Weight Difference-Steam vs Round

Lighter Weight?


  • Total voters
    9

LivinTheDream

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
9
Location
Missouri
Display Name

Display name:
LivinTheDream
Is there a noticeable weight difference between a Full-IFR Glass Panel and a Full-IFR Steam Gauge panel?

When I get bored I get to thinking about panel layouts if I ever build a plane, and the question always comes to mind.
 
By the time you strip out the vacuum system and the vacuum gyros, yes. Those gyros are heavy.
 
By the time you strip out the vacuum system and the vacuum gyros, yes. Those gyros are heavy.

The weight of the battery back ups for the all electric gyros close that gap. Batteries are chemical storage devices and they are heavy.
 
LOL! NO! By the time you add up all the racks, individual LRUs, connectors, wiring, circuit breakers, and standby batteries, the weight savings is negligible.
 
I say glass is lighter but it depends on how well equipped you are. If you equipped the steam panel to show as much information as a glass one, the glass would be way lighter. All I know is an electric gyro is HEAVY! The venture has a slaved HSI which is even heavier. It also has an RMI which is.... well you get the point. Those three instruments alone probably weigh as much as a modern glass panel. Add to that that a lot of the newer Experimental displays have Nav/Com/Autopilot/Transponder built in and the savings keep adding up.
 
For a second there I thought we were taking engines. I'm pretty sure Gustav Whitehead's steam engine was heavier than most of the later radials.
 
Isn't it ironic how heavy all this is, when there is probably the technology to put it all in an ounce(and have all the redundancy and accuracy ensured). I'm not saying it exists, just that it could exist, and be TINY.
 
all depends what you install. Even swap - glass is lighter. Adding autopilot interface and add-b likely a swap.
 
Garmin's G1000 system weighs around 48 pounds, including the standby battery. Your steam gauges and radio stack won't weigh that much. The PFD and MFD are heavy; I take them out regularly.

Dynon stuff is lighter.
 
Here's a data point. I have a 5 year old 2-screen Garmin G3X EFIS (7" screens). No battery backup but 2 alternators. Total weight excluding wiring is 12.4 lbs. The newer stuff with 10" screens but a smaller ADAHRS is even lighter.

Backup alt (PlanePower FS1-14): 6 lbs
PFD (GDU 370): 1.6 lbs
MFD (GDU 375): 1.7 lbs
ADAHRS (GMU 73): 3.1 lbs

The weight of other avionics like radios and transponders are a wash because those boxes are there regardless if your panel is steam or glass. It's just that with glass the LRUs are more likely to be integrated and/or remotely mounted off the panel (my transponder is remotely mounted and controlled via my EFIS while my radios are panel mounts -- SL 30 and GTN 650).
 
If building from scratch I would bet a glass panel would be cheaper than steam gauges if buying new. At least for experimental aircraft it would be.

Probably, and for certified it will eventually, too. I hope. When digital watches came out in the early '70s they were horribly expensive compared to mechanical watches, and now the pricing is reversed in a big way. The early stuff is expensive due to R&D costs, and the glitter factor that allows large profit margins.
 
Asking about the weight of a steam gauge panel vs a glass panel is like asking the weight of a banana. It depends on the banana.

One data point: Two 182Ts that I have POHs for. Glass G1000 is 96# heavier than steam gauge version. That doesn't surprise me, as there is a lot more "stuff." Boxes and backup battery in front, more boxes behind the tail section bulkhead. At OSH one time I asked a Cessna guy about this and he said the avionics difference was about 75# and the rest was due to the exploding seat belts and additional insulation in the later/G1000 airplane.
 
If you're talking IFR steam vs glass, don't think it ends up being a noticeable difference.

For me the benifit of glass is shrinking the size of my scan and having less moving parts and less complexity on my engine and panel and less stuff going through my firewall.
 
If you're talking IFR steam vs glass, don't think it ends up being a noticeable difference.

For me the benifit of glass is shrinking the size of my scan and having less moving parts and less complexity on my engine and panel and less stuff going through my firewall.
You still need all the sensors and probes even with a Glass display. They are just all routed to one box in the cockpit instead of multiple instruments and signal converters. The size of most screens people are putting in planes now doesn't reduce the size of your scan either numerically speaking. I still prefer flying behind steam as I like seeing the rate of needle movement better and a quick glance can tell you if all is right. I do like all the information a glass panel can provide though.
 
You still need all the sensors and probes even with a Glass display. They are just all routed to one box in the cockpit instead of multiple instruments and signal converters. The size of most screens people are putting in planes now doesn't reduce the size of your scan either numerically speaking. I still prefer flying behind steam as I like seeing the rate of needle movement better and a quick glance can tell you if all is right. I do like all the information a glass panel can provide though.

Having a attitude indicator with tapes is a smaller scan for me at least, I mean shy of having a huge screen, also nice having the colored tapes and the AOA (don't start!) along side the airspeed tape, plus the FD.
 
An RV-8 friend went from steam to Dynon glass and reported a definite weight savings. I'll find out how much when he gets back from his trip to Baja.
 
You still need all the sensors and probes even with a Glass display. They are just all routed to one box in the cockpit instead of multiple instruments and signal converters. The size of most screens people are putting in planes now doesn't reduce the size of your scan either numerically speaking. I still prefer flying behind steam as I like seeing the rate of needle movement better and a quick glance can tell you if all is right. I do like all the information a glass panel can provide though.

Well if you and Ted Kcazynski want to stay in caveman land then Dynon has solution for you as well
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    112.5 KB · Views: 26
Well if you and Ted Kcazynski want to stay in caveman land then Dynon has solution for you as well
haha I know. I'm just saying I would never spend the money to upgrade a steam panel to a glass one just to have glass. If building from scratch then obviously I would go glass for the weight and cost savings.
 
Well if you and Ted Kcazynski want to stay in caveman land then Dynon has solution for you as well

I don't care who ya are, that is the coolest thing....ever. And far be it from me to make yet another AOA comment, but I noticed it has one so it has to be safer. Right? If only they could get it approved for certified aircraft.
 
I don't care who ya are, that is the coolest thing....ever. And far be it from me to make yet another AOA comment, but I noticed it has one so it has to be safer. Right? If only they could get it approved for certified aircraft.

It really is.

When I was doing my Phase I flights, I would have killed for that feature. Getting comfortable with a new plane AND new instrumentation at the same time was a bit daunting.

I told GRT that they should add that feature.
 
Back
Top