Just curious, where did you find that definition of "capable of flying"? Because under that definition a glider ( unless it is a motorize glider ) is not "capable of flying".
> I think shutting down the engines is probably the safest option when this sort of thing happens. You could argue they should stay in the present setting, but...
Shutting down an engine should always be a decision made by the pilot not a machine IMO. A pilot might prefer to blow out an engine if that gives him enough ( even a couple of seconds matter in this situation ) time to reach a save landing spot or avoid an obstacle.
> what would happen if one engine were at 0% and another 100%?
Pilots are train in this situation all the time and is part of the syllabus for a multi-engine rating. Basically the plane would try to turn to the side that the engine failed. Pilot will use opposite ruder and aileron to compensate while cutting back power in the good engine to just enough you can keep altitude if possible.
> Most aircraft are pretty good at gliding even without power, and I'd assume a deadstick landing is part of the pilots training.
So happen here too. The crew tried tried a dead-stick landing in a field when they realized the could not make the airport. Unfortunately the hit a High Power pole and the plane catch fire.
One of the crew members lost in the accident was a friend of my father. My condolence to the families of those who lost their live that day.
Ah! you can still buy them; here's one you can fold: https://www.google.com/search?q=carro+dela+compra+con+tres+r...: