GlueBall
MGloff:
You're completely missing the point. No airplane can sustain controlled flight without sufficient airspeed. Better to deliberately land in any field or on any highway rather than to stall and to fall out of the sky.
With an airspeed of around 200 kts, how survivable do you think that would be...??? Imagine running your car at 230 mph (370 km/hr) over a rough field with hedges, ditches etc. Not an option! Keep her flying at all costs. That is what it's certified for anyway, if limitations had been observed. Rest in peace.
BEagle
NO!! A FE would certainly never be empowered to shut down any engine without a clear command from the handling pilot (or Captain - Company SOPs may vary). Even then, the shut down actions would be monitored by the non-handling pilot (or FO) before the engine was positively shut down and thrust irrevocably lost. NEVER, NEVER would such a critical action be taken without cross-monitoring - and that is one of the cornerstones of CRM!
Although your impressive resume, I have to disagree in the case of the Teneriffe accident. The captain was clearly violating all rules and should have been stopped by anyone and with any means. This includes the FE shutting down the engines if necessary.