Somehow I just can not reconcile the paradoxical logic (presumably based on in-depth risk analysis) that says it is safe to operate a twin engine aircraft for up to 3 hours on one engine (ETOPS 180) but then says, in the case of an engine failure you had better land at the first suitable airport, at peril of losing your profession, if you elect to fly a little further to a "more suitable" location ..... ie support services, etc.
The inference, for me, is that the argument for ETOPS is not really as well founded as it should be.
And I guess we'll just have to sit and wait to find out what really caused the engine to shut down.
I guess also that incipient failure of a gearbox could start to shed metal and would be picked up by the chip detectors.
tdtracer - is there any level of engine protection on the engine itself? That is, at a level below the FADEC controller(s)?