British Airways 747 incident on NPR

[Ron Garret]

Those who wish to hold forth on the recent incident with the BA 747 that
lost an engine (twice) and continued to its destination might want to
check this out:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4526930

"NPR's Alex Chadwick talks to British Airways official Steve Sheterline
about a recent incident on one of their long-haul flights. A 747
recently continued on its Los Angeles-to-England flight despite losing
one of its engines shortly after takeoff. A few days later, the same
plane had another engine failure coming out of Singapore, and the pilot
again choose to continue the flight. Some suspect the incidents are the
result of new European rules that punish airlines for delayed or
canceled flights."

Bottom line (according to Sheterline): The POH for the 747 requires four
engines for takoff, but only three for cruise.

rg

[Thomas Borchert]

Ron,

> Bottom line
>

Bottom line: Since it would have cost about 150,000 Euro to pay to the
passengers for a delayed flight, the question now is this: Did BA lose
150,000 Euro worth of image/marketing/PR by flying on? My guess is a
firm "yes."

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Robert M. Gary]

I just have a hard time believing that the pilots give a **** about BA
losing 150,000E. Perhaps they just didn't feel too concerned about
flying on 3 and wanted to get home (since none of them are limies
anyway :) )

-Robert

[Colin W Kingsbury]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
>
> Bottom line: Since it would have cost about 150,000 Euro to pay to the
> passengers for a delayed flight, the question now is this: Did BA lose
> 150,000 Euro worth of image/marketing/PR by flying on? My guess is a
> firm "yes."
>

If the captain came on the intercom on a normal flight and said, "ladies and
gentlemen, if we shut two engines off for the remainder of the flight, BA
will refund 1/3rd of your ticket price," I suspect you'd get around 75%
voting yes.

-cwk.