The fact remains, the engines are not the only factor...ETOPs is a matter of not only the engines, but ALL of the aircraft systems, as well as the airline operating the equipment. Besides, to compare a 777 to a propliner is rediculous. Anything CAN happen...but the likelihood, given the technology, is slim. And, the type of catastrophe that would cause BOTH engines to fail in a 777, would more than likely involve other factors, including massive systems failures. So you have a choice between slamming into the ocean or slamming into the solid ground anyhow. The systems on the A330/A340 are very much similar. So, the only thing that makes some feel "safer" are the extra couple engines (smaller and less reliable at that) on an A340. 777 systems were designed to be much more fail safe, due to these fears, moreso even than the 747. While you may not agree there is more to place confidence in in the 777, there is at least as much to place confidence in for the A340 as the 777. Sharp contrasts in Boeing's outlook and Airbus' outlook....on the Boeing site, in the FAQ section, one of the FAQs is "Are certain airliners safer than others?" The answer given is that all jetliners, by any manufacturer, are safe and reliable and well designed, going through rigorous tests and regulation. In contrast, Airbus releases ads trying to scare people into wanting to fly on 4 engine airliners since twin engine widebodies are unsafe! If I remember correctly, and looking at some old Airbus ads in Aviation Week, AIRBUS pioneered the twinengine widebody, and advertised the A300 as more reliable and economica than the competing widebodies, at the time the DC10, L1011 and 747! Don't believe me? Pull up some AW&ST issues from the mid to late 60's and early 70's. Both are safe reliable aircraft...scare tactics are not necessary...sasd thing is, seems to be working on some people.
Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!