In rec.aviation.student a wrote:
What Anthony does not seem to understand is it does not take much
training to learn to fly an airplane in ordinary circumstances. At
least two thirds of the training hours, and much of the time spent
with another pilot active in the right seat, are devoted to learning
how to fly the airplane when things are not going as they should. In
our case, we are much harder on ourselves than a CFI is. You want
unusual attitudes and combinations of failures? -- come into my parlor
said the spider to the fly. The thing is, that is true with many of
our pilot friends, too. He, on the other hand, simply restarts his
game.

Yep, exactly right. Any pilot who can't handle a failure is going to die
from it. Avoiding fancy-pants glass panels may extend his life a bit more
but it is not going to save him. The answer to G1000 reliability concerns
isn't to stick with ancient instruments, it's to maintain your necessary
ability to fly safely on backups.

As the readers of this group know, I had an instrument failure a few weeks
ago. It wasn't due to fancy computer-driven avionics, but rather a simple,
foolish assembly mistake. Combined with other factors it resulted in a
very exciting landing, but thanks to my training I had a successful
outcome.

Pilots must train for equipment outages and they do train for equipment
outages. Some may not, but the answer that is to start training for them,
not to avoid computerized avionics.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon