411A;
The DC8 had about the same numbers - 240kts with two out on one side on the Conway, (40 series), lower speed with flaps due to greater rudder authority. The stretch had slightly lower speeds.
Re "training" and "finest of...etc", has training changed to accomodate automation today or has the bottom line driven training to new lows in the expectation that automation will "look after the store"?
The question isn't loaded - I'm seriously wondering if we are training human factors in order to train automation appropriately; I can tell you that training syllabi that I am aware of today do not include an engine-out/two-engine out NDB/non-precision approach and that handling skills on raw data with an orientation, procedure turn and approach on an NDB are at an all-time low partly because they don't have to be "without fault" but partly because that's also what the industry leaders and regulators think mainly because the autoflight systems are so damn good, providing they are operated with the same comprehension and skill levels expected during the kinds of rides you describe. My first IFR ride was a lost orientation and range approach into Nanaimo...not on single engine, thankfully, so I know both sides.