Hasn't any one of you heard of 'contact company via datalink'....???!?
It was in all probability,an executive decision made by the company and not the pilot(s).
A dangerous mindset promulgated by today's bean-counting pilotless management. Where I work, the company end all ACARS transmissions with a disclaimer pointing out the message is for information only, and they take no responsibility for anything operational which happens after they make "suggestions."
Your company can advise all they like but the decision on diversion airport is up to the Captain of the aircraft and if you hand off that responsibility to someone on the ground, then perhaps you should re-assess your position.
Eitherways 3/4 powerplants for the fat girl isn't a mayday or a 'land asap' situation.
I don't think anyone believes it is. The question was why did they fly 2:45 or more in the reverse direction instead of going onward to an SQ airport. I asked because I did not know. Now I have a better idea.
Thanks for the feedback, guys - seems the issue of the manufacturer of the engines is likely one of the reasons for the choice of diversion airport. I have no doubt there was a lot of consultation going on and that a perfectly safe decision was made - by the captain.
Cheers...