Plane crash in Kentucky???

[mtrv]

According to the most latest reports, it was the wrong runway in pre-dawn darkness.

If this, IS the case, then it's time for the charts first, and GPS second crowd to get off their butts, and realize that a moving map GPS showing the aircrafts actual position relative to taxiways and runways can be very beneficial, and life saving!

All of this technology is available now for panel mount and handhelds. The airport diagram can even automatically load on the MFD during taxi operations on arrival or before departure.

When it's in front of your face, with actual position; something that a paper chart won't do, then it's easy to see where technology counts!

Yes, I'm quite pissed at everyone who believes that GPS techology should come in second place to old school. I see it all the time here.

 

[jdlilfan]

I was in LEX on Monday and there were quite a few NOTAMS about runway lighting and markers INOP due to construction although most of the construction looked like it was related to rwy 4 when I was landing. Feels kinda wierd knowing that I was just there the other day. Condolences to the families of the PAX and Crew.

 

[Say Again Over]

With an AirTran jumpseater, RIP

 

[rubicon789]

RIP.... However, I think the newest news confirmed the wrong RNWY t/o by indicating that there are score marks in the grass at the end of RNWY 8/26. Which would indicate that the crew departed from that RNWY. Maybe they rushed, maybe nobody ever questioned why the heading was off... we will probably never no. Be careful out there.

Fly safe. Condolences go out to the families of the PAX and crew.

 

[TOOL CRIB]

Sure was. In another (now locked) thread you can see the marks. Go to: http://www.heraldleaderphoto.com/featuredgalleries/featuredgalleriesindex.html

I think it's the top gallery, and it's now the sixth picture in the series. You can see dual bogey main marks at the end of a small berm at the end of runway 26, the perimeter fence has been taken out and treetops are gone. Looks like they went off the end of the runway on or within a foot or two of the ground, hit the berm and got pushed up about 20 feet, through the treetops and came back down a few thousand feet later.

 

[A Squared]

According to the most latest reports, it was the wrong runway in pre-dawn darkness.

If this, IS the case, then it's time for the charts first, and GPS second crowd to get off their butts, and realize that a moving map GPS showing the aircrafts actual position relative to taxiways and runways can be very beneficial, and life saving!

All of this technology is available now for panel mount and handhelds. The airport diagram can even automatically load on the MFD during taxi operations on arrival or before departure.

When it's in front of your face, with actual position; something that a paper chart won't do, then it's easy to see where technology counts!

Yes, I'm quite pissed at everyone who believes that GPS techology should come in second place to old school. I see it all the time here.

Sigh.... You really just don't get it do you? Nobody says that GPS should be discarded as it does not offer any benefits. Obviously, it is a very powerful tool. What people are saying, is that it may not be the smartest thing to train students from the beginning on glass, using all the latest nav technology. The reason being is that if you do, they may not develop fundamental skills which are basic to *all* aviation, skills that they may need in an emergency, or more likely, will probably need at thier first jobs, because thier first jobs likely will not be in glass cockpits.

It's like autopilots. Autopilots are a great invention. Nobody says that Autopilots should be discarded. However, you'd have to be stupid in the extreme to believe that primary iunstruction should be done exclusively with autopilots. The reason being that someone who has relied on an autopilot for everything except takeoff and landing since thier first flight will not have the skills to fly an airplane by heand in VFR conditions, let alone on instruments.

Someone who had learned to fly under all conditions by hand, can learn to use an autopilot very easily, whereas someone who has depended on an autopilot since thier first flight will not be able to fly by hand.

Likewise, someone who had learned to basic navigation will be able to adapt to more advanced nav systems quite easily, whereas someone who has depended on a GPS moving map display from the very begining will never develop the necessary skills to navigate without.

This seems such a simple and obvious concept, why do you find it so elusive?

To bring things back to the topic at hand. Yeah, sure if they'd had some spiffy airport diagram pulled up on thier tv screen, and they had cross checked it as they lined up, they could have noticed thier mistake before it was too late.

By the same token, if they had checked thier compass against the runway heading, they also would have prevented this accident. Now, I'm not placing blame, or speculating on causes, but apparently they did not do this. A compass/heading indicator check against runway heading is one of those basic, day one things you learn, and it appears, from what we know at this point, it would have prevented this accident. Again, I want to emphasize I'm not criticizing or assigning blame, I'm just making the point that yeah, gee-whiz technology could prevent this if you use it but so too could almost century old technolgy and procedures prevent this if you use it

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

According to the most latest reports, it was the wrong runway in pre-dawn darkness.

If this, IS the case, then it's time for the charts first, and GPS second crowd to get off their butts, and realize that a moving map GPS showing the aircrafts actual position relative to taxiways and runways can be very beneficial, and life saving!

All of this technology is available now for panel mount and handhelds. The airport diagram can even automatically load on the MFD during taxi operations on arrival or before departure.

When it's in front of your face, with actual position; something that a paper chart won't do, then it's easy to see where technology counts!

Yes, I'm quite pissed at everyone who believes that GPS techology should come in second place to old school. I see it all the time here.

He will hit a mountain sooner or later using his GPS.

CE

 

[epic!]

im sure it wont be too long before people start thinking this crash was a conspiracy

 

[mtrv]

To bring things back to the topic at hand. Yeah, sure if they'd had some spiffy airport diagram pulled up on thier tv screen, and they had cross checked it as they lined up, they could have noticed thier mistake before it was too late.

Getting back to the point. Should an airport diagram showing extremely obvious differences in runway lengths appeared on 2/3rds of a 15" center MFD, such as it will in the new Cessna Mustang, then the odds are much higher, that the mistake would have been caught; regardless of the basics of not catching the runway heading.

Why call it spiffy, or fancy as some here would,if it could have made the difference? It most likely would have made all the difference, as it would have been so dang hard too miss!

Yes, it's good to see high resolution big picture screens evolve through GA on up to business jets, and finally something such as the Boeing Dreamliner. But why not; I remember when a standard moving map handheld contained more vital navigation information than many commercial and military cockpits. There are a lot of accident cases out there, where even a handheld could have been all the difference. It's been reviewed and documented numerous times.

Besides, I don't know what's worse; glass panel pilots not being proficient at old school navigation; or the old school boys and girls not having a clue how to operate glass, and won't dare admit it. I think we're somewhere in the middle of all this, right now.

edit: just hate it when **** is changed to dang. Takes all the emphasis out of it, and makes me feel religious or something.

 

[mtrv]

He will hit a mountain sooner or later using his GPS.
CE

And, why would you say that? Perhaps if it's one of those old school low resolution, narrow field of view GPS's that draw a line on an empty background, then it's possible.

However, with today's terrain depicting, visual terrain warning, and audio terrain warning GPS's in high resolution color, the chances are most likely a lot less. And with 3D virtual terrain presentations, the chances will drop even farther.

Just think, someday, even the modern airliner cockpit might have uplinked XM Satellite type weather, dipicting weather for hundreds of miles, instead of the limitations imposed by radar.

I know of several airline pilots who are jealous right now; and I know many retired commercial and military pilots who would no longer care to fly long cross country flights without XM weather. We're all in that older age, high performance experimental/homebuilt crowd.

Yep, once they've seen it, and used it, they certainly know the value. This is fact! I'm also surprised by how many high tech glass panels go into these kitbuilt airplanes. But if you have money, and the interest to learn how to use them, then why not?

 

[A Squared]

Here's a good example of someone who is completely dependent on sophisticated navigation flying right into the side of a mountain .

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20021106X05441&key=1

He was counting on the magic to tell him if it was safe, and it didn't give him enough warning. Exactly why it let him down is a subject of discussion, but the bottom line is, it did let him dowm.

Now, if he had pulled out a sectional, and taken a look at the terrain, he would have seen that a direct turn toward Bethel puts you right into a ridgeline, but he just blasted off and trusted that the display would make up for his lack of situational awareness. Didn't work very well for him.

Besides, I don't know what's worse; glass panel pilots not being proficient at old school navigation; or the old school boys and girls not having a clue how to operate glass, and won't dare admit it. I think we're somewhere in the middle of all this, right now.

I think it should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense thet a glass dependent pilot who has never flown traditionally and is completely reliant on his glass to get him through the sky is much much worse than someone who is adept at establishing good situational awarenesss through traditional means but who has never worked with glass.

One of the aircraft my company operates is a (realatively) modern glass cockpit aircraft. I've jumpseated a couple of times and it's not rocket sience, in fact it's pretty simple. sure I don't know which buttons to push to make it do what I want, but that's just system specific training, as far as looking at it and knowing where I am, it's not tough. I doubt that someone who had learned to fly with all that help could step into my round dial cockpit and figure our where they were based on the raw data.

It's the difference between not having been trained on a specific system, and lacking fundamental skill essential to aviation.

There's a world of difference, and if you're unsure which is worse, you have a lot to learn.


Again, I want to reiterate that I am not putting down the technology. I am however, putting down the notion that you keep bleating, that we should skip learning basic airmanship because there are machines that can do it for us.

It's like insiting that we should drop basic arithmentic from elememtary education because we have reliable calculators now.

 

[DC4boy]

To the GPS touting guy; How 'bout situational awareness first?

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

And, why would you say that? Perhaps if it's one of those old school low resolution, narrow field of view GPS's that draw a line on an empty background, then it's possible.

However, with today's terrain depicting, visual terrain warning, and audio terrain warning GPS's in high resolution color, the chances are most likely a lot less. And with 3D virtual terrain presentations, the chances will drop even farther.

Just think, someday, even the modern airliner cockpit might have uplinked XM Satellite type weather, dipicting weather for hundreds of miles, instead of the limitations imposed by radar.

I know of several airline pilots who are jealous right now; and I know many retired commercial and military pilots who would no longer care to fly long cross country flights without XM weather. We're all in that older age, high performance experimental/homebuilt crowd.

Yep, once they've seen it, and used it, they certainly know the value. This is fact! I'm also surprised by how many high tech glass panels go into these kitbuilt airplanes. But if you have money, and the interest to learn how to use them, then why not?

A statistic waiting to happen.
What do you do when your precious moving map fails?
Since you have no practice with situational awareness using
normal instruments, you hit a mountain.

CE

 

[epic!]

i dont think this has been posted yet, but here are some shots of the crj

http://airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=N431CA&distinct_entry=true

 

[mtrv]

A statistic waiting to happen.
What do you do when your precious moving map fails?
Since you have no practice with situational awareness using
normal instruments, you hit a mountain.

CE

Since you've been following along with a sectional in hand, on the seat, knee board, whatever; you know exactly where you are, the second the GPS fails. Then just make sure your backup GPS is still right on target. You DO have a backup, as well as extra batteries, and a hand-held transceiver, don't you?

Of course, using high failure rates in GPS's as an excuse to not use them is pure fiction. The chances of an out of service navaid are greater, except for NOTAM areas where it's stated that the GPS may become inaccurate.

I suppose I'll just have to start a set of links to all those flight into terrain accidents, where situational awarness was lost, and no high res GPS with terrain features was on board. The listings go on and on and on. Yes, awarness could have been regained in a second, but not when a GPS unit isn't to be seen. A good moving map display on an MFD would probably prevent loss of awarness, even when you didn't realize it was lost.

Maybe I'll just start the links with Frank Sinatra's mother's aircraft, that hit a mountain around 50 years ago. These pilot's didn't realize they were lost either! Then there is Reba's band, the Ron Brown 737, the AA 757, and, and

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Since you've been following along with a sectional in hand, on the seat, knee board, whatever; you know exactly where you are, the second the GPS fails. Then just make sure your backup GPS is still right on target. You DO have a backup, as well as extra batteries, and a hand-held transceiver, don't you?

Of course, using high failure rates in GPS's as an excuse to not use them is pure fiction. The chances of an out of service navaid are greater, except for NOTAM areas where it's stated that the GPS may become inaccurate.

I suppose I'll just have to start a set of links to all those flight into terrain accidents, where situational awarness was lost, and no high res GPS with terrain features was on board. The listings go on and on and on. Yes, awarness could have been regained in a second, but not when a GPS unit isn't to be seen. A good moving map display on an MFD would probably prevent loss of awarness, even when you didn't realize it was lost.

Maybe I'll just start the links with Frank Sinatra's mother's aircraft, that hit a mountain around 50 years ago. These pilot's didn't realize they were lost either! Then there is Reba's band, the Ron Brown 737, the AA 757, and, and

Good luck...

CE

 

[lawfly]

Runway 26 unlighted, apparently.
The RJ is glass, isn't it? I don't really think this is a glass panel issue, or even a GPS issue. The practice of setting one's heading bug to runway heading, a standard pre-takeoff practice at some operations, comes to mind. There are heading bugs on full glass panels, too. Whatever your thoughts about glass, GPS, etc., there will probably be more attention paid now to heading indicators/bugs on line-up.
Of course, we don't know all the facts.
RIP.

 

[Say Again Over]

I now only fly out of a hand full of airports, most are the simplified layouts as in the new Hong Kong airport with a four parallel runways, terminal in the middle, how many little fields do the RJ's drivers have to be familiar with, new taxi procedures within the last week, very early morning and a complicated airport layout, tough conditions for anyone.

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Since you've been following along with a sectional in hand, on the seat, knee board, whatever; you know exactly where you are, the second the GPS fails. Then just make sure your backup GPS is still right on target. You DO have a backup, as well as extra batteries, and a hand-held transceiver, don't you?

Of course, using high failure rates in GPS's as an excuse to not use them is pure fiction. The chances of an out of service navaid are greater, except for NOTAM areas where it's stated that the GPS may become inaccurate.

I suppose I'll just have to start a set of links to all those flight into terrain accidents, where situational awarness was lost, and no high res GPS with terrain features was on board. The listings go on and on and on. Yes, awarness could have been regained in a second, but not when a GPS unit isn't to be seen. A good moving map display on an MFD would probably prevent loss of awarness, even when you didn't realize it was lost.

Maybe I'll just start the links with Frank Sinatra's mother's aircraft, that hit a mountain around 50 years ago. These pilot's didn't realize they were lost either! Then there is Reba's band, the Ron Brown 737, the AA 757, and, and

There is a special advanced piece of equipment in my airplane that helps prevent departure on the wrong runway.

It's called a compass.

CE

 

[ksu_aviator]

Since you've been following along with a sectional in hand, on the seat, knee board, whatever; you know exactly where you are, the second the GPS fails. Then just make sure your backup GPS is still right on target. You DO have a backup, as well as extra batteries, and a hand-held transceiver, don't you?

Of course, using high failure rates in GPS's as an excuse to not use them is pure fiction. The chances of an out of service navaid are greater, except for NOTAM areas where it's stated that the GPS may become inaccurate.

I suppose I'll just have to start a set of links to all those flight into terrain accidents, where situational awarness was lost, and no high res GPS with terrain features was on board. The listings go on and on and on. Yes, awarness could have been regained in a second, but not when a GPS unit isn't to be seen. A good moving map display on an MFD would probably prevent loss of awarness, even when you didn't realize it was lost.

Maybe I'll just start the links with Frank Sinatra's mother's aircraft, that hit a mountain around 50 years ago. These pilot's didn't realize they were lost either! Then there is Reba's band, the Ron Brown 737, the AA 757, and, and

What about last week when the entire south east was NOTAM'd as unreliable GPS coverage? I have yet to see an entire region of VOR's drop offline.

Learn the basic six...F*uck the new Sh*t. When you can fly a partial panel NDB approach in turbulence with an engine out, then you can move up to a GPS. Uh....you might want to try that in a twin.

I'm really going to miss NDB's, they are the best navaid out there.