Jet Flies On With One Engine Out on Nonstop Trip to London

"Julian Scarfe" wrote

On a twin with an engine out, or even a trijet, perhaps. On a 4-engined
aircraft which has just crossed the Atlantic on 3 engines on the basis of
having sufficient redundancy to do so safely, that would smack a little of
having your cake and eating it too, doesn't it? ;-)

I *love* all of the Monday morning quarterbacking going on around here.

I always make an effort, to not tell brain surgeons how to do their job.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

I always make an effort, to not tell brain surgeons how to do their job.

With all due respect, flying--even flying a 747--is not
brain surgery. And if you hose up during brain surgery,
usually it only costs you one customer.

I've never had brain surgery. I've flown commercial
probably a few hundred times. It seems natural that
people are more interested with a situation they can
imagine themselves in.

I've enjoyed the thread so far, though I'd like to see
more "here's why you're wrong" than "I've flown 20000
hours and you're a poopy butt" kind of arguments. I
think there is small danger the FAA is going to check
what public sentiment on rec.aviation.piloting is before
making an enforcement decision.


Mike Beede

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Julian Scarfe" wrote

On a twin with an engine out, or even a trijet, perhaps. On a 4-engined
aircraft which has just crossed the Atlantic on 3 engines on the basis of
having sufficient redundancy to do so safely, that would smack a little
of
having your cake and eating it too, doesn't it? ;-)

I *love* all of the Monday morning quarterbacking going on around here.

I always make an effort, to not tell brain surgeons how to do their job.

I don't see how you can argue that a comment on Standard Operating Procedure
is Monday-morning-quarterbacking.

Julian