How did you find the synthetic vision Timothy? I have only seen pictures and articles, and I have wondered whether the synthetic vision element is distracting or whether it detracts from the instrument scan.
Having a good idea of the lie of the terrain before takeoff is also a good idea. Biggin 21, for example, has houses to the left, an escarpment straight ahead, but a lovely clear agricultural valley to the right.
A while ago I had some correspondence with an ex military pilot whose view was that – in a failure above a cloud layer situation – you should glide as fast as possible, for the maximum options below the cloud. Arguable too.
I believe that. When I was taking a low-flying course earlier this year, the instructor demonstrated that a C172 with simulated power failure starting from even a rather low cruise speed (100 kt) has enough kinetic energy to make a complete 180 without losing altitude and rolling out on final approach speed!
Obviously when flying at 150 feet AGL you don’t have many options if the engine fails, but you can at least make sure that you crash into the wind which can make a big difference for survivability.
It was actually the other way round. Both were into shallow rising ground, but South Wales was daytime PPL, Blackpool was nighttime student + instructor.
I was commenting on
I think a CFIT at any speed above Vs (60kt) is going to be fatal
I can only suggest that my comment was justified in the light of evidence.
There have been several recent non-fatal CFITs over recent years, including at least two in the UK, one in South Wales, the other inbound to Blackpool.
The one in (IIRC) Wales (a night navex with a student and an instructor and no GPS being used – not even by the instructor!!) hit the ground at a very shallow angle. They were incredibly lucky because there was hardly anything left of the aircraft, but they both had serious injuries. Both were lucky to be alive, never mind walking afterwards (after a long time of recovery). The instructor was also IMHO extraordinarily lucky to not get a personal injury claim by the student…
So, yes, if you hit smooth terrain at about a 0.5 to 1.0 degree angle, at maybe 90-100kt (C150 sort of speed), you may get away with it. But that is incredibly rare.
IMHO one needs a much more plausible Plan B than “somebody did this and survived”.
I observed a student in a DA42 do a SynVis Approach to 100’ today.
If aviation was invented today, we would not have the VFR v. IFR separation 
But if aviation was invented today, it would be immediately banned by the H&S goons
Just out of interest, I observed a student in a DA42 do a SynVis Approach to 100’ today. It was a non event and I am quite sure that he could have landed in anything he could have taken off in.
There have been several recent non-fatal CFITs over recent years, including at least two in the UK, one in South Wales, the other inbound to Blackpool.
Uses for a radalt perhaps?
And synvis. From 1000ft I could turn back and land on the runway 0/0. Maybe not pretty but I won’t hit a house.
At a sink rate of say 6-700fpm 400ft gives you around 40 seconds. With adrenaline pumping you have a surprisingly long time to adjust alignment +/-30° or so. I would say if you have visibility to flare your survival chances are pretty good. Hitting the ground at best glide in that attitude is, I agree, very likely to be fatal.
Uses for a radalt perhaps?
Also what do you do over say the Alps? You are following your moving map which you use to descend into a valley. You dont know the height of the base. Do you preserve some extra energy to extend the glide when you become visual and risk a much harder impact if you meet the terrain sooner than expected or do you trim accordingly?
I think a CFIT at any speed above Vs (60kt) is going to be fatal, so there is little point in slowing right down. Arguable though… I would trim for Vbg. In most of the Alps, I’d say about 90% of the time if at FL180, you would make one of the very deep flat-bottomed valleys. Especially if you picked a suitable route e.g. the one running N-S of SRN. In the Pyrenees, no…
A while ago I had some correspondence with an ex military pilot whose view was that – in a failure above a cloud layer situation – you should glide as fast as possible, for the maximum options below the cloud. Arguable too
