With the exception of the takeoff, BA 268 may be considered a three engine ferry in all of its operational aspects, to suggest otherwise is a puerile attempt at deception.
The FAA defines the three engine ferry as;
“a ferry flight of a four-engine airplane or a turbine-engine-powered airplane equipped with three engines, with one engine inoperative, to a base for the purpose of repairing that engine subject to the following”
The regs go on to list the various conditions, stipulations and limitations under which said flight may be operated. Relevant to this discussion are;
(i) Limiting the operating weight on any ferry flight to the minimum necessary for the flight plus the necessary reserve fuel load;
(ii) Inspection procedures for determining the operating condition of the operative engines.
(iii) Persons other than required flight crewmembers shall not be carried during the flight.
The question that begs to be asked here is, when the rules are so restrictive (with good reason) for a planned three engine operation, why would they then be completely disregarded for an unplanned one. The easy answer is, of course, for the purpose of saving the company money. V1 is a magically productive airspeed.
The 744 is a very capable aeroplane. In this case, however, BA268 has clearly illustrated the extent to which the limits of those capabilities are being exploited by those charged with the financial health of the company, to the detriment of previously established safety margins. This flight represents a quantum leap in that trend, the exclamatory demonstrated by the well-developed error chain, the resultant Mayday call and coasting into Manchester on fumes, short of destination.
The practice of carrying dead engines and live passengers over long distances is, in my opinion, a most unwise one.