there is now so much new avionics out there that can make these approaches so much easier and safer but for a variety of reasons we are not using them. How much of a difference would a synthetic vision based off a terrain data base have made in this situation.I know they are not to be used for navigation purposes but it would have brought to the pilot's attention that he was closing with the ground.
First
, what a tragedy. At a minimum, six families in absolute grief, if including the operator. More, obviously, by extrapolation. My sincere condolences to all directly and indirectly involved.
Whilst I acknowledge your comment which i have
bolded, myself, I use an altimeter to monitor approach profile and MDA.Synthetic vision should have no input to an instrument approach. Synthetic vision is not in any way an appendice to an approach chart. Sure, its an aid in situational awareness but beware the Children of the Magenta Line mentality. Fly the promulgated approach chart, not the synthetics. It is not a video game.
I'm not in any way having a go at the PIC who I have no knowledge of, but I believe was quite experienced. You don't get a gig flying a C404 IFR with a basic CPL resume despite the current state of play in industry. Also, what cost is considered acceptable to add this capability to a 40 year old airframe. 50% the cost of the current asset? Money down the drain.
I know the operator involved and wish him well in the coming weeks, the AOC renewal is due in two weeks. I also know the Cairns CASA culture, poor bugger.