Air Tindi Crash near Lutsel K'e

[The Hammer]

TC is planning on making all commercial operators of turbine powered, 6 or more passenger aircraft, install TAWS A (10+pax) or B(6-9 pax).

This is within 2 years of it making it into the gazette which is maybe this fall but probably the spring 2012 (AC 600-003). There are exemptions for VFR only operators.

The cheapest TAWS A out there is the Sandel 3400 (which I dislike because it does too much else ie TCAS 1, RMI, etc and is rarely ever on the TAWS page because of that. It just screams "your f@#&%" before anyone tends to use it to its full potential.

The MFD does it much nicer and you will likely have seen the terrain in green, yellow, or red on the MFD before the aural warnings occur.

My only dislike is the distraction it can cause when operating at airports not in its database ie new airports, private airports, fishing lodge strips, etc. It can't tell you are near an airport and thus screams at you that you are about to die all the way to the ground (there is only so much of it you can disable/mute on some systems.) It is even more fun when it is loud enough for your pax to here.
We make sure we brief our pax/ new crew members of this when going to these airports. It eliminates a lot of phonecalls.

But most 705 operators who do this type of work have it and have lived with it.

The industry is already bitching about it.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/o ... 3-1347.htm

[Doc]

And the industry should be bitching about it.
Another TC knee jerk, head up their ass reaction.
The stuff works great if used as intended. Doesn't everything?
BUT, the guys .. running are just going to turn it off. Duh!
I guess TC thinks, that by forcing companies to spend money, it'll make flying safer? Therefore justifying they'er employment and huge pension plans.
It might wake you up if you go a little low on a published approach, but it's just "cargo" for low flights.
They'd be way farther ahead mandating FSI training and serviceable auto-pilots. The latter to keep the aircraft from descending in a turn, the former to help prevent this whole sordid scenario in the first place.

These comments are in no way in reference to the accident, but general thoughts on the subject at hand.

[ettw]

With respect to TAWs, I'm a big fan of it. For offstrip (which alot of my twin otter work is) ya it's a pain. But the ability to hit terrain inhibit once I'm visual reduces the nuisance warnings. And if I've screwed up with a letdown ie. altimeter it's got my back and you can be damn sure I'll react to it if it goes off when I wasn't expecting it.

The bottom line is we're human beings and we make mistakes and get tired. And in alot of the places 704 operators run out of, we have little to no radar or other forms of back up for us.

Bring it on!

ETTW

[grimey]

It's actually easier than that. Know how and when to execute the one hundred and eighty degree turn.

According to the news articles, he did turn around. Might have already been too late at that point though.

[Doc]

It's actually easier than that. Know how and when to execute the one hundred and eighty degree turn.

According to the news articles, he did turn around. Might have already been too late at that point though.

If it's too late for the turn, a max performance climb is the next trick in the bag to try, followed by vectors to an ILS or an RNAV someplace friendly. Reenforces my suggestion to make FSI training mandatory? Again I'm not referring directly to the accident in question, but in general. We really NEED to do something to make this industry safer.

[KAG]

My prayers go out to those affected by this tragedy...I'm getting sick of saying this.

Anyway this comment is in no way a judgement as to what may or may not have happened but in relation to the above comments- if your VfR and you can't see what's comming at you, you have no business being there.

Fly safe folks

[CAN_Yeager]

Hammer,
Quote out of the Sandel 3400 pilots guide
If any terrain alert occurs, the TAWS Alert text is shown at the bottom of
the screen and an audible alert message will occur on the cockpit audio
system. The REL (RELative Altitude) terrain display screen is
automatically selected at an appropriate range to put the alerting terrain on screen.
This action occurs on any alert, including GPWS. If the pilot has
previously selected TAWS INH, GPWS alerts are still enabled but no
terrain will be shown.

Since you mentioned the Sandel Taws I thought I would bring this up. Yes it is a TAWS, RMI, TCAS display etc etc but it's primary function is a TAWS unit and the software is set up to default as such. As for flying with the unit inhibited, there are usually remote annunciators installed with it, you would have a annoying amber "terrain inhibit on" right in your primary field of view.

As far as false alerts, update your terrain database when a new airport or cell tower pops up in your area. New database's are available almost weekly. But if someone really wants to fly in the weeds with passengers on board and there safety systems turn off what can I say to that.

You mentioned the MFD being the best. I would caution you to really know your equipment before make that call. A lot of MFD's and GPS units have ADVISORY terrain database's and do not met the TAWS TSO-151B standard. Some are intigrated with EGPWS units which is only part of the TAWS functionality.

For example a GNS 530 WAAS has a terrain advisory database only and a GNS 530 WAAS/TAWS looks identical to the GNS 530 WAAS but has a class B TAWS unit built in.
If your in any doubt, read your Flight Manual Supplements for details.

[Doc]

Hammer,
Quote out of the Sandel 3400 pilots guide
If any terrain alert occurs, the TAWS Alert text is shown at the bottom of
the screen and an audible alert message will occur on the cockpit audio
system. The REL (RELative Altitude) terrain display screen is
automatically selected at an appropriate range to put the alerting terrain on screen.
This action occurs on any alert, including GPWS. If the pilot has
previously selected TAWS INH, GPWS alerts are still enabled but no
terrain will be shown.

Since you mentioned the Sandel Taws I thought I would bring this up. Yes it is a TAWS, RMI, TCAS display etc etc but it's primary function is a TAWS unit and the software is set up to default as such. As for flying with the unit inhibited, there are usually remote annunciators installed with it, you would have a annoying amber "terrain inhibit on" right in your primary field of view.

As far as false alerts, update your terrain database when a new airport or cell tower pops up in your area. New database's are available almost weekly. But if someone really wants to fly in the weeds with passengers on board and there safety systems turn off what can I say to that.

You mentioned the MFD being the best. I would caution you to really know your equipment before make that call. A lot of MFD's and GPS units have ADVISORY terrain database's and do not met the TAWS TSO-151B standard. Some are intigrated with EGPWS units which is only part of the TAWS functionality.

For example a GNS 530 WAAS has a terrain advisory database only and a GNS 530 WAAS/TAWS looks identical to the GNS 530 WAAS but has a class B TAWS unit built in.
If your in any doubt, read your Flight Manual Supplements for details.

Or......you simply could not descend below a certain altitude to begin with?

[Redneck_pilot86]

As far as false alerts, update your terrain database when a new airport or cell tower pops up in your area. New database's are available almost weekly. But if someone really wants to fly in the weeds with passengers on board and there safety systems turn off what can I say to that.

Update the database every time there is a new bush strip built? Are you insane?

The ability to completly inhibit the GPWS is necessary for sure, we fly these airplanes VFR as well and I for one don't want to be listening to "Caution: Terrain" all bloody day.

[The Hammer]

Hammer,
Quote out of the Sandel 3400 pilots guide
If any terrain alert occurs, the TAWS Alert text is shown at the bottom of
the screen and an audible alert message will occur on the cockpit audio
system. The REL (RELative Altitude) terrain display screen is
automatically selected at an appropriate range to put the alerting terrain on screen.
This action occurs on any alert, including GPWS. If the pilot has
previously selected TAWS INH, GPWS alerts are still enabled but no
terrain will be shown.

Since you mentioned the Sandel Taws I thought I would bring this up. Yes it is a TAWS, RMI, TCAS display etc etc but it's primary function is a TAWS unit and the software is set up to default as such. As for flying with the unit inhibited, there are usually remote annunciators installed with it, you would have a annoying amber "terrain inhibit on" right in your primary field of view.

As far as false alerts, update your terrain database when a new airport or cell tower pops up in your area. New database's are available almost weekly. But if someone really wants to fly in the weeds with passengers on board and there safety systems turn off what can I say to that.

You mentioned the MFD being the best. I would caution you to really know your equipment before make that call. A lot of MFD's and GPS units have ADVISORY terrain database's and do not met the TAWS TSO-151B standard. Some are intigrated with EGPWS units which is only part of the TAWS functionality.

For example a GNS 530 WAAS has a terrain advisory database only and a GNS 530 WAAS/TAWS looks identical to the GNS 530 WAAS but has a class B TAWS unit built in.
If your in any doubt, read your Flight Manual Supplements for details.

You are correct but most operators with the Sandel installed them because it became a requirement to have TCAS 1 in a/c with +12,500 as of 2009 not for the TAWS function. An MFD type setup that displays TCAS, TAWS, wx and moving map provides a better picture for situational awareness. Your warnings of knowing your equipment are very true but should apply to the entire airplane right?

Sandel and most other avionics providers use Jeppesen which has a very terrible update timeframe for terrain in Canada. I can still go into a canadian airport that has GPS approaches only (meaning survey was done + 2 years ago) but no Terrain/airport info even though it has been open since last January and is a provincially operated. For this I pay almost a $1000 per aircraft.

Most small aircraft avionics providers only provide TAWS B capability ie avidyne, Garmin (G1000 will display some other mfr TAWS A info but has no plans to create their own system) leaving only Sandel in the <$50k market (Bendix King no longer sells new KMD systems due to lack of parts support from their suppliers.

[CAN_Yeager]

No argument the MFD has a nice way of putting all together. But now your talking about a wx radar, TCAS, TAWS with GPS etc. A quarter million in Avionics gets to be a tough sell for a operator that flies VFR. I am all for it but the operator might have some objections.

As for the Jeppesen Database they can't fix what is not reported. There are pretty receptive about correcting their database. For example a US goverment operator was doing some flights along the Aleutian Islands and found that only two of three island/mountains were being displayed. Once reported they corrected it.

Now I understand your not going to have every fishing village on the data base so I understand the need to Inhibit on your approach to these areas. But Enroute I agree with DOC you can simply fly higher. If you get a warning, you are a calculated 60 seconds from disaster if your current flight path remains unchanged. Even if your paying attention and thinking your not in any immediate danger, it does not leave a lot of time unforeseen events like a sudden engine failure. More altitude = more options and time.

[swordfish]

It's actually easier than that. Know how and when to execute the one hundred and eighty degree turn.

Actually, that's not easy at all...but it IS part of the "growing-old" experience....

[1000 HP]

I've flown in the area and it is nasty terrain. My flying was VFR in an amphib Caravan. Some of the runs are 500 or more miles and can be hard to complete VFR due to length of trip and lack of weather information. Occasionally some pilots are known to go into the cloud rather then sit down on a rock infested lake, where you never could tell if the giant rock was at surface or 60 feet down. BushIFR is common in the territories. In these situations, having TAWS to assist in a let-down is an asset.

I prefer to stay visual. The aircraft I fly now has a Sandel TAWS. On a beautiful day, I just pull the breaker. No problem. Day VFR at low level in poor conditions, I inhibit it but it can be painful. A price you pay for a little added awareness. At night VFR, I have it on all the time. It is a good instrument. I like my radar altimeter too and in crappy weather I set the DH to about 200' just as an eye-opener.

I suspect the passengers would like smashing into a rock a lot less than the TAWS saying "pull-up pull-up terrain imminent".

I also suspect a few of the Otter operators will be unhappy about being forced to put a TAWS into the rather limited dash space. And I don't think they should be forced to. And having additional equipment tends to increase the amount of weather pushed. That is a fact.

Just my thoughts..

[trey kule]

And having additional equipment tends to increase the amount of weather pushed. That is a fact

100% agreement. One of the big problems we face with low time pilots is they want to use all the new systems and equipment (to them), and will go out of their way to get themselves into a mess just to see if they can get out of it. The older, more experienced guys seem to suddenly get comfortable with pushing weather.
A big example is de/anti ice. Dont have it , and pilots seem to have an understanding. Put it in a plane and they all want to fly through the first aerial skating rink they can find, or simply keep flying in the crap, because they think they can now do it.
It is really to bad that many pilots can not grasp the concept that some of this good stuff is to make their flying safer, not expand their personal limits.

[Axial Flow]

And having additional equipment tends to increase the amount of weather pushed. That is a fact

Where is the information for this to be factual besides your opinion ?

[Doc]

And having additional equipment tends to increase the amount of weather pushed. That is a fact

Where is the information for this to be factual besides your opinion ?

Seat belts, air bags in autos.....they still have accidents.
Helmets on motorcyclists.....riders would take a lot LESS risks if they weren't wearing them.
Safe Boating Cards........Like that'll improve safety.....in some politician's dreams, perhaps.
The more safety gear you pile on a person, the more risk he'll take.....it's human nature.
Can we quote facts and figures? Probably not. If you think forcing operators to put a quarter million dollars into all the mandated "safety" equipment, will actually prevent CFIT accidents, your head is up your ass.
If you don't know that the MOCA is 3500 feet, and flying at 3000 feet WILL kill you, you ain't going to increase your odds with any piece of equipment.

[Axial Flow]

How much risk do airline pilots take having all that extra safety equipment? By your logic they would be flying 50 feet above their TAWS altitude read out and your flights would always make it in because it's human nature to take more risk when you have more layers of safety.

I think this should be a separate thread because this is not directly related to the Tindi crash.

[AJV]

Depending on where you are MOCA will give you 1000, 1500 or 2000 feet clearance. So 500 won't kill you.... I know....I am a smart ass.... but I do agree Doc, if you know your MOCA or your MSA and not break it then you can not hit anything.

[FenderManDan]

And having additional equipment tends to increase the amount of weather pushed. That is a fact

Where is the information for this to be factual besides your opinion ?

This is an easy one, think of hockey in the terms of "additional equipment". How would a game look like if you left the players in a skates and gloves only.

Motorcycle helmets is similar idea as Doc mentioned earlier. The riders don't like the helmets because nobody can tell who is showing off on the bike and the taxi drivers don't like the bike helmets because when they hit a biker the biker is dead anyway plus there is a big dent on the hood. If the biker did not have a helmet he would be just dead and no damage on the cab.

Just joking here, but hopefully you know what is meant by it.

[jpilot77]

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repor ... 1w0151.asp

[midwingcrisis]

Disturbing, sad and costly.

[mag check]

With that much THC in his blood, would he have been smoking just before takeoff? Or was it just 3 straight days of getting high before the flight?
10 times the limit seems to me to be pretty excessive consumption, and you would think someone would have noticed the state he was in, unless he was chronic and lived at those levels all the time?

[tempest2c]

I am very interested to know if some method is being developed, similar to the breathalizer to detect impairment due to THC use : I used to live in that part of the north and can testify to the high level of skill needed to fly in marginal conditions . A pilot needs to be at the absolute top of his or her game especially when solo pilot on board. Disturbing too that impairment can lead to unwise flight planning.

[I'm just one]

OH . . . my . . . goodness.
I just don't know what else to say.

[trey kule]

Where is the information for this to be factual besides your opinion

Speaking of facts, Axial, that comment was posted by 1000 hp ,not me..Good to know you alway get your facts straight.