Wikipedia

Talk:Ground proximity warning system

Latest comment: 2 years ago by QueenofBithynia in topic "Whoop whoop pull up" listed at Redirects for discussion
Learn more about this page

EGPWS vs. TAWS

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The U.S. FAA defines GPWS as a type of terrain awareness warning system.[1] More advanced systems, introduced in 1996,[2] are known as enhanced ground proximity warning system, although sometimes confusingly labeled with the TAWS term.

I think this should be rephrased.

As far as I know, the EGPWS is a TAWS. TAWS is the system, EGPWS is a product (from Honeywell) which implements the TAWS system. There are also other products implementing the TAWS system available on the market (from Garmin, Sandel, Shelton, ACSS/Thales).

As far as I know (once again), all TAWS systems include the GPWS system. GPWS is both a system and a product (Honeywell), as Honeywell managed to get their product name GPWS to be used to designate the GPWS system.

See FAA TSO-C92c (GPWS) & TSO-C151b (TAWS) for more information.

--Laomai Weng (talk) 15:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

As far as I know TAWS, GPWS and EGPWS are all generic acronymic terms used to refer to certain types of aircraft systems which are designed to prevent flight into tearrin. There also are proprietary names, such as (in the UK) TERPROM, which refer to specific company products. If Honeywell do own a trade mark or copyright on the name "GPWS" I think we should all be shown the legal evidence for this. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
GPWS and the superseding EGPWS are Honeywell (originally Sundstrand until AlliedSignal took Sundstrand over) brand names for its TAWS systems; TAWS is the generic term mentioned in airworthiness regulations. This is Honeywell's website for its EGPWS system, where it states, "Honeywell [comment: actually Sundstrand] pioneered the first Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) over 30 years ago. Today, we offer Enhanced TAWS protection in our "EGPWS" for thousands of aircraft of all types around the world"; IMO this article should be merged into the TAWS article. YSSYguy (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Inaccurate statement

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I changed this statement (because it was not accurate):

"Since the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration required large airplanes to carry such equipment in 1974, there has not been a single CFIT crash by a jet in U.S. airspace.[2]"

to read as follows:

"Since the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration required large airplanes to carry such equipment in 1974, there has not been a single passenger fatality, in a CFIT crash by a large jet in U.S. Airspace.[2]"

Although the original statement was derived from a speech by a FAA expert [2], it was not accurate, since there were three CFIT crashes of large jets in US airspace, after 1974.

December 18, 1977, a UAL DC-8 freighter crashed into high terrain, while in a holding pattern, near Salt Lake City.

April 13, 1987, a Buffalo Airways 707-321C freighter crashed short of the runway, while conducting an ILS approach to the Kansas City airport.

June 2, 1990, a Mark Air 737-200 crashed into rising terrain, while it was conducting a non-precision approach to the Unalakleet, Alaska airport.

All three were CFIT crashes of large jets, and all three only had flight crew and/or authorized company personnel on board. I also inserted the word "large," because there have been one or more small jet (Lear Jet size) CFIT accidents too.

EditorASC 13:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)Reply


Suggested merge with Bitching Betty

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments6 people in discussion

Probably not a necessarily good idea since, at least for military fast jet aircrew, "Bitching Betty" (also called "Nagging Nora" in UK), is usually understood to include all the voice messages produced by all cockpit warnings, not just those from GPWS. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 12:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Don't merge, it is a bad idea to merge because other systems, like TCAS, also use cockpit voices --66.32.178.63 (talk) 21:13, 21 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Eurofighter Typhoon apparenty has over 200 different cockpit voice warnings, only a few of which are associated with GPWS. I would expect other modern fighter aircraft are much the same. A merge here is definitely not a good idea. In fact, more detail on cockpit voice warnings would be a better idea. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 22:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dont Merge Although I had never heard of term 'bitchin betty', it is mildly humorous, but it doesnt clarify the source, EGPWS, TCAS, RadAlt, etc.B744B763 (talk) 04:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I am in favour of eliminating the heading "Bitching Betty" and transferring the technical content to GPWS. Mildly amusing local terms like Bitching Betty, Nagging Nora, Helpful Heather etc have no place in an encyclopedia because if they have a meaning it is unambiguous only in some parts of the world or in some industries. The technical content in Bitching Betty is of high quality and deserves to be located where it can be found by readers using the technically correct name - GPWS. "Bitching Betty" can be re-directed to "GPWS" so that anyone familiar only with the term Bitching Betty can find all the technical information in Wikipedia, and at the same time learn the internationally correct terminology for this equipment. Dolphin51 (talk) 11:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I agree with your point about the heading, Dolphin, but if we do that merge, anyone familiar only with the term Bitching Betty unfortunately won't currently find "all the technical information" relevant to Cockpit Voice Warning Systems, but only the GPWS part. In commercial aircarft its usually only the GPWS, ICAWS, TCAS etc which produces voices, but in the military cockpit practically every system, sub-system and equipment can have a voice warning, all distributed across a complex hierarchy of categories and prioritisation. Similarly, GPWS as a system itself is far more than just the voice inteface end. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Don't merge - The only thing that would make sense wrt the 'bitching betty' phrase is a single sentence in this article noting that GPWS is often referred to by that term by pilots (with embedded link to that article). A merge of 'bitching betty' content into this article would be totally out of place, considering that the one is a superset slang word for two or more other systems.
> "Mildly amusing local terms like Bitching Betty, Nagging Nora, Helpful Heather etc have no place in an encyclopedia because"
Sounds like this is a "RFD" in a different guise :) . I'm an inclusionist, but I'd agree that the 'Bitching Betty' article probably could use improvement. It's probably a little longer than is called for, and the "example phrases" section is growing into a list. Could the article itself be renamed to something more appropriate, more "encyclopedic", with a redirect from 'Bitching Betty'? How much slang does wikipedia cover? CraigWyllie (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I agree with CraigWyllie's suggestion that the article should be re-named something more encyclopedic. When a user such as the USAF, or an airplane manufacturer, needs to specify the inclusion of a Bitching Betty I'm sure they don't issue a technical document referring to a Bitching Betty - they would use a more appropriate and self-explanatory term. Perhaps they use Simulated Voice Annunciator System, or Audible Crew Alerting Facility. I'm sure you get my drift. Whatever term is used by the industry that designs, manufactures and installs these systems is the term that should be used in Wikipedia. Then, as CraigWyllie has suggested, there could be redirects from Bitching Betty, Nagging Nora and any other mildly amusing terms that flight crew and maintainers have for the equipment. Dolphin51 (talk) 11:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Original Design and Development

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Although Don Bateman and team are credited with design and develoment, I think they were working under the old Allied-Signal banner, prior to Honeywell.. EGPWS was definetly developed in late 90's prior to the merger.. Unable to find an authoritive reference. B744B763 (talk) 00:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

The original patent for a 'Ground Proximity Warning System Utilizing Radio and Barometric Altimeter Combination' No: 3,715,718 was filed by Ralph A. Astengo on Aug 11, 1970 so why is Don Bateman credited with the invention of the GPWS? His patent 3,922,637 only expands on the GPWS to provide added protection during a landing approach using a waypoint signal from an area navigation beacon. The correct inventor should be credited in an entry entitled GPWS--Corkery (talk) 13:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corkery (talk • contribs) 10:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ground proximity warning system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ground proximity warning system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:12, 22 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ground proximity warning system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ground proximity warning system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ground proximity warning system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

"Whoop whoop pull up" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Whoop whoop pull up and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 16#Whoop whoop pull up until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. QueenofBithynia (talk) 23:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ground_proximity_warning_system&oldid=1198676126"