^That is why the long term goal is to blend both technologies. You would have the computer based terrain displayed with the relativity short-range infrared mixed in with it. So during an IMC approach, you would see the synthetic terrain and runway 5 miles out, but as you approach 1/2 mile final, the deer picked up with the IR camera would be shown walking onto the runway.

Here is what Honeywell is doing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEvXr1nsJcE

 

Beautiful!

I love the civilian version of the 'velocity vector' and ACLS needles approach symbology.
With those tools in my back pocket i might do better with this **new** technology!

 

Collins is playing with a sub-mode of the weather radar to give a millimeter wave radar image, in addition to the IIR image. (EVS). The whole idea is fuse the various images into one and thus confirm the synthetic image as being accurate.

Remember none of thus will negate approach design program--airports and runways will still to be "surveyed" and approaches designed IAW TERPS or PANS-OPS.

GF

 

Looks like good system.

I just got back from doing some approaches with another pilot and longtime friend. We practiced flying to 30 ft AGL or so with me using the synvis (he was safety pilot ready to call go-around or take airplane) and I was heads down until where roundout would start. The synvis pic of the runway is too small to use it from the FAF so I used RNAV to mins (was ~300 AGL this approach) then synvis to 40-50 AGL, just beyond runway threshold, then 30-40 ft AGL. Did 2 low approaches, and once to landing heads up around 30 ft above runway.

Very easy to do and works surprisingly well. Worst part was transition to visual after looking up and getting the hood out of the way quickly, ballooned a bit due to maintaining higher approach speeds longer.

It is an interesting prospect for the GA pilot. I don't think I would ever do it in real conditions but I might practice this on occasion. I was really concerned about the danger practicing this but with an alert very competent safety pilot it felt ok.

 

Imagine the all too cliche Dr. in his Bonanza with his friends/family on board, not proficient, no alert/competent safety pilot on board

 

Yeah, docs sometimes do stupid things in airplanes. But so does everybody if you read the NTSB reports.

I did a few more of these since. A couple impressions - number one I dont think this is that different than riding the ILS to the pavement which I've heard people do in an emergency, but it will EASILY keep you right centered over the runway. It is actually very similar to a video game. The runway is really small and there is illusion that you are nearer and higher (yes it is odd) to the runway than in reality. It works, again would save you from death.

I had my non-instrumented rated fellow pilot MD attempt to use it and it was disastrous. He couldn't maintain proper altitude while heads down (were going to use the MEF+500) and even attempting to get lined up was impossible. I was pretty surprised at how bad he was but he's older and it has been years (decades?) since he did the 3 hours of hood time. It would not work for non-instrument pilots as is unfortunately, need at least VNAV or something else to get you to the runway.

 

The sarcasm wasn't thick nor obvious enough for ya doc?

 

Not really... I'm not sure I "get it" - docs have been stereotypically linked to crashes, at least historically. I'm not sure the analysis is still true however.

Accidents: Flying Physicians - TIME

The Mohler report is pretty old now, and a lot less people fly now than even 25 years ago.

 

Found the Mohler report - I haven't read this in decades.

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/res...ia/am66-25.pdf

 

Unfortunately a too typical story, taking his whole family with him and a family friend.

Anesthesiologist Dr. Stephen Lester Killed in Plane Crash - The Vitals Blog

and try to read the NTSB report without becoming angry.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...no=1&pgsize=50

Fields become IFR for a reason.