slink.... somne good/interesting points you make, which I shall try to answer. Not really relevant to this incident, so we'll probably sent to the "stupid questions" thread
At "idle" most modern jet airliners plan a 3 degree descent from Cruise altitude. We tend to be above optimum speed, so changing the "idling engines" to "stopped engines" then a 3 degree glide is just about possible, clean (1 in 3 i.e. 3 miles / 1000').
For Engine Out planning, we'd rather go for somewhere 1 in 2, so keeping something in hand for maneouvre... and plan on ~2500' for a 180 degree turn. We then hold the 1:2 approach with some flap ~180K and this needs some speedbrake.... and then ~1500' think about gear, rest of flap and flare. It is eye opening the change at this point i.e. the effect of the gear and extra flap and you do
not want to this bit too early
Finally, correct me if I am wrong (I left engineering without 777 experience), but in every other type I have known, for an autoland, the buses need to be separated, which means 2 independant forms of power. In a twinjet, I would take this to mean a "deadstick autoland" is not possible?
You are correct, but only as far as the rules go
Airbus AP will quite happily fly engines out, APU on, and really gives you some "capacity". You would normally want do the landing manually, but 1 trainer with too much time on his hands used (in the Sim) to show you could do the 1:2 profile, when the gear went down, also increased RoD and picked up the 3 degree ILS slope (very late!) to an Autoland...
NoD