See http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19960403-0 for the quick-and-dirty, and http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/ComAndRep/Dubrovnik/summary-T43.html for a very good analysis.
Well depending on what you believe Ron Brown, Commerce Secretary under Clinton was either involved in a aircraft accident or was murdered at the orders of Clinton and a cover up of an aircraft accident was undertaken to hide the murder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Brown_(U.S._politician)
This ain't the Spin Zone, so if anyone wants to further discuss the latter thought, take it there.
I'm also surprised that you don't have GPS. It was my impression that for at least a few years all turbine powered airplanes with 6 or more seat had to have TAWS (Terrain Awareness and Warning System) and that airplanes had to have a GPS to make it work. That's when all our airplanes, which didn't already have it, finally got GPS.
), so if they're using it, we can usually expect to get a visual approach to it. The only problem is, the GPS database in our GPWS doesn't know it's there. It sees us descending at 700fpm toward what it thinks is nothing but open field and it goes NUTS. We have to disable the GPWS before starting the visual approach to 32 (the disable button is the one under the flip-up plastic cover under COM 2, in case you're interested). So yes, we have GPS on board, but not in a way that we can use for navigation.
That seems... dumb. You would think if there is already a receiver and processor it wouldn't be too much more cost to install a control head. It would give you a lot more flexibility in routing not to mention accuracy. But what do I know.
That seems... dumb. You would think if there is already a receiver and processor it wouldn't be too much more cost to install a control head. It would give you a lot more flexibility in routing not to mention accuracy. But what do I know.
