Glass cockpit vs steam gauges

[MackMooney]

I have two G5s and loved getting rid of the vacuum pump, so did my mechanic when working on the engine. I kept one OBS on Comm2 and use it as a backup on approaches. Following the large needles is a lot easier to interpret than the small heading and glide slope markers on the G5s. It just takes an instrument scan glance to interpret the OBS vs. the G5, even out of the side of your central vision. But the info on the G5s is well worth it.

do you have both of your g5's in ai mode? my #2 looks like an hsi with large needles

 

[pfarber]

I flew the 319 and the 320. Flew the morning, noon, evening, etc, etc. We had 330's as well. Not sure where the "problematic" stuff you are complaining about comes from.

You admit to never even sitting in an A350 yet YOU KNOW FOR SURE that glare is not an issue. I guess you're just gonna go down with the ship. I even actually kinda sorta agreed with you that other 'buses are not as bad... but you simply HAD to post something, anything to try to be right... again you admit that you never sat in an A350 yet you know for sure its not a problem....

Oh you sweet summer child.

 

[Doc Holliday]

You admit to never even sitting in an A350 yet YOU KNOW FOR SURE that glare is not an issue. I guess you're just gonna go down with the ship. I even actually kinda sorta agreed with you that other 'buses are not as bad... but you simply HAD to post something, anything to try to be right... again you admit that you never sat in an A350 yet you know for sure its not a problem....

Oh you sweet summer child.

View attachment 148076

How do you know I've never been in the 350? And where did I make that supposed admission?

I noted my actually experience flying the 319/320. We had other Airbus models as well.

You obviously have zero maintenance training on the type, went in the cockpit and because you don't understand the systems make an assumption that wasn't true.

 

[Dan Thomas]

You admit to never even sitting in an A350 yet YOU KNOW FOR SURE that glare is not an issue. I guess you're just gonna go down with the ship. I even actually kinda sorta agreed with you that other 'buses are not as bad... but you simply HAD to post something, anything to try to be right... again you admit that you never sat in an A350 yet you know for sure its not a problem....

Oh you sweet summer child.

View attachment 148076

I doubt that the A350 would ever have been certified if sun glare could wash out the instruments. Moreover, if the earlier 319 and 320 have glass that's readable in sunlight, the later 350 surely would.

I guess you will never accept correction until some A350 pilot does it. You are, after all, a relatively inexperienced mechanic, not an ATP. Do you even have your PPL yet?

 

[Bell206]

You obviously have zero maintenance training on the type, went in the cockpit and because you don't understand the systems make an assumption that wasn't true.

Perhaps he should freshen up his knowledge on Part 25.773(a)(2) on glare requirements???

 

[MauleSkinner]

I’m curious if there are any studies regarding level of safety for 6-pack vs full glass for point to point IFR transportation flying…

There was a study a while back, but I can’t find it. The upshot was that there was no significant safety difference between the two.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Perhaps he should freshen up his knowledge on Part 25.773(a)(2) on glare requirements???

Freshen up? Unlikely to ever looked at it. Even mechanics that work on FAR 23/CAR3 airplanes are mostly unfamiliar with the design and construction regs. That's why, for example, we occasionally hear of an accident due to fuel venting issues when a mechanic replaces a vented fuel cap with an unvented one, or the other way around. Either one messes up the tank pressures and flow is affected.

I once ferried a Citabria that had the wrong caps on it. It was losing fuel out of the cap vent that wasn't supposed to be there.

 

[Rick A]

I’ve slowly been getting comfortable with a blend between the standard six-pack, minus the mechanical AI and HSI, that were replaced with dual Garmin GI275’s.

Very glad I kept the round mechanical A/S, Altitude and VSI indicators… the large needles are fast and easy to read. Someone said try covering up the old A/S, Altimeter and VSI instruments to force getting familiar with using the vertical tapes.

I’ve covered the round instruments up in cruise and conducted heading and altitude changes, and yes, it’s a good suggestion and a great help for getting used to the vertical tapes. However, I’m not yet comfortable enough to shoot an approach in IMC and land watching only the GI275’s. The three old round instruments are just too fast to interpret, and very familiar compared to the GI275’s vertical tapes, small ball (keeping the plane coordinated), and displaying a very tiny to view + or - numerical VSI value.

At this point, doubt I’d ever want to remove the remaining three mechanical instruments since the panel space is available and should remain so. But that opinion could change as familiarity and comfort levels increase with the glass. Having flight instrumentation consolidated is very cool, and I’m still a work in progress.

 

[sarangan]

Ive been flying 45 yrs. Owned 6 single engine planes small to large. Simple to complex.
I have many hours ifr in benign conditions way before gps existed and with no auto and with no problems at all. All approaches were vor or ils approaches.

I have a friend with an older cessna 210 worth about $100,000 before adding $70,000 of avionics to it. He never flys imc. He's a retired airline pilot.
I know of many other such cases.

Makes no sense to me.

I ask because Im looking to upgrade to a newer RV14 and they all have glass cockpits.
Ive never even used one. Call it my last hurrah.

Your thoughts? I respect and appreciate all responses.

I learned to fly on steam gauges nearly 30 years ago. The real advantage of glass is that it simplifies the system: no vacuum pump, a built-in magnetometer, reliable MEMS gyros, and lower power draw than traditional electric gyros. During flying, I don’t feel there’s a dramatic difference.

If anything, I’ve felt more disoriented in some older planes which had a different layout than the standard six-pack. One time, an old-style attitude indicator that used only a horizontal bar with no blue or brown made me very nervous.

For what it’s worth, I was comfortable flying in IMC on my first flight with G5s (though I had some simulator time). The G1000 is nicer still - but is it worth an extra $100k? Personally, I don’t think so. For that kind of money, I’d expect the airplane to fly faster or higher.

 

[Bell206]

Freshen up? Unlikely to ever looked at it. Even mechanics that work on FAR 23/CAR3 airplanes are mostly unfamiliar with the design and construction regs. That's why, for example, we occasionally hear of an accident due to fuel venting issues when a mechanic replaces a vented fuel cap with an unvented one, or the other way around.

I think you'll find more mechanics than not are familar with those airworthiness standards. However installing an improper fuel cap falls under Part 43 in the realm of things. Regardless, in the context of the all knowing mx guru above, to state a modern airliner has instrument glare issues when there is a specific rule requirement it must not borders on "plane" ignorance than anything else.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I dunno. I just wait for the latest “here’s what I hate today” post. I like dark humor.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Any one could fly my panel. Have some redundancies.View attachment 148051

Yeah, our flight school did that to all of their 172s. A bit of a change, coming from a loaded (with steam gauges) vintage Skyhawk.

 

[asicer]

I learned to fly on steam gauges nearly 30 years ago. The real advantage of glass is that it simplifies the system: no vacuum pump, a built-in magnetometer, reliable MEMS gyros, and lower power draw than traditional electric gyros. During flying, I don’t feel there’s a dramatic difference.

There's also the matter of reversionary failover and multiple independent backup power sources. I feel a little safer in IMC with that in my back pocket.

 

[wilkersk]

I believe both Garmin and Dynon glass systems have the option to display flight instruments in a six-pack format. But, once you get comfortable with the EFIS display, especially with the Flight Director and Synthetic Vision, you won't want to do it any other way.

 

[markair]

Ive been flying 45 yrs. Owned 6 single engine planes small to large. Simple to complex.
I have many hours ifr in benign conditions way before gps existed and with no auto and with no problems at all. All approaches were vor or ils approaches.

I have a friend with an older cessna 210 worth about $100,000 before adding $70,000 of avionics to it. He never flys imc. He's a retired airline pilot.
I know of many other such cases.

Makes no sense to me.

I ask because Im looking to upgrade to a newer RV14 and they all have glass cockpits.
Ive never even used one. Call it my last hurrah.

Your thoughts? I respect and appreciate all responses.

IM MARK FROM N.CALIF AND BEEN A PPL SINCE 1980 AND I TOO PERFER THR OLD ANALOG INST.WHEN I RETURNED BACK TO FLYING AFTER
BEING NON CURRANT FOR 30 YRS,IM FINDING NEARLY ALL C-172,S AND OTHER SINGLE,S WITH GLASS INST.WITH THAT SAID,AND WITH HIGH
COST TO RENT,I JOINED A SMALL CLUB AT MY AIRPORT (khaf) with an 1965 c-172F with old stream inst and a french socata tampico8 and although don,t fly much i still perfer the old instr airplanes.some day will go up in a glass one.

 

[maduro]

You get the quickest speed/ADI/altitude reading with dials.....but I don't like the vacuum system so I did G5s for the ADI and HSI. I don't like the digital tapes.... to small. I can look at my ADI and simultaneously read speed & altitude dials with my peripheral vision all with one quick glance. If I need to focus on a speed tape, that disables my peripheral vision so it is a single stream of information. In high task situations, quickly reading the ADI, Airspeed and altitude all in one is invaluable.

 

[Albany Tom]

I learned flying in an aircraft without either a vacuum pump or electrical system, on purpose. I wanted to know that I could fly with just the basics. For a similar reason, I'm working on my IR with a plane with basic steam gauges plus a WAAS GPS. None of this was for a technical reason, it's just so in the back of my mind I *know* I can fly it, because I've done it. I'm usually pretty calm under stress, but I want to stack the deck toward that as much as possible.

I do see some safety advantages of glass over steam. Everyone talks about vacuum system failures, and I've seen that, but I've also had an electric turn coordinator fail during simulated instrument work. Not a big deal at all, as long as you're aware that it isn't working. That seems to be a major problem with the old style gyros...they are all eventually going to fail, they spin too fast not to, and you might not know it right away. Where with glass, I think it's more likely they error out and tell you. So my ideal airplane, glass primary, but with a separate round analog airspeed and altitude, and a separate electronic AI. With those three as backup, plus either a tablet or radio, I can get back on the ground. VFR, I just need the first two.

 

[Van Johnston]

Why didn't you keep the analog ASI and ALT?

Four partners in the plane. Other three wanted a new GFC-500 AP. That required some panel reconfiguration changes, but all the original options retained the remaining analog gauges. But somewhere along the way one of the partners said "as long as we're in there anyway..." An extra 8 AMU later no analog gauges anymore.

Initial benefits of the dual GI-275: no gyro drift, saved a few pounds, TAS and winds automatically calculated and displayed, no parallax in the ADI which is slightly off center, easy to read at at night, aural warning for altitude bug is nice. Taking out the residual analog instruments later saved a few more pounds, and we no longer have to pay for a second biannual cert.

Disadvantages: speed tape, had to re-learn our speeds in knots vs mph, database subscription went up, no whirr of the turn coordinator to remind you you left the master on...

 

[Rick A]

....no whirr of the turn coordinator to remind you you left the master on...

Yes. Definitely a disadvantage. Can't tell you how many times I'm walking away from the plane and have to turn around and check to see if I remembered to turn off the M/S. In my plane the T/C is fairly quiet. It was the two Attitude gyros (one vacuum, one electric) that were noisy enough for the old ears to notice.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Where with glass, I think it's more likely they error out and tell you.

Ah, the myth of the big ?

 

[Albany Tom]

Ah, the myth of the big ?

My drunk uncle, er I mean AI, says that a G1000 will detect a mems gyro error. Not true? And I can believe if it's not true given that some airline computers apparently can't tell when a pitot tube is clogged.

 

[N747JB]

I had glass for 10 years, 3 years with a single Aspen unit in a 421B, then 7 years with a Garmin G600 in a 425. I bought my 414 with steam gauges a few years ago and it wasn’t too bad going back to steam. Last year, I got tired of the shaky HSI and put a G600Txi in the panel. I honestly enjoy flying more with it versus the old steam gauges, is it worth the expense? I don’t know, but I’m 61 and might as well enjoy it while I can!

 

[MauleSkinner]

My drunk uncle, er I mean AI, says that a G1000 will detect a mems gyro error. Not true? And I can believe if it's not true given that some airline computers apparently can't tell when a pitot tube is clogged.

One airplane I worked with had what I thought was an appropriate turn of phrase. It will flag any “foreseen malfunction.” I take that to mean a malfunction that the engineers thought of and programmed into the software before the project ran out of money.

Glass will generally flag malfunctions similar to what steam will flag, with the addition of “something’s going on, I don’t know what it is, you need to figure it out” flags.

 

[farmrjohn]

Disadvantages: speed tape, had to re-learn our speeds in knots vs mph, database subscription went up, no whirr of the turn coordinator to remind you you left the master on...

Just curious since I prefer knot vs. mph overall but if a plane was certified in mph is it “ legal” to change the airspeed indication to knots?

 

[WDD]

Taking out the residual analog instruments later saved a few more pounds, and we no longer have to pay for a second 2nd biannual cert.

Not quite following. IFR cert every two years can cover everything IFR, be it digital or analog. Why would there be a second cert?

 

[M20K]

I find speed and altitude tapes much harder to assess at a glance than a round-dial gauge with respect to trends, although bugging altitudes is helpful.

I've always wished they would have come up with a modification where the Speed and Altitude numbers would have a dial around them with a marker. So exact numbers in the middle and a marker for a quick glace to see that you're in the ballpark, similar to steam gauges.

 

[Van Johnston]

Just curious since I prefer knot vs. mph overall but if a plane was certified in mph is it “ legal” to change the airspeed indication to knots?

This topic is cussed and discussed in other POA threads, but I assert

a) the plane was certified in knots because the TCDS lists all speeds in both mph and knots, and
b) we didn't change the airspeed indication because the original airspeed indicator had mph on the outer markings, but also an inner ring of markings in knots.

I'll reconsider my position if there is an authoritative source that says otherwise.

 

[Van Johnston]

Not quite following. IFR cert every two years can cover everything IFR, be it digital or analog. Why would there be a second cert?

I guess I worded that poorly. You're right, just one certification, but twice the work to do it.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I believe both Garmin and Dynon glass systems have the option to display flight instruments in a six-pack format.

Yes, they do. For Garmin, I think it’s just the G3X.

I think it’s silly but have to admit it was my first reaction to glass too. In 2004, about 5 years before I started flying regularly with glass, I did a demo flight in a Cirrus. They had just moved to the Avidyne Entegra and were doing demo flights for CFIs. I asked whether a virtual 6-pack was an option. “No,” came very quickly.

 

[Bell206]

Just curious since I prefer knot vs. mph overall but if a plane was certified in mph is it “ legal” to change the

Shortly after the switch from the CARs to the FARs, the FAA started the transition from the statute mile standard to the nautical mile standard which included MPH > Knot reference changes. So in general, both are "legal" except for those aircraft with specific limitations to use MPH indications for compliance of existing required markings or other limits.

 

[AZEL]

Freshen up? Unlikely to ever looked at it. Even mechanics that work on FAR 23/CAR3 airplanes are mostly unfamiliar with the design and construction regs. That's why, for example, we occasionally hear of an accident due to fuel venting issues when a mechanic replaces a vented fuel cap with an unvented one, or the other way around. Either one messes up the tank pressures and flow is affected.

I once ferried a Citabria that had the wrong caps on it. It was losing fuel out of the cap vent that wasn't supposed to be there.

Just don't use a pencil.

Harry Brooks ( I might spend too much time playing "free association" and going down rabbit holes. )

 

[asicer]

I've always wished they would have come up with a modification where the Speed and Altitude numbers would have a dial around them with a marker. So exact numbers in the middle and a marker for a quick glace to see that you're in the ballpark, similar to steam gauges.

Isn't that what the bugs are for?

 

[donjohnston]

Where with glass, I think it's more likely they error out and tell you.

Usually. And kind of.

I have dual Grand Rapids Technology HXr screens. Those are connected to a pair of AHRS's and a pair of magnetometers. I have a secondary 15amp alternator and a second backup battery that can power the pilot side EFIS, AHRS and magnetometers for about an hour. System 1 is the pilot side screen and support boxes and System 2 is co-pilot side. My normal configuration is to have the pilot side screen in EFIS mode:





And the co-pilot side on Engine/Map display.


I was flying home one day from Sebastian. In the clouds. I don't recall if it was raining at the time but there had been some light to moderate rain. Cruising along with the AP on. My home field was VFR and I had gotten a pirep from a KingAir going in the opposite direction 1,000' above that the conditions would improve in my direction. For some reason, I had the ForeFlight screen to show the Attitude Indicator. I don't know why. Maybe because I had been in the soup for so long. But I was tooling along when I heard a "Ding". I looked down at the screen to see what the ding was for and saw this:



The heading indicator was also rotating pretty fast too. I immediately grabbed the stick and looked at Foreflight which showed straight and level. I turned off the AP (which had been holding straight and level) but that spinning display in front of me was making me nervous. Then I started trying to figure out if I was spinning out into the gulf or what. After looking at the EFIS and ForeFlight a couple of times the helmet fire started to die down and I remembered that with a couple button pushes I could get the co-pilot screen to show the EFIS screen. So I did that and saw this:



That screen showed pretty much the same thing as the ForeFlight AI screen. That's when I noticed the "AHRS 2" near the top of the screen. Normally, it says "Dual AHRS". And on the pilot side screen it showed "AHRS 1". My conclusion at the time was that something went sideways with the number 1 system. Other than the heading output, everything else on the screen was fine. All the buttons and knobs were working properly. That lead me to believe the problem was in either the #1 AHRS or the #1 magnetometer.

I have a switch that lets me source the AP from either either side that is always set to "1" which is the pilot side. I flipped it to "2" and hit the AP engage switch while being ready to turn it back off if anything happened. Airplane kept cruising along just like the co-pilot side screen and ForeFlight said. Meanwhile the pilot side screen was showing that steep turn to the left.

I thought about rebooting the pilot side system, or maybe just the AHRS or magnetometers. But things were working. I had one good system and the ForeFlight AI which was agreeing with my good system. So I left it alone. The next 15 minutes were rather nerve racking. I considered diverting to Tallahassee but I would have had to shoot an instrument approach to almost minimums while continuing to home would have let me fly a visual approach.

After landing, I rebooted the #1 system and it came up fine.

I sent the system logs to GRT and they think that static electricity hit the #1 magnetometers. I asked why the AP continued to fly straight and level even though I had the switch sourced to the #1 system and they told me that if an annomoly detected with one system it will automatically source the AP to the good system. We had some "discussions" about maybe providing some more obvious indicators that there is a failure since they could obviously could detect that something was amiss. Not sure if they ever implemented those updates.

 

[MauleSkinner]

We had some "discussions" about maybe providing some more obvious indicators that there is a failure since they could obviously could detect that something was amiss.

This would be a case of a “something’s going on, I don’t know what it is, you need to figure it out” flag.

 

[Rick A]

Usually. And kind of.....

That's a killer event. Glad it worked out.

I flew a lot of rain in an old Mooney with a vacuum powered wing leveler, and a six pack. In heavy rain it leaked and water dripped down behind the instrument panel. When the first glass displays became available I thought "hope these units are sealed real good" thinking a drop of rain in the wrong place could create havoc.

My thought was a drip or two of water in the wrong place could cause it to sizzle, then just go blank. Your experience went far beyond that.

 

[Beech18]

Martin Pauly has it spot on.
-
Must say it was convenient to jump from a 727 to a Turbo Commander, a DC-3 or C-180 and have pretty much the same 6 pack, 2 VOR's and 1 ADF. Same interface.
These days you better know how to handle all of your avionics because you probably can fly one 182 and better not the other one.
When you do get to know your equipment they are just fabulous. Love the G3X with say a GTN750, fantastic.

 

[Gary Ward]

Adaptation to glass varies. I've been flying about 35 years so, like you, my initial experience was analog. I got my instrument rating with a traditional six-pack, dual VORs, and an ADF. My first glass was with G1000 just about 15 years ago. Since then, I've flown and/or taught in many of the combinations available from Garmin, Aspen and Dynon. I feel equally comfortable with all of them, as well as analog instruments. If I have a specialty as a CFI/CFII its avionics transitions and mastery.

This is my perspective. People adapt at various rates. Those who don't adapt at all fall into two categories. First is those who simply choose not to make the effort. They climb into their first glass, turn it on, get intimidated, and simple walk away. The second group are those who try to train themselves. There are definitely people who can do that, but they are few and far between. The ability to DIY has absolutely nothing to do with native intelligence or even the way you handle other kinds of technology. If anything, what a CFI does is break learning into manageable pieces.

Just as an example, I am a member of a club with two G1000 aircraft. We get new members who have not flown glass before and I typically do the training in three distinct steps.

1. Just getting used to the glass display. With analog, we have familiar dials. Holding altitude is noticing the position the altimeter hands and flying up or down to where it should be pointing. Like a wrist watch with no numbers, we hardly need to read the numbers at all. Not so with an altitude tape. For this stage, I cover the backup analog instruments to force getting used to the display and begin teaching simple strategies like bugging heading and altitude, pretty much always. I'll even bug pattern altitude for touch & goes.​

2. Basic VFR functionality. To #1 it adds things like basic GPS flight planning and we will generally do a short cross country. A bit of autopilot work here as well. When they and I feel comfortable that they won't distract and hurt themselves, they are signed off with a VFR limitation. I tell them to go fly and practice.​

3. Advanced. That's to cover questions they might come across and raise. For the instrument rated pilots, we move to IFR functionality. At this point, it more about the GPS navigator/FMS than about the glass PFD.​

When I first started flying a G1000 at a flight school, I spent some time on the ramp with a ground power supply connected. I could play with the panel all I wanted to get familiar with it at no extra cost.

 

[M20K]

Isn't that what the bugs are for?

Yes, but not quite the same mental picture. And I'll often move the Bug to Minimums or Pattern Altitude quite a ways out. So this would be an always-there quick reference.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Yes, but not quite the same mental picture. And I'll often move the Bug to Minimums or Pattern Altitude quite a ways out. So this would be an always-there quick reference.

I’m not familiar with your system, but it seems like there should be a better way to manage bugs.

 

[Albany Tom]

Usually. And kind of.

Wow. Instead of interesting and informative, I'm going to file that under "terrifying and informative", and come back to it later. At the surface it makes sense, I think, because each has a separate reference sensor rather than one having three sensors it can compare against each other. So if one is clearly out, maybe a warning, but if the data feed is within normal spec but wrong, it has no idea. Which comes back to terrifying again. Thanks for posting that.