If a SBAS stacks up as a general benefit....do you oppose LPV in the GAFA? Because IT WILL SAVE LIVES!
Oz,
Of course I don't "oppose" LPV, and nothing I have written on this thread suggests such a silly notion.
What I have continually asked is:
"What is the catch??"
What is different, this time, in this trial, that the outcome will be different ---- why will it stack up this time, what "general benefit" when the benefits of SBAS/WAAS years ago didn't stack up, not even close, and many of the then non-aviation benefits are now already available --- have been for years.
A lot of money being spent to tell us what we already know.
"IT WILL SAVE LIVES"
----statistically, yes, but thankfully the occurrence of CFIT in Australia is extremely rare, that is why the value of a minor reduction in minima is difficult to sensibly evaluate.
If you look at the accident record, UFIT --- uncontrolled flight into terrain can be seen, in the circumstances having LPV would not have altered the outcome.
Two examples come to mind, the Citation that crashed out the back of Mareeba, and the Lockhart River Metro.
As to the latter, much has been written, there are many opinion, but I was involved in part of the investigation, including flying the whole sequence per the flight recorder trace in a simulator.
What the flight recorder showed (regardless of anything else) was an approach that was no where near conforming to the published letdown, and the approach
was wildly unstable. If the PIC is going to demonstrate such "behavior" why would LPV make any difference. If the PIC had conformed to the published letdown, there would have been no crash.
So, back to my question:
"What is the catch" ---- that millions of taxpayers $$$$ are being spent. Why are we going to learn anything new about a rather mature and well understood aid.
Tootle pip!!