Greebo said:
I find this whole concept just astounding - hundreds of lives put in needless jeapordy to save a hundred k pounds? How much would it have cost BA in law suits had the plane crashed and killed all on board? And don't get me started on "Just as safe on 3 as 4"...a plane making loud bangs and shooting sparks is NOT as safe as a plane running on 4 engines in good condition!
Chuck,
I have never hauled pax, or ever flew com, But I have had 13 engine failures in flight, None of which caused the mission to be terminated. When you have 4 turning the rules are different.
Safe is what the NATOPS say it is.
Remember 99% of my 43k Hours in Willie Victor is out of sight of land. when we lost an engine we had rules of risk management to follow.
If you caused a crew to scramble to replace you on station, you better be in a raft when they get there. (patrol crew joke)
Yes I know that hauling PAX is a different situation and a lot more lives were at stake here, But flying with 1 of 4 in the bag is a safe operation. Safe as 4? NO, but still above the required safety margin? yes.
The Boeing 777 can fly full gross with one of two on line, and is certified open ocean ops, with one.
When a turbine bangs, and sparkes fly it usually means it ate some thing (FOD) check lists come out and are taken down by the numbers, The flight is terminated when the check list say so.
Please know that I am not rationalizing this crews actions, just explaining that 3 engine ops are safe.