Three engines -No sweat.

[Woodlouse2002]

I accept that but would crossing the Atlantic on 3 engines so early in the flight be normal procedure? I must confess to being surprised, especially in those conditions.

I should imagine it's down to the Pilots discretion. If he thinks they can continue then he's the boss.

[C]

I suppose his line of thought may have been:

1) 747 full of pax on wrong side of atlantic with a U/S aircraft wanting to stay in hotels and boss saying "you could've got back".

2) Follow the wx forecast (which would inevitably get the wx wrong)

3) Take the aeroplane home and land at the closest airport to LHR whilst staying within the company fuel and diversion regulations, declaring fuel priority and just leaving the boss to organise 8 or 10 coaches to take the pax to LHR...

Put it this way - if at any time he was in doubt of crossing the atlantic or not making it he would have diverted (which eventually he did)...

[Craig.]

Dont get me wrong, i am not saying it was the wrong desicion, lets face it, the 747 was designed with this sort of incident in mind. 1 engine out pleanty more to continue on. Its just whenever this sort of thing happens a pilot usually diverts to the nearest airport.

[Hagar]

Right thanks Charlie. Quite frankly I'm still surprised. I can't find anything on the subject right now but safety always used to be the priority. I always understood that if there were any technical problems at all on a transatlantic crossing the rules were quite clear. Up to half-way across & you turned back. Over half-way & you carried on. It should be a lot easier now as the major airlines have maintenance bases all over the world.

I appreciate that the 747 is quite capable of crossing the Atlantic on 3 engines. I'm not so sure about 2.

[Nexus]

The pilot and crew did nothing wrong.
Losing an engine on a 747 isn't really an emergency ( does not require the emer. checklists)
And if you ask the passengers, I'm sure they'd wait in Manchester and somehow make it to LHR, rather than be stuck in N. America and miss their possible connections?

[Hagar]

I'm sure they did nothing wrong. I was simply surprised to find out that this is the case now. Speaking as a passenger I'm not sure I would fancy crossing the Atlantic on less than a full complement of engines. Shows how outdated I am.

And if you ask the passengers, I'm sure they'd wait in Manchester and somehow make it to LHR, rather than be stuck in N. America and miss their possible connections?

That's debatable. It would probably take longer to get from Manchester to LHR than from JFK or wherever.

[Nexus]

How long is a busride from Manchester to London, then?


Geography was never my strong subject  ;D

[Craig.]

Too the M25 about 90 minutes if that. Once you hit the M25, you might aswell walk

[Hagar]

Too the M25 about 90 minutes if that. Once you hit the M25, you might aswell walk

This is on a good day. Courtesy of AA Route Planner.

From Manchester Airport (T1),Gt Man
To Heathrow Airport Central,Gt Lon
Distance 197.0 miles  
Time 3 hr 23 min

It could easily take double that. Talk to any passenger that's been diverted to an alternative airport in the UK & you will hear plenty of horror stories.

[Craig.]

wow didnt realise it was that far. Its actually further with new roads and recent changes not included in the directions.