Again it surprises me what I get out of pprune! What maeroda is doing is so very different from what my experience has been. Your use of the system reminds me of the NZ NVFR accident a couple of years ago when the pilot was following an electronic track in a valley at night, missed a waypoint by not very much at all and clipped a bit of terrain. Fortunately the pilot did a great job bringing the aircraft and all the pax home despite some injuries and was able (and humble enough) to share the experience with all of us.
This accident raised the debate to which JimL refers and to which should be again stimulated here: can such systems be used to ensure terrain clearance?
Would you do the same thing in total IMC? What is the difference between total IMC and dark night VFR?
Methinks that unless you can
see the ground, get above LSALT. I cannot yet bring myself to rely on my own skills to follow what almost amounts as a form of terrain following radar.
I have often wondered what the procedure would be if you had a GPS or radar failure in those circumstances? (they never fail do they?)
For my money, below LSALT means you must see the ground. Enhanced vision systems (uncooled IR) weigh in at less than 2kg, cost less than $15,000 US and require no training. NVG should be added for night at $40,000 per cockpit and $24,000 for 2 X sets of NVG and weight less than 5kg combined. Cheap, light, no "bitchin", and you see the actual ground, not some software engineers perception of it!!!
Different to off-shore. EVS and a sensibly used RadAlt warning system would suffice I think - but I have no offshore night experience so may be talking crap. As usual!
