alf, anyone can make a navigational error and end up approaching high terrain, no matter how hard we train and how vigilant we are, so EGPWS is a good thing. But landing long is usually not a mistake, it's an attitude, it's a deliberate act. You know you land long. If you flare and you do not touch down within five seconds, you know you are leaving the best part of the TDZ behind you. If you cross the threshold and you do not hear 'fifty', you know you are in a bad position. We have all been there, haven't we. Do we really need another box to shout at us? Or should we change our attitude?
Actually I'm not against warning systems with exotic acronyms at all. I'm just saying that landing long is mostly a matter of attitude. Be it corprorate attitude, flight deck attitude, individual attitude, you name it. It's attitude change we need. We need to regard the long landing in the same light as bing unstable at 500'.
Anyway, to switch focus if I may: why do some of you prefer an ILS over RNAV? I sense a certain fear, a certainnreserve and I don't think it has anything to do with the higher minimum..
An Airbus will happily fly any RNAV approach, so what is the hesitation about? Unfamiliarity?