ACR FO COMPLAINT REGARDING THE MVA INTO TRI ARPT AND REPEATED GPWS ALERTS WHILE IN DSCNT TO 4000 FT.

Narrative

THIS WAS A REVENUE PAX FLT FROM CLT TO TRI. AS WE APCHED HMV VOR WE WERE ASSIGNED A HDG AND TOLD TO DSND TO 4000 FT MSL. WE WERE DSNDING IN IMC CONDITIONS AND RECEIVED A GPWS 'TERRAIN' WARNING AT ABOUT 4300 FT MSL. WE STOPPED THE DSCNT AND THE GPWS WARNING CEASED. DSCNT WAS THEN COMPLETED TO 4000 FT WITHOUT FURTHER WARNINGS. A NORMAL APCH AND LNDG FOLLOWED. IT IS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF THIS INCIDENT DUE TO THE PRIMITIVE NAV EQUIP ON THE ACFT. OVER THE YEARS I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL SIMILAR GPWS WARNINGS LIKE THIS WHILE APCHING TRI FROM THE SE. THIS IS DEFINITELY A RECURRING PROB! EVERY TIME A PLT HEARS AN 'UNNECESSARY' GPWS WARNING HE WILL BE LESS LIKELY TO RESPOND PROMPTLY WHEN IT IS NECESSARY TO DO SO. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY ACCIDENTS WHERE THE CREW TOTALLY IGNORED THE GPWS. THE SIT OF REPEATED UNNECESSARY WARNINGS AT TRI IS UNACCEPTABLE AND WILL EVENTUALLY LEAD TO AN CFIT ACCIDENT. ATC PROCS AT TRI MUST BE MODIFIED; EVEN IF THIS LEADS TO INCREASED APCH DELAYS. I WILL RPT THIS SIT TO MY COMPANY FLT SAFETY DEPT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR IS A FO FOR A MAJOR ACR. HE DID NOT CONTACT THE APCH CTL SUPVR TO DISCUSS MVA VECTORING ALTS ON THESE E AND SE ARRS. HE HAD NOT HEARD OF ANY OTHER FLCS TELL PARALLEL STORIES ABOUT GPWS PROBS AT TRI. HE DID ADVISE THE ACR OF THE INCIDENT VIA A STANDARD RPT FORM AND RECEIVED THEIR THANKS. ACFT WAS AN F-28. WHEN ASKED ABOUT HIS RATE OF DSCNT HE STATED IT WAS IN EXCESS OF 1000 FPM. HE WAS COUNSELED TO TRY 500 FPM NEXT TIME TO SEE IF THE RATE OF DSCNT WAS PART OF THE PROB NEAR THE HILLS. HE HAD STATED THAT; WHEN LEVEL; THERE WAS NO GPWS.