From: "Mark" 

Yes, I'm sure they weren't opening the cockpit windows and flapping their
arms to get to Manchester -- I found it interesting just because of that
sheer coincidence!

"Steve Ewing"  wrote in message
news:opsnj0jcoysagvys{at}news.barkto.com...
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 17:44:38 -0500, Mark  wrote:
>
>> Remarkably, the plane involved is the same one that blew an engine on
>> takeoff last week, ran out of fuel, and forced to make an emergency
>> landing in Manchester -- and the
>> engine that failed yesterday was the replacement for the first failure:
>
> Sheer coincidence.  The plane, BTW, diverted to Manchester because of
> lower-than-expected tailwinds, not headwinds as in some reports; and it
> was a diversion due to not having enough fuel to meet the safety margins
> of potential delays, circling, etc. -- the way the reports read it
> staggered into Manchester on fumes.
>
> The second problem was an oil pressure alarm, shut down in-flight; the
> first was on take-off and a bit egregious: sure, it *can* (and did) safely
> fly LA to England on three engines, but should it?
>
> Salon's "Ask The Pilot" covered this in the last two weeks.
>
> --
> Steve 
> http://www.qmss.com/sewing

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5