I still can't get past the fact that so many posts seem to be missing the point - as I understand it in this particular case this engine shutdown appears (until, at least, further details emerge!) to have been a PRECAUTIONARY shutdown NOT an emergency shutdown.
Compressor stalls are spectacular and noisy - especially at dusk/night - and consist of large flames usually from the back but also occasionally from the front of the engine concerned. A sort of giant hiccup or backfire usually caused by a sticky relief valve.
Occasionally one is caused by the fuel management computer (EMC) getting its 'knickers in a twist' and can be sorted by stopping and restarting the engine (for those familiar with the Rolls powered 744 I don't need to harp on about the various problems that a shutdown and restart can solve).
If the engine settles down, other than a note in the tech log, the engine is fully serviceable, in this case judging by the reports that the a/c circled LA for 20 minutes before continuing I would assume that Engineering interrogated the engine by the ACARS SatCom datalink (a/c parameters are continuously monitored by the BA engineering computers using burst technology) and they probably advised a PRECAUTIONARY shutdown. This would not have precluded a relight in the event of a second engine failure (please note DOVES - unlike the DC10/MD11 the 744 is extremely robust, has 4 engines, 4 of everything else (hydraulics etc) AND has MUCH MUCH better systems redundancy built in!!).
After all I asume that pilots of 3 engined a/c were happy to fly these sort of routes? Statistically the chances of a second engine failure (excluding for fuel contamination reasons) on a 4 engined a/c is much lower that a single engine failure on a 3 engined a/c and the 744 can continue on one engine if necessary.
Basically what I am trying to convey is that prejudging this decision is neither rational nor fair - the aviation community condemns the press for doing just that - applying experience of a different a/c type to make an (ill informed?) judgement in this case is plainly stupid, as is armchair pontificating.
I think that it would be sensible to wait for the report from those who actually KNOW what decisions were made (and why) and what ACTUALLY happened to the a/c.
Pax vobiscum!