds. The instructor stated he was uncertain what setting was reached. It was clear to the instructor, however, that the engine was not responding to the increased throttle setting. The instructor reached down and further advanced the mixture. Judging by sound, the instructor believed at this time all engine combustion ceased. Within 1-3 seconds, the propeller had stopped windmilling. The instructor attempted, to no effect, a re-start using the starting switch. He then turned his attention to making a right turn toward an adjacent area that had been graded by construction equipment. The stall warning sounded shortly before touchdown. The instructor estimated they had slowed to 40 knots when the aircraft impacted a berm of very loose earth which was on the edge of the graded area. With no apparent injuries, they closed the fuel shutoff valve and retracted the flaps then turned off the master switches and opened the canopy.