In article ,
Thomas Borchert wrote:
I agree. But in both cases, it is "nice to have", not something you'd bet
on. For IFR, if you adhere to the procedure as published, you won't be near
the terrain anyway. IN the VFR case, if you really can't see the terrain
(and imagine it from the chart), you have no business being there.

Sure, if everyone did everything perfectly every time, and never got
lost or disoriented, all of this technology wouldn't be necessary. I
agree, it is certainly supplemental, but it can indeed save your bacon
if you find yourself disoriented with surrounding terrain. I wouldn't
rely on any one instrument or system if I had supplemental information
available. The bottom line is that if my GPS alerts me about a tower,
I'm going to climb or turn. Same goes for terrain. I think that this
functionality is a very nice supplement that can make flying safer, but
certainly isn't intended to be a substitute for good pre-flight planning.

That being said, unless you fly in mountainous terrain, I wouldn't waste
money on the terrain. In my opinion, obstacles are a bigger deal
because they seem to be "growing" taller in many areas, and are
sometimes difficult to spot.




JKG