Stagger ...
But we are comparing a 747 starting on 3 with a twin.
So a tri-jet compared with a twin ..... ?
So a twin compared with a single-engine ..... ?
This logic suggests that a gilder would be best (statistically speaking) at avoiding having an engine failure, even against the most reliable engine available. And so it would. But where does that get us?
Of course it is all in how you composed your argument: but you are doing statistics here, not flight safety - which uses statistics to assess flight safety outcomes. By setting it up to "compare a 747 on 3 with a twin" you neatly manage to avoid dealing with the probability of having two such failures on one flight. In fact your approach ensures that
like is not being compared with
like. This may be fun, but it is misleading for an operational audience.
When you say “This is
just one factor to be considered....” you imply to the unwary that the risk of a second event increases as a result of the first failure. But of course you are not claiming that, are you? (What then of ETOPs?).
Whatever this is doing, it adds nothing to assessing the decisions made by the crew of this particular flight who, correctly, would not have taken such an argument into account.