Why synthetic vision?

CarlosF@grtavionics · #1 07-12-2010, 02:56 PM

A customer called GRT Avionics yesterday to share his story of an engine out experience while on-top, over mountainous terrain, climbing through Flight Level 180.

In short, he heard and felt a loud bang and the engine immediately stopped. He radioed air traffic control (ATC) and they helped as much as they could.

As he descended into the cloud covered mountains; radio and radar contact were eventually lost. The pilot used the "forward looking synthetic vision" on his Horizon HX and flew the plane. The result was a safe, uneventful landing. "It may have saved my life", he said.

Details of the event and ATC audio to be released in coming weeks.

Fly safe.

Carlos Fernandez
GRT Avionics

mcencula · #2 07-12-2010, 05:36 PM

Glad the crisis ended well. Good work to all.

lostpilot28 · #3 07-12-2010, 06:02 PM

That's a fantastic testament to the benefit of synthetic vision. I'll be looking for the details of the event in the near future!

tonyjohnson · #4 07-12-2010, 06:43 PM

I just tried to imagine being in that scenario. IFR on top, engine out, descending into clouds over mountains !!!!

I think I will go make a drink now.

Ironflight · #5 07-12-2010, 07:00 PM

You know, not very many years back (maybe three or four), the only choice for Synthetic Vision was in the high-end avionics suites where the "ad-on" would have been about $50K. Would I have put SV into my airplane at that price? Probably not - I just don't have that kind of money! But....with the main Experimental EFIS providers all offering it in their equipment STANDARD, how can you argue with the peace of mind you'd get in a situation like that?!

I've had SV for a couple of years now, but unfortunately live on the Gulf Coast where it is flat as a pancake. It sure is nice when we head out west though! Since we DO fly instruments, and VFR at night, I think it will be a feature of whatever we have from now on - when you consider that most of the systems come that way - why not? Would i still fly a "six pack" in the mountains? Sure I would, if that is what I had, and it was reasonable weather to do so. But if had a choice, I'd take the SV airplane any day.

Paul

L.Adamson · #6 07-12-2010, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironflight

Would i still fly a "six pack" in the mountains? Sure I would, if that is what I had, and it was reasonable weather to do so. But if had a choice, I'd take the SV airplane any day.

And of course, when we add the terrain information we get from our Garmin 696's (or other) to the six pac, it's a much better situation too. I have this tendency to recreate mountain accidents (to a degree) when flying over various accident areas. There are lot's of them out here in the mountain west. My 696 gives plenty of warning, but synthetic vision adds the icing to the cake. When terrain GPS and synthetic vision becomes the norm with lower pricing..............I think it will be just great! These day's we just don't have to run into mountains anymore with the technology that's available, but some still do. But come to think of it, there seems to be less flight into terrain accidents out here this year. Maybe the day has come!

L.Adamson -- RV6A

flickroll · #7 07-12-2010, 07:38 PM

SV very likely helped saved the life of the pilot who had the engine out. We are very fortunate to have SV technology in affordable equipment....AFS, GRT, Garmin, Dynon, and others.

SV also makes flying instrument approaches a whole lot easier. On an ILS for example, keep the velocity vector on the runway looming off in the distance and wind correction is automatically taken care of. Hand flying this or an LPV is an absolute piece of cake.

We really have come a long way from steam gauges...it was not long ago when many of us were flying approaches with with an air driven attitude indicator with questionable reliability. Perhaps there was some sort of backup in the aircraft, perhaps not. Today, with dual screens, dual error checking AHRS, backup batteries, etc., overall safety is getting better and better.

Bavafa · #8 07-12-2010, 07:46 PM

A couple of instrument approaches I have done lately, it has been in relatively narrow (for my comfort level) valley that you have hills on both sides and you enter the valley perpendicular to the hills.. My fear is that if I am off course by accident and being low would have consequence that I don't want to contemplate. Anyway, having the SV, just gives me that one more level of comfort and it is amazing how realistic it displays things. I LOVE the GRT EIFS.

BlackRV7 · #9 07-12-2010, 09:15 PM

Well I'm chiming in on this one as I had GRT synthetic vision on my 7 and will have it in my 10. While flying IFR, or at night, it is adds such a comfort level plus situational awareness that you just don't get without it. Keep it up you experimental EFIS guys, you are worth it to us.

breister · #10 07-13-2010, 06:33 PM

Synthetic vision is nice, but you get virtually the same information on a Garmin hand-held with terrain - just takes a little interpretation.

Not knocking SV in any way; if it had been mature when I made my purchase decisions I would have bought it - just pointing out that the data is there for you to interpret from a 396/496 which many people already have on board.