"Doug Carter" wrote in message So what? The question was "is it SOP to
take off with passengers and a dead engine?"

The engine was not dead when they took off. Your question as it stands is
irrelevent.

No doubt. But do you argue that going missed on two engines is as safe
as with four?

It depends on the weight. After burning most of their fuel during the
crossing, it is likely that a 2-engine go-around would have the same results
as a 4-engine go-around. It is practiced in the simulator.

First, From a technical perspective I remain unconvinced that crossing
the Atlantic with a known dead and un-inspected engine is, per Part 121
"...as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport..."

The engine did not leave the wing. I suspect that the rotor did not suffer
an uncontained burst. Therefore the shutoff handle in the cockpit (usually
used for engine fires) will shut off fuel, bleed air, hydraulic fluid, and
electricity from the generator at a point outside the engine compartment.
What is there to inspect? The fluids will be monitored (as is done routinely
with all engines running) and the airplane will be diverted to an alternate
if need be.

Second, From a business perspective keep in mind that there is a lot of
competition for business class ticket revenue.

Most passengers are concerned about airline safety yet are truly ignorant
about what is safe. If BA tells them that a BA B-747 can have an engine quit
and still fly around the world, that will sound pretty darn good to them.
It's all in the marketing and BA is darn good at marketing.

D.