Difficult to Learn Avionics

[Jaybird180]

I watched this video lastnight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT3XZjits4U&feature=youtube_gdata_player

(careful, it's almost an hour long but it was worthwhile)
The video is about instructing in TAAs and the challenges that accompany it.

In the video, they mentioned a system that was used in high priced airplanes that were not very intuitive and didn't have the functionality that's become (somewhat) standard in <12,500GA TAAs and made so by the likes of the G1000 and the Cirrus Avidyne glass cockpits. I think they may have used a picture of a Collins setup to descibe a "difficult" to use system(???)

In another thread CAPTAIN talked about a Piaggio P-180 Avanti II. So I looked it up. http://www.controller.com/listingsd...I-II/2012-PIAGGIO-P-180-AVANTI-II/1157378.htmVery attractive, but there was that Collins setup.

What do you guys think of the different avionic devices that you've flown with (TAA or add-on single boxes) and the learning curve involved?

 

[LearDriver]

There is far more advanced functionality in a G1000 than in the GIV I fly. Both have plusses and minuses. Its really all about learning to fly what you have installed and being able to utilize it to the maximum of its capabilities. Always respect all limitations placed on the aircraft and avionics and you will get the most out of what they can provide.

 

[Jaybird180]

There is far more advanced functionality in a G1000 than in the GIV I fly. Both have plusses and minuses. Its really all about learning to fly what you have installed and being able to utilize it to the maximum of its capabilities. Always respect all limitations placed on the aircraft and avionics and you will get the most out of what they can provide.

The video talked about simple things like destination weather not being available in the sophisticated machines Who designs these things?

 

[wabower]

Guys who want to obtain FAA approval to sell them? The pentium chip in the G-V FMS was several generations old and quite slow by modern standards. Changing to a new and better chip was not economically feasible due to FAA bullshlt. So we lived with the old chip and just waited for stuff to happen.

Who designs these things?

 

[DaleB]

The video talked about simple things like destination weather not being available in the sophisticated machines Who designs these things?

It may also be a matter of, "How many years ago were these things designed?"

 

[Jaybird180]

It may also be a matter of, "How many years ago were these things designed?"

More ancient than the G1000 or better yet, G600? How long did it take Garmin to see they had a winner and develop the "mini" version? AND get it through the FAA wickets?

 

[Ted]

What do you guys think of the different avionic devices that you've flown with (TAA or add-on single boxes) and the learning curve involved?

Even when you're looking at a 530/G1000, there's a ton of functionality in there. What's most important is being able to get to the parts that you need. What I like to do in cruise is play around with the tools and learn all the little details.

Once you learn one, the rest are typically pretty easy. They may have different menus/submenus/etc., but the overall functionality is similar.

 

[skidoo]

It may also be a matter of, "How many years ago were these things designed?"

As long as it works reliably and does what is needed, then it wouldn't make much significance to me how long ago it was designed. Now, on the other hand, should something else newer that can do everything the older design does but the system weighs 200 lbs less, then that would be great for adding useful load. Except for the fact that most of my TAA avionics reside in the tail section, and is probably needed for CG...

 

[jesse]

Even when you're looking at a 530/G1000, there's a ton of functionality in there. What's most important is being able to get to the parts that you need. What I like to do in cruise is play around with the tools and learn all the little details.

Once you learn one, the rest are typically pretty easy. They may have different menus/submenus/etc., but the overall functionality is similar.

FWIW -- Ted is the only owner I've ever flown with whom can run his 530 better then I can. Most people have no clue how to use the crap they've paid for.

 

[Ted]

More ancient than the G1000 or better yet, G600? How long did it take Garmin to see they had a winner and develop the "mini" version? AND get it through the FAA wickets?

When I've done certification work, it's been a bear. Even if you have a cooperative ACO (which in my experience most are), you're looking at a whole ton of requirements and testing that takes a long time. Electronics require DO-160 certification (hardware being able to withstand environmental, electrical, and fire conditions), DO-178 certification (making sure the software isn't going to crash). Nevermind developing all this stuff.

Let's say it takes 5 years from initial development to certification, which isn't out of line at all. That means the initial design is starting with 5-year-old hand-me-down technology by the time it comes to market.

 

[Ted]

FWIW -- Ted is the only owner I've ever flown with whom can run his 530 better then I can. Most people have no clue how to use the crap they've paid for.

Good to know that I managed to do something better than you when we flew together.

Hence why I'm a big proponent of playing with it in flight. I end up just scrolling through every menu and submenu, just to see what it does.

 

[denverpilot]

Good to know that I managed to do something better than you when we flew together.

Hence why I'm a big proponent of playing with it in flight. I end up just scrolling through every menu and submenu, just to see what it does.

I do that too when the gadgets are available to me.

I've run into what I'll dub as "proceduralists", usually older pilots who consciously or subconsciously are "afraid of breaking the computer" who will completely flip out if you start flipping though menus and pages doing a "recon mission" of the software.

For me, spending a little quality time flipping both teaches the buttonology and the design philosophy the software developer used.

They learn one specific ordered set of button-pushes that gets them what they want to see and will actually go into mental lock/overload at the sight of new screens they haven't seen before.

I can imagine for you instructors, trying to adapt to the many different ways someone can learn a user interface, must be entertaining to watch and help people through.

I use but dislike PC simulators as avionics trainers. I'd rather sit in the aircraft with ground power or a simulator with a better tactile and placement layout than a laptop PC because I want the muscle memory to work when reaching for knobs. The reality is though, that you can learn where things are in menus and what-not much more cheaply with the PC avionics trainers.

It just takes an extra step to translate that from "click mouse on fake button D->" to "push real button two feet away labeled "D->" once in the aircraft that I don't like as much as just having reached that two feet away every time while "exploring" the interface.

I wanna push da buttons!

 

[wabower]

Since you brought it up, I'll share a dirty little secret about instruction. I know that pilots want to be in the airplane rather than a classroom, even if the training environment and resources, including slides, diagrams, wall art, air conditioner, coffee and whizzer are 3x better in the building.

So we park the plane in the shade and hook up the cart. They typically think we're going flying, but I never commit to that until the systems and avionics training is completed. You might be surprised at the number of times the airplane never moves an inch. Age and cunning usually win.

I do that too when the gadgets are available to me.

I've run into what I'll dub as "proceduralists", usually older pilots who consciously or subconsciously are "afraid of breaking the computer" who will completely flip out if you start flipping though menus and pages doing a "recon mission" of the software.

For me, spending a little quality time flipping both teaches the buttonology and the design philosophy the software developer used.

They learn one specific ordered set of button-pushes that gets them what they want to see and will actually go into mental lock/overload at the sight of new screens they haven't seen before.

I can imagine for you instructors, trying to adapt to the many different ways someone can learn a user interface, must be entertaining to watch and help people through.

I use but dislike PC simulators as avionics trainers. I'd rather sit in the aircraft with ground power or a simulator with a better tactile and placement layout than a laptop PC because I want the muscle memory to work when reaching for knobs. The reality is though, that you can learn where things are in menus and what-not much more cheaply with the PC avionics trainers.

It just takes an extra step to translate that from "click mouse on fake button D->" to "push real button two feet away labeled "D->" once in the aircraft that I don't like as much as just having reached that two feet away every time while "exploring" the interface.

I wanna push da buttons!

 

[Ted]

I've run into what I'll dub as "proceduralists", usually older pilots who consciously or subconsciously are "afraid of breaking the computer" who will completely flip out if you start flipping though menus and pages doing a "recon mission" of the software.

I think part of the issue comes down to whether you have someone who is good with computers or not. Since modern GPSs really are nothing more than computer programs, chances are that people who are good with computers will be good with them. Us computer geeky-type people will push buttons, scroll through things, etc. It's not a black box for us.

My mother (who should never fly) could never grasp how a GPS works, or how to use it.

 

[DavidWhite]

Most people have no clue how to use the crap they've paid for.

*raises hand*

 

[Henning]

Guys who want to obtain FAA approval to sell them? The pentium chip in the G-V FMS was several generations old and quite slow by modern standards. Changing to a new and better chip was not economically feasible due to FAA bullshlt. So we lived with the old chip and just waited for stuff to happen.

How did that work out?

 

[Henning]

Good to know that I managed to do something better than you when we flew together.

Hence why I'm a big proponent of playing with it in flight. I end up just scrolling through every menu and submenu, just to see what it does.

Exactly what I did with my 430 & 500, then I went to get insurance so they required an IPC, I've got just the guy who knows the equipment inside and out and can explain it to give me my IPC for some fine tuning and short cuts that were nice. For the most part, just flicking through stuff observing the menu structure.

I never got it, I always thought the 480 was easier than the 430; irrelevant now with the GTN 750. 2 of those with 2 G-300 heads with a third system to include engine in the middle. Perfect modern panel if they either certify the 300 (which they should offer for a $7k installed price when coupled to a GTN 750 stack unit.) or let us go Owner Experimental. I so hope that comes true...

 

[Ted]

I never got it, I always thought the 480 was easier than the 430; irrelevant now with the GTN 750.

I've never used the 480, but always thought the ability to include airways was a big plus. I often wish my 530W had this feature - especially on the Canadian routing I get, which frequently includes airways.

or let us go Owner Experimental. I so hope that comes true...

Amen...

 

[DavidWhite]

Ted what I do on the 530 when they give me a Victor airway is just put the different VORs in there and it's pretty much the same way. I just put in the VORs and intersections that would take me along the same route and follow along on the GPS while im doing the airway thing.

It takes a little bit of time, but it makes it easy(er)

 

[Ted]

Ted what I do on the 530 when they give me a Victor airway is just put the different VORs in there and it's pretty much the same way. I just put in the VORs and intersections that would take me along the same route and follow along on the GPS while im doing the airway thing.

It takes a little bit of time, but it makes it easy(er)

That's what I (and most other people with 530s) do. It's necessary if you're on a GPS-only airway.

However, it is much easier to be able to simply put in ILUSI T614 etc...

 

[DavidWhite]

That's what I (and most other people with 530s) do. It's necessary if you're on a GPS-only airway.

However, it is much easier to be able to simply put in ILUSI T614 etc...

Man I thought I was an innovator.

 

[Ted]

Man I thought I was an innovator.

Keep preaching - there are probably people out there (I'm sure Jesse has seen them) who don't know how to do airways on a GPS.

Fortunately, I figured it out. I just wish I could put in the airway number and make it simple.

 

[Henning]

Ted what I do on the 530 when they give me a Victor airway is just put the different VORs in there and it's pretty much the same way. I just put in the VORs and intersections that would take me along the same route and follow along on the GPS while im doing the airway thing.

It takes a little bit of time, but it makes it easy(er)

Here's where it caught me, I'm coming across the desert from Vegas in a T-310R with a morning appointment at at Tom's in LGB to do some work. I depart VFR before dawn with clear still conditions existing and predicted for the SoCal basin. As I clear the ridge over Lake Arrowhead on descent into the basin just after sunrise I see the LGB cloud forming behind signal hill and SoCal calls me to tell me my destination went IFR. Damn, and I'm smoking in on descent out of 16'000. SoCal gives me a clearance I know through Gorman VOR but I also knew the V airways had dog legs in them, I couldn't look it all upon the MX 20 and dial it into the 530 fast enough, and I didn't have the paper to back me up, so I had to tell him, "Look I've got a bunch of whiz bang I cant work that fast and I haven't got charts, how about vectors ILS 31?" So that's how I got in. I bitched at the Garmin guy at SnF long enough that h finally popped "If we add that, why will people buy our next product?" Well, having briefly sampled the GTN 750 and looking to do my next IPC with it, I can say, "You had no worries, you could have gave V-airways and you'll still sell me the GTN 750."

 

[denverpilot]

Since you brought it up, I'll share a dirty little secret about instruction. I know that pilots want to be in the airplane rather than a classroom, even if the training environment and resources, including slides, diagrams, wall art, air conditioner, coffee and whizzer are 3x better in the building.

So we park the plane in the shade and hook up the cart. They typically think we're going flying, but I never commit to that until the systems and avionics training is completed. You might be surprised at the number of times the airplane never moves an inch. Age and cunning usually win.

I like hearing you say that. So many instructors want to go aloft and then teach these systems and/or clubs don't have ground power available.

I've spent an hour or so sitting in a G1000 T182T with ground power hooked up, poking and learning with a CFI. Was time well spent if I ever get around to doing a checkout in that bird. He moved away so will have to start fresh on that eventually, but **** happens. Not the highest thing on my priorities list right now.

 

[Henning]

Since you brought it up, I'll share a dirty little secret about instruction. I know that pilots want to be in the airplane rather than a classroom, even if the training environment and resources, including slides, diagrams, wall art, air conditioner, coffee and whizzer are 3x better in the building.

So we park the plane in the shade and hook up the cart. They typically think we're going flying, but I never commit to that until the systems and avionics training is completed. You might be surprised at the number of times the airplane never moves an inch. Age and cunning usually win.

God love ya for doing it, it's the only way I learn it well, let me sit comfortably in the plane and spin and push my way through it. If you think to provide ground A/C I'll chip in. I never did well with the Garmin PC sim stuff. A morning and afternoon air conditioned in the shade and 2 days flying would be a heck of a good way to learn it. Still takes some more fine tuning and instruction later to answer the questions you didn't even know to ask before, lol.

 

[Lance F]

I love my 430 and GMX200. Like Ted and others I pushed every button, turned every dial, explored every screen. Long xc's give you time to do that stuff, and it's well worth while. A 430/530 is pretty old technology now, but G did build a great box.

Now I'm also a little in the FMS world, most recently with dual Universal UNS1 boxes. The data entry is different and takes some getting used to. These FMSs can do a lot more than the 430s, but I would guess a lot of pilots only scratch the surface of their capabilities. The best thing is to play with them on the ground to get used to the data entry and to figure out what is in the many sections and menus. However a lot of functions only happen when it's in the air getting info from the air data computers, fuel flows, etc. Therefore the new user needs a chance to play with it in the air as well. For sure having the airways in the database is very necessary. On long legs you have neither the time or patience to put in all the waypoints on an airway by hand. And you need them in your flight plan or you and ATC are not going to get along.

I look forward to the chance to fly the current generation of these boxes. I hope it happens because to me this is part of the fun of aviation.

 

[Ted]

A 430/530 is pretty old technology now, but G did build a great box.

This is why we spent the cash on upgrading the 530 to a 530W, rather than look at doing a 750 or other alternative. The 530W is still a great unit, and will serve us well until a major upgrade is needed in ~10 years.

If we do anything with the #2 radio, it will be installing a 430W in that slot.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I watched this video lastnight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT3XZjits4U&feature=youtube_gdata_player

(careful, it's almost an hour long but it was worthwhile)
The video is about instructing in TAAs and the challenges that accompany it.

In the video, they mentioned a system that was used in high priced airplanes that were not very intuitive and didn't have the functionality that's become (somewhat) standard in <12,500GA TAAs and made so by the likes of the G1000 and the Cirrus Avidyne glass cockpits. I think they may have used a picture of a Collins setup to descibe a "difficult" to use system(???)

In another thread CAPTAIN talked about a Piaggio P-180 Avanti II. So I looked it up. http://www.controller.com/listingsd...I-II/2012-PIAGGIO-P-180-AVANTI-II/1157378.htmVery attractive, but there was that Collins setup.

What do you guys think of the different avionic devices that you've flown with (TAA or add-on single boxes) and the learning curve involved?

Since learning the avionics (including the Garmin, which controls the radios for God's sake) is NOT A PART of the normal check out, I don't really know much about the 172 that I fly. I have asked the owner of the flight school (not a CFI) about this, and he offered to show me. Hoping to get an hour or two, with AUX power, this Sunday, on some of the stuff.

According to the web (and I thought it was a 1979?):

N1596E 1980 Cessna 172N​

• Garmin 430
• King KX 155 Nav/Com
• King KLN 89B GPS
• King KT76A Transponder
• Cessna ARC 300 ADF
• King KMA 24 Audio Panel

• 4 Place Intercom
• Digital Fuel Flow Computer
• Digital Engine Analyzer
• Digital Tachometer
• 180 HP Engine
• Long Range Fuel

 

[jesse]

Since learning the avionics (including the Garmin, which controls the radios for God's sake) is NOT A PART of the normal check out, I don't really know much about the 172 that I fly. I have asked the owner of the flight school (not a CFI) about this, and he offered to show me. Hoping to get an hour or two, with AUX power, this Sunday, on some of the stuff.

According to the web (and I thought it was a 1979?):

N1596E 1980 Cessna 172N​

• Garmin 430
• King KX 155 Nav/Com
• King KLN 89B GPS
• King KT76A Transponder
• Cessna ARC 300 ADF
• King KMA 24 Audio Panel

• 4 Place Intercom
• Digital Fuel Flow Computer
• Digital Engine Analyzer
• Digital Tachometer
• 180 HP Engine
• Long Range Fuel

Sounds like they need to give better checkouts.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Sounds like they need to give better checkouts.

Tell me about it, the Garmin controls the radios. So you have to go through a bunch of screens to even get to a point where the knobs control the freq. My first flight was after two checkout flights (two weekends). The CFI had been one of those "do everything for you" people, both in my 150 and in my 172. That means, once I landed and cleared the runway, my transponder / flaps / other items were "magically" cleaned up. I was not a happy camper.

 

[TMetzinger]

Tell me about it, the Garmin controls the radios. So you have to go through a bunch of screens to even get to a point where the knobs control the freq. My first flight was after two checkout flights (two weekends). The CFI had been one of those "do everything for you" people, both in my 150 and in my 172. That means, once I landed and cleared the runway, my transponder / flaps / other items were "magically" cleaned up. I was not a happy camper.

Kimberly, the radios on the 430/530 are pretty simple, once you learn what the C/V push-switch is for. Pushing it switches the cursor between the Nav and Comm standby frequencies, and then the knobs change them just like any other digital radio. And there's a dedicated swap button to switch standby/active frequencies. If you've used something like a KX-155 it should come pretty quickly.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Kimberly, the radios on the 430/530 are pretty simple, once you learn what the C/V push-switch is for. Pushing it switches the cursor between the Nav and Comm standby frequencies, and then the knobs change them just like any other digital radio. And there's a dedicated swap button to switch standby/active frequencies. If you've used something like a KX-155 it should come pretty quickly.

Tim, I know some of that (now) but it was frustrating on my first flight when the Garmin asked yes / no / enter questions and there was no "enter" key and I was trying to do my engine start / runup / takeoff.

(I think it asks about have you done a preflight or something, and a few other screens)

Lucky for me the frequencies were already in there but I wanted to call ATC so I think I ended up either using the second radio or asking my pilot passengers to help me figure it out. Eventually, we did.

Also a few weeks ago came across an issue with not being able to make the runway lights turn on. The pilot with me used his handheld radio but that was an eye opener. The flight school owner told me it was a known Garmin issue if I have the second radio tuned to the same freq. Sheesh.

 

[Jaybird180]

Sounds like they need to give better checkouts.

 

[Captain]

Sitting in the plane with it on ground power is a super tool. It does have one major limitation and that's that you can't put the plane where you want it...like about to intercept the LOC for example. A computer sim solves this issue, but every one I've seen has varying degrees of 'quirks' that do not exactly mimic the actual box and that's a seperate limitation.

btw, OP, what did I say about the Piaggio Avanti II? Hope it sounded reasonably intelligent.

 

[LearDriver]

There is a thing called google. It can be used for all sorts of things besides porn viewing. One could look up avionics user guides.

 

[Henning]

Sounds like they need to give better checkouts.

Now wait, what did she pay for? It takes a couple moments to show someone to use a 430 as a flip flop nav/com radio. If that's all they want to pay for they should be able to check out with that and use it as that learning along the way. That's how I first learned the Garmins in a DA-40. I got checked out in an hour and was underway on a trip. By the time I got back I had it reasonably sussed out.

 

[Henning]

Kim, I remember hearing an offer of letting you sit in the plane with a power supply, accept that offer and make an appointment where you'll be able to sit with the 'Quick Start Guide' and work through it. This is where paying an instructor who really knows their stuff and this system pays off. The only shame is at this stage in your training you won't get full value since you aren't familiar with the IFR structure and operations. You can try for it all, but it'll be drinking from the fire hose for sure lol. In 4 hrs you can learn to use it to guide you safely and economically to unfamiliar places VFR.

 

[N747JB]

There is a thing called google. It can be used for all sorts of things besides porn viewing. One could look up avionics user guides.

Are you sure?? The Google on my computer is pretty much "porn only" I did get it to find a restaurant once.

 

[Jaybird180]

I got a King video to learn my KLN94, perhaps there is one for the 430. Learning FPL will pay HUGE dividends. The 89B in your panel is the predecessor to the 94.

Captain- your comment was about what you'd buy if (IIRC) Elvis showed up in a UFO.

 

[Henning]

Non porn uses for Google...hmmmm, what a novel concept! Might have to give it a go when I get off Backpage.