NTSB Prelim

[douglas393]

You have to rmrmber that the majority of 'glass' is still not SVT, and in at least one 'glass safety study' I read, SVT was specifically excluded from the research. All glass without SVT is just a rehash of the same old crap we've been using since Doolittle's days.

SvT has nothing to do with making a careful pilot, it's about having an informed pilot.

You may want to let your life depend on SVT, I for one feel that depending on anyone thing to get me out of trouble is a recipe for trouble. SVT may be the next greatest thing since sliced bread for aviation, but then again not. I have a nonSVT G1000, but also have a 796 with its version of SVT(which I realized is not true SVT). I also have terrain guidance on my moving map, my PFD, and aural terrain warnings, they are just but a complement to my other tools for situational awareness, not a replacement.

As for the crash that started this thread, I am still not convinced SVT would have helped. As for me I am not yet convinced spending $10,000 on SVT is worth it. Now this may be because I fly in south florida and the highest terrain we have are towers and buildings. I may feel different if I flew in the more mountainous areas of the country, but I still do not feel that SVT is a replacement for situational awareness, and based on my reading of the causes of GA accidents am not convinced it would make a difference in the vast majority of either IFR or VFR accidents including many but not all CFIT accidents.

 

[flyingmoose]

I could make that assumption and drive straight into terrain that rises faster than I can climb when if I had SVT I could see that 20 degrees right or left would have been what was required. A general warning while operating at speed in 3 dimensions is not adequate for conflict resolution.

No one is debating what he could have seen if he had SVT. Point is he did NOT and the best couse of action would have been to execute a FFP climb. He was not in a good situation and at that point you do the best you can with what you have in front of you. Most airlines do not have SVT but have procedures for terrain warnings.

I go with Henning on this. I've been around a lot of synthetic vision & mountains. Unless you're flipping through menus (as may of happend with the two CAP pilots out of Las Vegas).............it's almost too hard to ignor whats on the screen.

However, you never know. A few years back a figher fighting bomber slammed into the mountain, on the opposite side of the peak, from where I live. The co-pilot who was flying, told the captain that the Garmin 396 handheld was showing terrain up ahead. They were scud-running, with the captain giving orders for headings and altitude, as he was somewhat familiar with the area. When the co-pilot questioned the captain about the terrain warnings, there was no response. As to whether he didn't hear him, we don't know. This is all from cockpit recordings. Never the less, they just simply slammed into the mountain at 240 knots. Perhaps a large SV screen would have been a bit more convincing. No excuse to scud run, though.

Well you can go with whoever you want. But fact is most of user are not flying with SVT right now. I don't disagree that it is a fantastic system and would do alot of good for those who find themselves really needing it. But scud running and still not listening to the technology that you have in your aircraft is perhaps stupid. Perhaps your right, might have saved them, but should he have been there to begin with?

 

[Henning]

You may want to let your life depend on SVT, I for one feel that depending on anyone thing to get me out of trouble is a recipe for trouble. SVT may be the next greatest thing since sliced bread for aviation, but then again not. I have a nonSVT G1000, but also have a 796 with its version of SVT(which I realized is not true SVT). I also have terrain guidance on my moving map, my PFD, and aural terrain warnings, they are just but a complement to my other tools for situational awareness, not a replacement.

As for the crash that started this thread, I am still not convinced SVT would have helped. As for me I am not yet convinced spending $10,000 on SVT is worth it. Now this may be because I fly in south florida and the highest terrain we have are towers and buildings. I may feel different if I flew in the more mountainous areas of the country, but I still do not feel that SVT is a replacement for situational awareness, and based on my reading of the causes of GA accidents am not convinced it would make a difference in the vast majority of either IFR or VFR accidents including many but not all CFIT accidents.

My life and situational awareness depends on one thing, information. SVT does not replace situational awareness, it creates it by giving information in a natural format that does not require reference to 8 instruments and a paper chart then a process to derive ones position that can take longer than the distance to the terrain takes to cover at 2 or 3 miles a minute or more.

When operating IMC off of airways as in the old system, the only real situational awareness is what I get from ATC. Personally I would rather be looking at the real time 3D imaging of my surroundings that is installed in my plane than solely relying on ATC not to drive me into a mountain.

With SVT you have 2 forms of situational awareness info, without you have one. I prefer redundancy especially when there is a clear record of ATC driving people into mountains. You can rely on them if you please, I personally lack that faith and trust when there is an option to be had.

 

[douglas393]

My life and situational awareness depends on one thing, information. SVT does not replace situational awareness, it creates it by giving information in a natural format that does not require reference to 8 instruments and a paper chart then a process to derive ones position that can take longer than the distance to the terrain takes to cover at 2 or 3 miles a minute or more.

When operating IMC off of airways as in the old system, the only real situational awareness is what I get from ATC. Personally I would rather be looking at the real time 3D imaging of my surroundings that is installed in my plane than solely relying on ATC not to drive me into a mountain.

With SVT you have 2 forms of situational awareness info, without you have one. I prefer redundancy especially when there is a clear record of ATC driving people into mountains. You can rely on them if you please, I personally lack that faith and trust when there is an option to be had.

Here you get no argument from me.

 

[Henning]

Here's the long and short to SVT and cost: Information costs money, what is the information that saves your life worth? That's all there is to it. SVT doesn't fly the plane, SVT doesn't replace skill or knowledge, SVT doesn't save your life. SVT provides you the information to use your skill and knowledge to self rescue from CFIT situations, that is all, and it does a hell of a good job at it.

 

[L.Adamson]

You may want to let your life depend on SVT, I for one feel that depending on anyone thing to get me out of trouble is a recipe for trouble. SVT may be the next greatest thing since sliced bread for aviation, but then again not. I have a nonSVT G1000, but also have a 796 with its version of SVT(which I realized is not true SVT). I also have terrain guidance on my moving map, my PFD, and aural terrain warnings, they are just but a complement to my other tools for situational awareness, not a replacement.

As for the crash that started this thread, I am still not convinced SVT would have helped. As for me I am not yet convinced spending $10,000 on SVT is worth it. Now this may be because I fly in south florida and the highest terrain we have are towers and buildings. I may feel different if I flew in the more mountainous areas of the country, but I still do not feel that SVT is a replacement for situational awareness, and based on my reading of the causes of GA accidents am not convinced it would make a difference in the vast majority of either IFR or VFR accidents including many but not all CFIT accidents.

A better way of looking at this.............is to go through many accident reports, and see just how fast "situational awareness" was lost. I do live in mountain country, and this isn't Florida. Just a loss of a few seconds is the difference between living & death. Yes...........SVT can easily make that difference. I don't know about how many aircraft accident's you've studied, but it's been one of my major interests for the last 35 years. Ever since a DC-8 plowed into the mountain above my home.
As I've said, we'd average three CFIT a year, just in my single mountain west state.

L.Adamson