Mike
Quote
'I can think of far better targets for the FAA to be aiming at - O'Hare for example, with 3 very recent near-accidents to think about.......'
I would suggest that O'Hare has become that way by constantly pushing the boundaries of what is sensible, driven by commercial pressure.
Quote
'I think you will find that this crew did more safety-related planning & re-planning in one flight than most crews will do in a year (or more!)......'
Yet they still ended up landing after declaring an emergency.........
I didn't know airmanship was type specific?
I'd rather sit behind a Captain with BEAGLE's attitude than many others displayed on this thread, over-conservative possibly but isn't that what we're always told is right? If in doubt take the safe option? If there was no doubt that night why all the extra planning?
The fact that they ended up in some confusion about the fuel state of the A/C merely highlights the problem with putting yourself in situations you have not seen before, in an aircraft with degraded capability.
In my opinion it's clear that whatever thought processes went on among all those involved,safety was not top of their list!If they were dumping fuel the Captain had already decided to return to land - who or what changed his mind?The guys onboard have probably only ever had one engine failure and it has been the subject of newspaper articles, forum debate and criticism from the FAA. Good decision? Not for me.