Glass or steam?

[John Baker]

This has probably been hacked at before, but what the heck.

I prefer, since that is all I have ever used, the tried and tested steam gages. I just can not get my head into an all glass panel. Even if I could afford a glass set up, I would not bother with it. The whole thing seems to be a very expensive solution to a problem that doesn't exist.


What say you?

John

 

[TMetzinger]

How much flying in hard IMC do you do? How often have you experienced equipment failures?

I grew up on steam, am comfortable with it. But to me there's no comparison - a glass panel (G1000, G500, Avidyne, Aspen) offers significant operational and safety advantages.

I've had four mechanical gyro failures, and NO glass failures.

 

[somorris]

I prefer steam supplemented with hand held GPS. I can't afford to replace functional equipment with new at the price they want for the new stuff. If money were no object, I would probably switch to glass.

 

[Arbiter419]

Glass is great and all, but I just don't think it should be used for primary training. Or for the instrument rating either. Learn to fly instruments on the steam gauges, and then switch over to glass.

 

[jason]

I'm glad that I'm working on my instrument using steam...but there is not question that I'd take the reliability and ease of glass any day of the week when I'm loading my family into the airplane.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

I think it will be a long time before the majority of light a/c have only glass, so I would not limit my training to glass only - especially as a young pilot...unless you are in the remarkable situation in which you can guarantee you will never fly non-glass.

 

[wsuffa]

Glass is good, but is still relatively new - at some point, reliability is likely to decrease. My plane has steam, I'd love to have glass for it's flexibility and elimination of mechanical parts, but I'd still like to have minimal steam backup.

I've had a remote compass failure with my KI-525 HSI. It was pretty insidious. Realized it coming out of Four Corners because the track on GPS didn't match the HSI indicator.

 

[Dan Thomas]

I think it will be a long time before the majority of light a/c have only glass, so I would not limit my training to glass only - especially as a young pilot...unless you are in the remarkable situation in which you can guarantee you will never fly non-glass.

Someone soon will come out with an affordable, STC'd glass mod for a wide range of lightplanes. That's what I think, anyway. There's a huge market for an affordable system, and the manufacturing costs are a small part of the system costs right now; it's profit, and lots of it. If I can buy a laptop for $400 or a handheld navcom for $300, someone should be able to make a glass cockpit for <$10K. Price of a couple of radios.

We have the G1000 in a 172S. 1700 hours, and the standby mechanical attitude indicator has just failed. Bearings on the gyro wheel are shot already. The glass has given no trouble at all.

Dan

 

[EppyGA]

The last half of my training was split between steam and glass and I took my check ride in a G1000 172. I have no problem with either setup. My Warrior si steam with a 430 and I carry a 296 and my iPad.

 

[jason]

Someone soon will come out with an affordable, STC'd glass mod for a wide range of lightplanes. That's what I think, anyway. There's a huge market for an affordable system, and the manufacturing costs are a small part of the system costs right now; it's profit, and lots of it. If I can buy a laptop for $400 or a handheld navcom for $300, someone should be able to make a glass cockpit for <$10K. Price of a couple of radios.

We have the G1000 in a 172S. 1700 hours, and the standby mechanical attitude indicator has just failed. Bearings on the gyro wheel are shot already. The glass has given no trouble at all.

Dan

Like an Aspen? Been out for a few years. $10,000.

 

[Henning]

This has probably been hacked at before, but what the heck.

I prefer, since that is all I have ever used, the tried and tested steam gages. I just can not get my head into an all glass panel. Even if I could afford a glass set up, I would not bother with it. The whole thing seems to be a very expensive solution to a problem that doesn't exist.


What say you?

John

I started with an Eipper Quicksilver which had a piece of yarn for instrumentation. I now fly with a G-500 and 430W. It's all about information, and yes, the information presentation as well as quality and quantity gives you situational awareness at a level that is not possible without it. It's as simple as that. Information is a hedge, the more accurate and easily interpreted your information stream is, the better off you are.

 

[taters]

I like a good mix of both.

 

[EdFred]

I find that shoveling all the coal to keep the boiler pressure up distracts me when I am flying IMC.

I prefer a mix of vacuum, electric, and pitot-static gauges with moving map GPS display.

 

[Jim Logajan]

What say you?

I say steam gauges should be in steam powered airplanes, and no where else:

 

[ajstoner21]

Glass is great and all, but I just don't think it should be used for primary training. Or for the instrument rating either. Learn to fly instruments on the steam gauges, and then switch over to glass.

I agree! I think if you learned in only glass, you could skate through with possibly missing some fundamentals because the glass did all the work. When VFR, not such a big deal, but, if going from glass to steam in IFR, and you've had no training in steam, you're going to have a lot of difficulty I think if you try Hard IMC by yourself for the first time in steam.

 

[Dan Thomas]

Like an Aspen? Been out for a few years. $10,000.

No, like the MGL Odyssey:

from http://www.mglavionics.com/html/odyssey.html but not certified. Made for homebuilts, many of which have systems far advanced beyond many certified airplanes. Homebuilders pioneered this stuff.

Or the Dynon Skyview:

From http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/SkyView_Displays.html
More homebuilder stuff. If it was certified it could fix up a lot of steam-gauge airplanes.

Dan

 

[denverpilot]

Dynon's leadership has repeatedly stated in interviews that they're not interested in the Certified market, citing ridiculous costs for the process.

Either it's a head feint or they're serious. I tend to believe the latter after reading similar complaints from other manufacturers.

 

[bbchien]

I'm current in glass, but I worry all the time about when Garmin stops supporting the G1000.

You chuckle but it's going to happen.

 

[Henning]

I'm current in glass, but I worry all the time about when Garmin stops supporting the G1000.

You chuckle but it's going to happen.

They will have started to sell the touch screen replacement several years prior. The GTN series is going to grow same as the 530 did.

 

[Andrew Sego]

Glass is great and all, but I just don't think it should be used for primary training. Or for the instrument rating either. Learn to fly instruments on the steam gauges, and then switch over to glass.

There's a definite advantage to being proficient in both systems, but wouldn't it be prudent to get the rating with the equipment you plan to fly?

I'm current in glass, but I worry all the time about when Garmin stops supporting the G1000.

You chuckle but it's going to happen.

It's definitely going to happen. It's electronics. I think it'll be a decade or two before that happens, though. Things move slowly in aviation. The 430 was introduced in 1998 and I doubt we'll be seeing parts shortages for it anytime soon.

 

[mcarlini]

Definitely learn on steam instead of glass. Saves money and it is much less distracting.

However, when flying cross country in a single engine plane at night over the Cascades, the synthetic vision, nearest button, and relative terrain warnings really are assuring.

 

[denverpilot]

It's definitely going to happen. It's electronics. I think it'll be a decade or two before that happens, though. Things move slowly in aviation. The 430 was introduced in 1998 and I doubt we'll be seeing parts shortages for it anytime soon.

All that has to happen is some nanny state to enact something like RoHS for a hard to replace component inside any Garmin boxes to force new hardware designs.

RoHS wreaked havok on the electronic parts and assembly world not that many years ago. Lots of parts that were otherwise well-known and well-tested went "obsolete" overnight via external economic factors, not because they were really obsolete.

It's the direct cause of stuff like the manufacturer of my in-wall oven dropping the rebuild, refurbishment, and availability of the ridiculously simple control panel for my very popular Kenmore. I can't purchase a replacement control panel because components inside were made with substances banned by treaty, and assembled with lead-based solder. I had to buy a whole new oven.

The unintentional consequence is that it's headed for a landfill now. A perfectly working oven with half a keypad dead and probably a single timer chip blown. No parts. No one doing board level repairs, even as a basement side-business.

 

[Everskyward]

How much of a premium are people paying for glass? If it way my airplane and I was paying the bills I wouldn't pay all that much more. I think it's just as easy to fly with conventional instruments. If you want better situational awareness, get a moving map display. The only "modern" instrument I would like is an HSI, but a mechanical one is fine. I've also grown to like flight directors but I remember having to be coerced into using it at first. I'm also not convinced that glass is easier. It gives you a lot of information but you need to know where to look, just like on a conventional panel. What is easier is what you have done most frequently and recently.

I'd like to hear from someone who learned on glass and had to re-learn on conventional instruments. Many people think that that it must be harder to do it that way but is it really?

 

[BillTIZ]

I've had four mechanical gyro failures, and NO glass failures.

Glass panel failure when the cooling fan on the Aspen fails 25 minutes into the flight. A lot of red Xs pop up on attitude and heading reference. At first thought the AHRS failed. It's in the shop now awaiting the final verdict.

 

[denverpilot]

CAP Squadron has also had a number of failures of the G1000 bird due to cheesy connector issues. Lotsa red Xs. Took a full failure for the avionics shop to find it, apparently.

 

[Ted]

As it is, gyros are being obsoleted to a certain extent. This happens with all equipment, be it mechanical or electronic. Some just last longer before being obsoleted.

I prefer steam gauges overall, however I'll be putting an Aspen in either of the aircraft when it becomes needed. Price wise, there's no question that it's the best value for an AI/HSI solution in the certified world. Since it's had a few years worth of time to get the bugs out and I have enough redundancy in my aircraft that losing it isn't a big deal, I'm comfortable flying that way.

 

[Henning]

Definitely learn on steam instead of glass. Saves money and it is much less distracting.

However, when flying cross country in a single engine plane at night over the Cascades, the synthetic vision, nearest button, and relative terrain warnings really are assuring.

If you believe there is an advantage to flying glass why would you train in and fly with round gauges? G1000 172s and Diamonds are getting older now and are getting closer in price to their six pack stable mates. A new student these days is well advised to start glass and stay glass. It's not just about the magenta line either. It's about presentation of data into a readily interpretable and feature rich format. You get all the information presented to you in one place all geo referenced rather than having to combine three or four sources of information to a paper chart that requires endless tending and folding/refolding. Oh yeah, an AHRS doesn't tumble either, gyros do.

 

[jason]

If you believe there is an advantage to flying glass why would you train in and fly with round gauges? G1000 172s and Diamonds are getting older now and are getting closer in price to their six pack stable mates. A new student these days is well advised to start glass and stay glass. It's not just about the magenta line either. It's about presentation of data into a readily interpretable and feature rich format. You get all the information presented to you in one place all geo referenced rather than having to combine three or four sources of information to a paper chart that requires endless tending and folding/refolding. Oh yeah, an AHRS doesn't tumble either, gyros do.

Do you feel the same way regarding primary training?

 

[Henning]

Do you feel the same way regarding primary training?

Yep, because that way you will be familiar with it just by osmosis if nothing else by the time you have your PPL in hand. Now when you take your passengers flying, you will be able to make use of some of that fancy crap to help y'all out when things aren't going so good. Even primary training you have 3 hrs under the hood and you have a few cross countries to do not all of which is necessarily in ones best interest to do all of as pilotage. It's actually easier and more effective to learn pilotage using a glass MFD.

 

[acluffpoa]

I recently updated my panel to glass (G500 with GNS 430W and GTX 330) and found that I spend less time looking inside now because it takes me less time to make my scan and obtain needed data. I call that all good.

 

[thomascannon]

If you believe there is an advantage to flying glass why would you train in and fly with round gauges?

Simple. So you can learn to visualize what's going on without the MFD screen telling you. Learning how to navigate using two VORs or a VOR and DME will do wonders for your situational awareness, which I don't think anyone really learns when flying glass.

My IFR checkride started with DPE asking me, "So are we doing a real instrument checkride here or are you going after one of those 'I love Lucy' ratings in an airplane with a couple TV screens in front of you?" My CFI was of the same mind.

Also, since I had to do it the hard way, I think everybody else should have to do it the hard way.

Of course I really do get your point about learning how to really use the glass cockpit and leveraging the sucker's bells and whistles as best you can. Unfortunately, Garmin likes to make some frustrating changes between software releases and if you rent you can get some nasty surprises. I know a guy who flew into a mountain at night heading to Reno. There were a number of factors that killed him, but one was that he had only flown glass and didn't know that terrain warnings could be turned off. (He was also a student pilot, trying to fly over mountains, at night, solo, knowing he wasn't authorized or allowed to be doing that, but figured he'd put the plane away after everybody left the FBO and nobody would be any wiser. Turned out pretty much exactly as you would expect.)

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

You fly while I try to figure out how to work this thing

Name witheld to protect the guilty.

 

[HPNPilot1200]

Learning how to navigate using two VORs or a VOR and DME will do wonders for your situational awareness, which I don't think anyone really learns when flying glass.

I think this depends a lot on your instructor. For primary students learning cross country nav procedures, I turn the inset map off on the PFD and turn to the traffic page on the MFD. We brief ahead of time how we're going to navigate and what navaids may help us and use them to cross reference our position along our flight. On the second or third leg of the last dual cross country I'll enter the flightplan into the G1000 and demonstrate how GPS can really help us navigate but the fundamentals come first.

My experience has been that if you teach it a certain way, they will learn how to use two VORs or a VOR/DME in a glass equipped airplane.

 

[TMetzinger]

I think this depends a lot on your instructor. For primary students learning cross country nav procedures, I turn the inset map off on the PFD and turn to the traffic page on the MFD. We brief ahead of time how we're going to navigate and what navaids may help us and use them to cross reference our position along our flight. On the second or third leg of the last dual cross country I'll enter the flightplan into the G1000 and demonstrate how GPS can really help us navigate but the fundamentals come first.

My experience has been that if you teach it a certain way, they will learn how to use two VORs or a VOR/DME in a glass equipped airplane.

Some primary airplanes only have GPS now (no VORs), so I think this is more important for IFR training, where navigation is much more critical since the pilot may have no visual references whatsoever.

 

[dell30rb]

This might sound dumb but I fly steam guage airplanes and I don't think i'll have a lick of trouble transitioning to glass. Because of all the fighter pilot video games I played when I was a kid, i'm completely used to the way glass cockpits give info.. the airspeed, hsi, altitude etc..

 

[poadeleted20]

I recently updated my panel to glass (G500 with GNS 430W and GTX 330) and found that I spend less time looking inside now because it takes me less time to make my scan and obtain needed data. I call that all good.

Based on my experience flying instructing pilots in both, I'd call that unusual.

 

[fgcason]

If I want to watch tv, I'll just turn the computer on at home.


Are all the GPS and glass panels standardized yet or are they going to be? I mean I can jump into anything with a VOR or ADF made by nearly anyone and fully operate it without reading the manual for a week - know one, know them all kind of thing.

 

[poadeleted20]

Are all the GPS and glass panels standardized yet or are they going to be?

No, and no.

At least, not by the FAA, but Darwinian market forces may have some effect on that.

 

[Henning]

Simple. So you can learn to visualize what's going on without the MFD screen telling you. Learning how to navigate using two VORs or a VOR and DME will do wonders for your situational awareness, which I don't think anyone really learns when flying glass.

I don't agree, you just think it does because you have to work 100 times as hard and long to have 1/8th of the situational awareness. The reality is it is impossible to have the same situational awareness in flight with paper and round gauges as with SVT glass, it just isn't available in the time frame you have to work with.

 

[Henning]

If I want to watch tv, I'll just turn the computer on at home.


Are all the GPS and glass panels standardized yet or are they going to be? I mean I can jump into anything with a VOR or ADF made by nearly anyone and fully operate it without reading the manual for a week - know one, know them all kind of thing.

If you know 2 systems you can get in basically any glass GA plane and go with about 20 minutes of futzing around. If you can use a 430/530, you will have no problem with the G500/600/1000 side of the panel. If you managed to learn the Garmin, the Avidyne is even easier. The hardest thing about all of it is learning the menus in the 430/530 system. The 750 takes care of that by using very simple and intuitive buttonology on a touch screen.