lomapaseao;
[quote]I'm not sure that there is necessarily a direct correlation here with EGPWS.quote]
No, I'm not sure there is a correlation here either - that's the reason I posed the question.
That said, any incident that was serious enough to be reported would invariably set off the GPWS, (but not by the EGPWS. Here is why I think this:
The crew likely would not have come to such a conclusion before an EGPWS warned them of terrain. A "Terrain Ahead" warning is a lot earlier than a "Terrain, PULL UP" warning from a GPWS.
In other words, it is my inclination to doubt that EGPWS was installed.
If this was the serious incident it is being portrayed as, the EGPWS would likely have gone off before the crew came to a conclusion that they were too low.
If it wasn't installed, the crew may or may not have come to their conclusions before a "GPWS Pull UP" warning, simply because such a warning is much later by virtue of the fact that it is "looking down, not ahead", (sorry, not offering a "lesson" in GPWS as I think you know all this - but expanding upon my reasons for asking, and thinking the way I have).
Raymond767's description of the approach is excellent and offers a notion on the difficulty of the approach. Perhaps this aspect was part of the incident.
I would hate to think that the crew were indeed bailed out by the EGPWS system.[/
Hmm..you wouldn't "hate to think" that a crew was bailed out by the TCAS though, would you? Either a loss of SA occurred and they realized it, (just like the 727 crew did moments before they crashed northwest of Washington Dulles during a dark-and-dirty approach,
Accident Report), or a regular GPWS installation saved them. An EGPWS would have gone off before, or about the same time they figured their situation out.
IMHO...just thinking it through.