aadrvark2zz,
Chuck Yeager? What does that mean? I assume you mean - throw out the checklists, knee jerk react, improvise and 'go for it'. I don't think that Chuck Yeager ever did a 'Chuck Yeager'. He was a well trained test pilot dealing with risky situations and for all of his swagger I am sure that he was well briefed, studied and professional in his approach.
As for the Swiss Air situation: Yes if they proceded to YHZ at 100% at first sign they may have made it. Or they may have crashed in the communities of Dartmouth or Bedford in the latter stages of the approach when the flight deck environment was unbareable.
As a commercial airline pilot I do not assume the first hint of smoke or a tripped circuit breaker is the genesis of a catastrophic situation. I analyse. I have smelled smoke on numerous occasions that turned out to be some paper in the oven. Should I have made an emergency landing at the nearest airport? I have had an inverter burn out with smoke in the flight deck - donned masks, proceded towards an airport and completed checklists. I have had a circuit breaker trip in flight. Should I have made and emergency landing assuming this was the start of something really bad? No I assumed the breaker was functioning normally and protecting a circuit from a short. I don't reset the breaker and I follow a checklist. The Swiss pilots did the same. They reacted in an analytical way and did what most professional commercial airline pilots would do.
As for ditching in the ocean. At night, strangers to the area, over the coast with not many lights for perspective in a hostile cockpit environment - poor chance. This was pointed out.
There are no fields of opportunity to land in the Halifax area. It is rough rocky shore with dense wooded inland areas.
These are points the investigators highlighted. Given the situation and circumstances the crew did their best.
It is always easy to armchair quarter back.
A310