I tend to disagree with this statement, primarily because I would much rather have people go into this situation with the mindset that it is O.K. to sacrifice a prop and an engine rebuild in order to keep the option for a go-around if needed. Yeah, I won't second guess someone for shutting down once the runway is made FOR SURE, and the speed is right and the commitment to land is a safe decision...I just don't wan't someone to be so predisposed to save the engine above all other considerations that they commit to land, shut down the engine, THEN figure out that the increased drag from a wind-milling prop means they are going to come up short. Much better to have the mindset that they will give the prop to the insurance company, and only try to save it if everything works in their favor, in my opinion. Remember, you don't get money back from the insurance company if you save them an engine rebuild, so don't sacrifice safety just for their pocketbook.
Again, I'm not saying it is wrong to shut down the engine, I'm just saying it is wrong to go into the situation planning on doing so.
Not sure I agree with this one either. I've seen culverts in the low grass areas along side runways. I've also seen transitions from the grass area to the crossing taxiways that would ruin your day. I've also heard people argue that partially extended gear, or an open gear door, could dig into the softer ground in a grassy area and cause the plane to cart-wheel. I can think of lots of reasons that I would rather land wheels-up on pavement than grass.
Not intending to pick on you personally, but these are two *common knowledge* kind of statements that I think people ought to really think through before finding themselves in the situation.
