Hi there.
The B777 is designed to initiate an automatic re ignition if a flame out occurred where no ignition was already on, but as the engines were still above idle (no ENGINE THRUST alert to crew) during the initial phase of the approach, this is a moot point. Once the configuration for landing was initiated, continuous ignition is applied.
If an icing related event had occurred at the intake of the FP due to pressure drop or otherwise (other restrictions that may have existed in the system) then the interruption of fuel to the engine would have been temporary, the engine driven fuel pump has suction feed capability at low altitudes/thrust levels, and reignition would have occurred.
The dynamics of the event require that some thrust remained from the engines, at least in the latter phases of flight.
In respect to the isolated development of software, the design constraints and group backgrounds/experience and training will tend to develop similar solutions in isolation. The engineers natural tendency for frugality in memory overhead certainly comes to mind, as does the limited inputs available and the specific task output constraints as drivers towards similar solutions.
Personally, I remain concerned in respect to the number of the B777's that have opted to have single TAT probes fitted vs the option for dual probes. I have had on another Boeing 4 holer all engines rollback to idle at rotate (while in HOLD mode...) as the TAT probe had failed and driven the EPR limit to near idle. This is not the case with the BA aircraft, but remains a potential vulnerability to the pilot.
Interesting discussion.
regards
