AA. I'm on no soap box here, and quite frankly I can't see how you've read any disrespect towards the crew on my part in anything I said. Not even implied criticism, it's simply not there.
All I said was what might have happened; that is, they might have been using TAWS to navigate out of the valley, TAWS might have been the best choice left available to them, and that TAWS navigation data might have been subject to error for no fault of their own. Others here seem to be in agreeance with me, that GPS and TAWS has it limitations, but if you've got it, use it if you need it.
No one is saying the crew shouldn't have been using it, or even whether they were actually using it. I also said we don't know what mode the TAWS was in, or what it was reporting, and I gave a whole host of reasons why. For all we know the wing might have fallen off the plane and TAWS or navigation uncertainty had nothing to do with it. We just don't know.
I haven't said anywhere what caused the crash or who is at fault, that is left to the investigating authority. My "insight" as you say is based purely on my knowledge of the equipment fitted to the aircraft, having used this exact same equipment extensively throughout PNG for years. If I'm wrong in a technical sense about anything I have said about the equipment then so be it, I did qualify my comments that I was unsure about some aspects. My 7+ years of PNG insight also says there is an element of bad luck at play here, as is often the case. My insight also says the crew was doing the best they could with the equipment they had in the circumstances they faced.
As Bush Boss says, if faced with a situation you use whatever tools you have available to you. If that means using TAWS to navigate out of a valley, lucky you for having it. Much better than not. If the engine stopped or the wing fell off, or if the GPS was degraded, that's just the worst luck.
I welcome further criticism of anything I have said here. That's what the forum is for.