Non-essential services such as weather... and enclosed cockpits, and
gyros, etc. Guess it depends on your perspective on where you draw the
line for nicer, reduced workloads and non-essential services. I want a
head...

Some people prefer new Cessnas, some Lancairs, a few Staggerwings. How
old are you anyway?

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Those whose aircraft are tools rather than "playthings" often want every
edge we can get when they are use for making money. For many, it's a much
cheaper alternative to a whole newer airplane.


What capabilities would you have with glass in a typical light airplane
that you don't have without?

Short answer: there aren't any. Sure, glass may be nicer, reduce
workload, and provide non-essential services such as terrain and
weather, but the reality is that you're still flying to the same
airports, with the same approaches, using the same minimums, and flying
the same routes. If you are flying revenue-generating missions, the
glass may well be worth it, but I don't see the value for general
business or pleasure flyers over the long term.



JKG