Originally Posted by
Landflap
Jack ; See ? I was, rather, hoping to avoid this - done to death -discussion. "Nearest suitable" does NOT mean suitable in terms of time -"nothing else". As you say . Oh dear. Land at the nearest suitable means (1) NEAREST in terms of distance . Note any dictionary , (2) SUITABLE refers to things like performance criterior ( Not suitable if the runway is grass-eh ? Maybe concrete but is it long enough ? Is the field, actually, open ? ) etc, etc, etc .
Here's the thing and something for you to ponder. In my last Company's Command Selection Board of which I was a member, we posed the question ; Twin engine, en route to dest, bang, lost a donk OVERHEAD a company regular field. Down the road is another company regular field (Suitable) and with a strong tailwind forecast, you will reach it quicker than descending in the hold for the overhead (nearest, ole mate ,) field. When you inform Company that you are descending in the hold, engine out, mayday procedure for that lovely long, SUITABLE and very familiar airfiled right under your backside, they ask you to go to the en-route because they have a spare engine there & you will be back aloft for destination within six hours. Worse, where you are intending to go is suffering a employment dispute and there is no engine spare holding . What do you do ?
Those bowing to commercial pressure, failing to understand simple terminology like (nearest), failing to have fully grasped the meaning of "suitable" were shown the door. Nearest suitable door, actually.
Me too, but sorry I don’t agree with you neither do Boeing
You were exploring the meaning of suitable and tying it to commercial pressure. As I understand it the enroute airport would be reached quicker in terms of time you don’t mention how much quicker ? A few minutes or longer ? , never mind.
That makes this airport( the enroute) the nearest suitable, spare engine or no spare engine that is not relevant neither is the possible industrial dispute unless it involves RFF or some such thing
You may just have canned a lot of “ suitable” guys with your flawed interpretation of “nearest suitable”“btw I’m not Just offering my opinion you can confirm with Boeing . Anyway it’s worthy of discussion as there are so many variables, the definition of closest and nearest for example being one of them.
I am sure that your upgrade interview technique involved more than this particular question and scenario and you tried to get an overall picture of a candidates suitability