"It's what's demonstrated by the test pilot on the day."
That MAY be true but are you sure that the engine upgrade didn't involve anciliary mods which might have had some relevance to Vmc considerations ?
The captain judged that the fire was so severe that the structure would not stay intact for even a tight circuit
Command prerogative is there for such decisions. However, no-one in the circumstances could make a rational call on that so the decision can only be seen to be a knee-jerk reaction to the situation. All of us who have had time on Darts would have a heightened concern about uncontained engine fires so the captain's decision is not entirely strange.
Overall, continuing for a circuit has the better outcome numbers on risk history. Having said that, if I were faced with similar circumstances and, say, 10-14,000 ft of runway, I'd be doing the same thing. However, the report suggest he landed with not very much seal in front of him and proceeded to depart the runway head at VERY significant speed for a Draggie. Probably not a good call to try and justify to the Chief Pilot over tea and bikkies - actually, probably without the tea and bikkies ?
it was hardly "very safely"
That's an understatement. Thanks for the link - I had read this report long ago and had the same thoughts then.
all planes don't magically fly after V1
Of course they don't.
Certification Standards and SOPs address reasonably expected circumstances. If the situation is dreadfully out of left field, then all bets are off and the captain earns his year's salary in the next few seconds or minutes ....
The very great majority of situations, however, will have a better likelihood of a satisfactory outcome by following sensible SOPs. No guarantees at all .. but the historical numbers are on the side of SOPs.
I ponder how many people JT has banned who simply made the comment that a captain with 5000 feet of runway post V1, can stop his aircraft safely
Actually, I have no idea how many folk I have chastised - probably not more than I could count on the fingers of one hand and certainly none for the sort of reason that you cite.
Caveat - a couple of troublesome folk who have gone through an interminable succession of re-incarnations have had recurrent slaps on the wrist applied. On that point, should I hold some interest as to why your comment is vaguely familiar in its style ?