Originally Posted by
barit1
Any penetration of the engine casings would result in very hot air escaping into the nacelle, which will cause an engine fire warning.
In the absence of a fire warning, and no other indication of systems distress, there is no emergency - it's a simple OEI.
Are you sure you should be making statements like that. About a year prior to the BA737 accident PWA 501 burned in Calgary after a similar uncontained engine failure. A 1 second fire bell did ring 51 seconds after the failure which ejected metal and punctured a fuel tank. I suppose this was a different sort of malfunction.
http://www.avsaf.org/reports/CANADA/...ing737-200.pdf
I am not saying I would have done differently than the crew perhaps continueing on to at least JFK, but someone elses comment about a visual inspection, if it was daylight does not cover the fuselage or underside of the wing.
Many mention the 777 in their argument, that it only has two engines and of the redundancy of the 747-400 but would you rather go across the Atlantic in a fully serviceable 777 or a damaged 747-400 and for those who would continue including perhaps myself, how can we guarantee that there is no secondary damage in this situation? Just play the odds?