Well according to some airlines he could have continued on to London eh Guv?
The nearest suitble airport is for the captain to decide. The nearest airport is not.
Already above we can see the makings of an unending “debate” between the ignorant and the not so ignorant which might rival the earlier threads.
I have some 4 engined experience and some ETOPs experience and, as has been so often said, there is a WORLD of difference. The point of my post is that it might just be worth your while Danny getting yourself a real
bone fide operational expert to prepare a short article for publication here for those who seem to be able to persuade themselves that there is a kind of equivalence in flying relatively short distances on one engine – but past operational airfields – and continuing for a substantial period on three engines past operational airfields.
Otherwise we are going to be driven to distraction with emphatic nonsense from those who never seem to stop and think. And, by the way, IMHO any professional pilot should be able to work this out with a little bit of effort.
My own view is simple: there is no equivalence of redundancy between these two cases. In one case an immediate landing is REQUIRED (subject to normal critera - not including commercial criteria), notwithstanding certificated POSSIBILITIES at the margin of operational limits (i.e.
no commander's discretion). In the other case an immediate landing is not REQUIRED, but may or many not be the prudent thing to do (i.e. commander's discretion).