"Mxsmanic" wrote ..
Union Thug writes:


Hello MX, long time no see ;-)

This reminds me of the discussions in rec.photo.digital around 2002. So are
you still regarding film as superior to digital as you did then?

The biggest difference between steam and digital is the amount of
information you can display is much greater with digital. Take the
speed tape for example, you get minimum and maximum values just like
steam, but you can also get flap speeds, manuvering speeds for each
flap setting, trend indications, trend vectoring, etc. You can display
much more information on a modern glass PFD and ND than you ever could
on an old school panel.

Being able to display more doesn't mean that the pilot uses or needs more,
and
sometimes finding the needed information in a display system that provides
information overload can take too long for safety.


Then you must prefer performing your flight simulation with the B747-100
over the B747-400, right?

In my personal experience, I much prefer looking up the needed information
(example: approach crosswind component) from the glass panel, even if it
takes three seconds, than having to compute it in my head or on paper or
with E6B. Which method might be safer and more accurate?

That said, sometimes even the most basic steam gauges are quite capable of
generating information overload ;-)

Some manufacturers are better than others, but
once you are used to these glass systems, you will find the hardest
thing is to fly an old school panel again.

That would depend on their design. I think that goal is achieved to a
large
extent with the most evolved and expensive systems used on commercial
transports, but I cannot say the same for the small and cheap systems used
on
private small aircraft.

For once, I have to partly agree. There is still improvement potential in
the user interfaces. However, compared to mechanical gauges it's no contest
..