Wally et al,
Let's drop the word "safe" and use the word "risk", safe is an emotive word without definition, risk can be measured.
Going right back to the early days of EROPS/ETOPS now EDTO, have we all forgotten that the original risk analysis showed that in-flight fire was a greater risk than engine failure, hence the significantly different hold certification standards now applied.
The risk of an engine failure, when an aircraft is in cruise and in the EDTO phase of flight is, as I think we all know, very low, almost vanishingly low. It has been clearly demonstrated in practice, not just theory.
I would have thought that the last 30+ years of long range twin operation had put the question beyond argument.
(1) Right now, how many 4 engine large civil aircraft are in production?
(2) In each case, how are their sales going, what is the order backlog?
(3) How many of the above were delivered last year and how many deliveries have been deferred?
(4) Will the A380 production ever reach break even levels, let alone make a profit?
(5) Will Boeing ever make a buck out of the B747-8?
(6) How many EDTO certified or certifiable twins were delivered last year, and how many are on order?
The answers to the numbers questions, of course, is tens versus thousands --- I would say the market has spoken, wouldn't you.
Much of the Qantas long haul commercial malaise right now is attributable to not having ordered B777 almost 20 years ago, because the company was not, in my opinion, being run in the best interests of the shareholder and the company.
If Qantas has had fuel competitive aircraft for the last 10-15 years, instead of increasingly tired B744, the bottom line would be very different right now.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 11th August 2013 at 02:55.