Originally Posted by mekberry

Just studying up my Air, Inc. "Questions Questions" book and reading about other peoples experiences with the LOI and there is a pretty standard scenario given to an applicant during the interview.

It usually goes something like this: You take off from XYZ airport that is above takeoff minimums, but below landing minimums. 20 minutes into the flight a flight attendant notifies you that there is a passenger having severe chest pains. The closest airport having landing minimums is 1:30 away. What do you do?

There are unlimited variations (you are enroute, there is smoke or fire, system failures, the available airports have varying abilities to handle emergencies, etc) but they share the same essential problem: Do you get on the ground ASAP (assuming you still wouldn't duck below decision altitude?) Or do you try to push it for a lot longer flight in an attempt to make a more adequate airport?

I am just curious what the menagerie of aviation professionals here has to say about it. Especially those that might currently be or previously been on the interview board at the airlines. What are they looking for exactly? Is one answer more preferred? I realize that they are looking for you to handle the situation quickly and appropriately using all available resources, make a decision and go with it.

What have you been asked and what are your thoughts?