Nora- You can copy it and print it out. Or save it as a Word document.

Or you can always find it again on the forum by 'clicking' on your Author: Name. That will bring up a list of any posts you started or participated in.

As for the 2 vs 4 engine problem, no, it doesn't matter. The 747 needs 2 engines to keep flying, the 2 engine planes need 1, so as long as half of the engines keep working, it's not a big deal. Not to mention, as far as I can remember, there hasn't been a crash in at least a decade, probably more, that could be attributed to too many engines failing and the plane just falling out of the sky on any reasonable airplane (not counting sketchy African airlines or anything; anyone else able to think of any such crashes?). Usually crashes are from pieces breaking off of planes or other things hitting important parts.

Jay: it's just my personal experience on NW, and it's never been a nightmare, but things just seem to go wrong and be a bigger hassle with them every time I fly NW, I don't know why, maybe I just have really bad luck, but I still try to avoid them.

My son flew NW when he went to Europe to study for six months. During his stay, he had to return here once for a family funeral. He flew that roundtrip on Lufthansa and was amazed at the difference in service, etc. (much better than NW). Then when he returned home at the of the six months, Northwest lost his checked luggage. We finally received it a week later. So I think I'm also in the "no to NW" camp.

Missed approaches also occur because of poor visibility. I was on a flight into CDG in thick fog early last month and the pilot executed a go-around. It's a startling sensation--full power back on, landing gear up, and flap adjustments. As rkkwan mentions, the pilots are pretty focused during this process; we were back up, leveled off, and circling before the pilot told us what had happened. (I had figured it out--I lived in foggy Newfoundland for years and had lots of go-arounds in bad weather.) So, we toured northern France for a while, and then made a second approach. By that time the visibility had improved and we had no difficulty landing.

On the issue of two engines versus four? Two engines aircraft have to prove certain reliability characteristics before being rated for trans-oceanic flight, and are then restricted by the number of hours that they can be from a suitable diversion airport. There are airports in Labrador, Greenland, and Iceland on the way to Europe.

Anslem

I am not surprised that some non-frequent flying public will raise the question about 2 engines vs 4. Afterall, Virgin Atlantic specifically use it as a marketing tool, saying they only fly 4 engine aircrafts.

But as other's said, twin engine aircrafts have been as reliable, if not more reliable, than 3- or 4-engined ones. B757, 767, 777, as well as A310 & A330 have been flying over vast oceans for 20+ years.