In the case of the MAN accident, most people agree that a turn in the direction NOW taught would probably have improved survivability.
It would be interesting to understand what you would evaluate, why, and when these items are considered in deciding to opt for an evacuation
- hmm! Any pieces of string you need measuring while we are at it?
In three airlines now, a period of collection of information - using whatever sources are available - has been actively encouraged following an engine fire warning or engine failure RTO. That is the area of the 'loneliness of command'. I would hate to have broken pax ankles or worse, chucking them off an aircraft with a false fire warning, and equally would hate to keep them on one with a real fire. Sometimes it is easy. Sometimes not. Are you 'hinting', perhaps, that in your mind any RTO with a fire warning should be an automatic, instant evac?
I recall many 'false' fire warnings in aviation history - I believe at least one a/c had 3 aborted take-offs in succession with such (what fun!), and no evacuation took place.
Regarding a 'turn', either towards or away from an engine,
if it can be incorporated in generic SOPs (turn for all fire warning RTOs) without detriment, then it can be a positive safety aspect
- again, taught and emphasised in three airlines, and also for engine failures, BTW, and VERY SIMPLE to absorb - and it IS a positive safety aspect.