Text 13852, 37 rader
Skriven 2011-02-03 10:27:40 av Ward Dossche (2:292/854)
  Kommentar till text 13844 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Re: The Smolensk crash on April 10, 2010
================================================
Michiel,
 
Mv>WD> Had a CAT-III ILS been working, the visual limits were still too
Mv> low.
 
Mv> ILS, NDB, VOR, DME, radar talk down.... What puzzles me is why the
Mv> flyboys still kling to 40 years old technology. In my car I have a nav
Mv> aid that can bring me within 3 metres of the beginning of my drive way.
Mv> Or yours if desired. No need for a beacon on my house our yours, or any
Mv> other location bound equipment. The gadget cost les than EUR 200.
 
Mv> Why is the same technology not deployed te get aircraft to the threshold
Mv> of a runway?
 
Years ago ... I was in the cockpit of a Fokker-28 and the operator had a TomTom
intalled in the instrumentpanel. It was good enough for the pilot to track his
flight and announce "look to the left and you will see ..." but too slow to
track a landing.
 
I would guess the precision and speed of a GPS-device as they are now is
insufficient for accurate up to the meter positioning of a craft that comes
down at 300km/h instead of your car travelling at 80km/h.
 
Plus it has no situational awareness, how high is it, wind direction,
air-density, other traffic.
 
The future no doubt will bring other wonderful technological innovations.
 
So what's wrong with inertial navigation? The Brits during Operation Black Buck
1 flew from Ascension to Port Stanley (Falklands) about 7.500km over open water
with only inertial navigation and when sighting land only needed a correction
of less than 100 meter prior to the bombing run.
 
 \%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.59
 * Origin: Many Glacier / WikiLeaks http://213.251.145.96 / (2:292/854)