Before posting I had checked the location of the North Magnetic Pole, since I remembered it being in over (under?) land, in high Canadian latitudes. https://en

Before posting I had checked the location of the North Magnetic Pole, since I remembered it being in over (under?) land, in high Canadian latitudes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_magnetic_pole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_magnetic_pole and more specifically the chart at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_magnetic_pole#/media/File:North_Magnetic_Poles.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_magnetic_pole#/media/Fil... show it is indeed 1) over water, 2) near the North Pole, near 86.400°N 156.786°E, and 3) close to where the Nautilus It is the North Geomagnetic Pole which is over land. Since nickdothutton said "magnetic north", I took it to be plausible. HOWEVER! I was wrong, because I didn't check far enough. The geographical location of the Earth's North Magnetic Pole moves, and in the 1950s it was in the Parry Channel of the Northwest Passage. Which is not where the Nautilus went. Do you have a reference for the 747 failure? I couldn't find one. In October 1977, Pan Am Flight 50, using a 747SP, circumnavigated the Earth via the poles: San Francisco over the North Pole to London, then Cape Town, then over the South Pole, then Auckland, then back to San Francisco. With no engine problems. While your description reminds me of BA flight 009 going through a volcanic cloud, where all four engines flamed out and they didn't get a restart until about 12000 feet - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_009 .