This is not realistic for most scenarios. Every airplane has at least a published “best glide” speed that provides the best glide distance horizontally for the amount of altitude lost. My airplane has a glide ratio of just over 9:1 at this speed, so if I am 3,000 feet above the ground, I can under ideal conditions glide 27,000 feet, or just under 5 statute miles.
There’s a slightly different speed that maximizes time aloft. In other words, there’s a speed at which I won’t glide quite as far a distance, but I will be aloft longer. Most of our training focus is on maximizing distance (getting to a favorable spot) over maximizing time (having more time to diagnose.)
My airplane’s best glide ranges from 70 to 80kts indicated, depending on weight. On my typical mission it’s about 77 at takeoff and about 73 at landing weight. If it’s 77, I am going to trim the airplane up to fly right at 77 all the way to my desired landing point, and will maneuver around to arrive at a final approach position a bit high by gliding around at 77, not by altering my speed. I can use flaps and/or slip maneuvers to steepen my descent angle while sill maintaining a pretty consistent glide speed.
There should be no “zooming” or swooping, with rare exceptions. I want to bleed off the last speed—from 77 down to my touchdown target speed of about 55 kts—as I am on my last couple of hundred feet of descent. The goal is always to just do a very normal landing approach and flare, essentially the same as a “normal” landing, whenever possible.
There is no speed you can get down to that makes crashing upside-down at that slower speed better than crashing right-side-up at the higher speed. So hitting whatever you are going to hit at, or just above stall speed, is profoundly more survivable than stalling trying delay the inevitable forced landing another second or two.