Questions for you glass-panel folks

So we've been flying our new "Penguin" -- our brand-new 2-place simulator --
during Movie Night at the Inn (see it he
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/flight_simulator.htm ), and last night we
started "flying" the G1000-equipped Mooney for the first time.

No one in the room (and there was probably 30,000 hours worth of GA
experience in that room) has flown a new glass cockpit. Most of the Movie
Night regulars are more into the antique/classic aircraft, and I've only
flown behind "steam gauges" -- so we quite frankly didn't know what the hell
we were doing, at first.

However, once we got the hang of the thing, it seemed incredibly, almost
laughably easy to fly an instrument approach. Set things up, follow the
flight director with occasional reference to the moving map, and bingo --
you're landing in virtually zero-zero visibility. With that huge glass
artificial horizon and crisp, graphic depiction, shooting instrument
approaches just couldn't be easier.

In 2002, before we bought the hotel, I was weeks away from taking the IR
check-ride -- so I've got some experience with doing instrument approaches
the old-fashioned way. The difference between the two is absolutely
stunning since, with almost zero training, anyone in the room could fly a
passably safe approach in almost zero visibility.

My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

2. Assuming that it is, has the FAA considering a new, simplified curriculum
for obtaining an IR in a glass cockpit?

I'm fairly surprised that the FAA hasn't made changes to the rating that
address this exciting advance in capability. I haven't read or heard anyone
talking about any simplified instrument rating that this equipment seems to
allow, but it sure seems like it would be a great step forward in flight
safety for the FAA to do something along these lines.

I haven't looked at the instrument written test for six years, but if it
still concentrates as much on VOR and NDB approaches as it did in 2002, it
would seem hopelessly out of touch with the reality of flying these new
birds. Has the written exam changed to address this new equipment?

After "flying" the sim last night, my eyes have really been opened to the
brave new world of glass, and I now more fully understand the enthusiasm
pilots have displayed toward them despite their incredibly high cost.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:37:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:



My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

Yes and no. There are a number of functions in the G1000 which are
missing from MSFS. The depictions and moving maps do make life much
easier, especially when coupled with an autopilot which can couple and
do procedure turns and holds which are part of an instrument approach
(missed approach hold, hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn).

The flight director is not implemented in every G1000 out there.

2. Assuming that it is, has the FAA considering a new, simplified curriculum
for obtaining an IR in a glass cockpit?

I seriously doubt it. They'd have to have a restriction to G1000, or
restriction to Avydine (like the old centerline thrust thing) and i
doubt there's any interest in re-writing that part of part 61.

"Peter Clark" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:37:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:



My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

Yes and no. There are a number of functions in the G1000 which are
missing from MSFS. The depictions and moving maps do make life much
easier, especially when coupled with an autopilot which can couple and
do procedure turns and holds which are part of an instrument approach
(missed approach hold, hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn).


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really learn
anything of huge value. I took the King course as well but the G1000 has way
to many menus, submenus, windows etc. compared to the MSFS version that I
felt fairly lost once I sat in front of the real thing. Still the G1000 is
awesome and a lot of fun to learn!

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:31:03 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:


"Peter Clark" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:37:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:



My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

Yes and no. There are a number of functions in the G1000 which are
missing from MSFS. The depictions and moving maps do make life much
easier, especially when coupled with an autopilot which can couple and
do procedure turns and holds which are part of an instrument approach
(missed approach hold, hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn).


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really learn
anything of huge value. I took the King course as well but the G1000 has way
to many menus, submenus, windows etc. compared to the MSFS version that I
felt fairly lost once I sat in front of the real thing. Still the G1000 is
awesome and a lot of fun to learn!

A much better option for getting familiar with the G1000 system is to
buy the $5 CD from Garmin. The simulator is customized to the
aircraft series it's in (Cessna NAVIII for example) and has the
appropriate things enabled for that airframe, and contains all the
features of the G1000 system (just like the 430/530 simulators did for
those boxes).

"Peter Clark" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:31:03 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:


"Peter Clark" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:37:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:



My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction
of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

Yes and no. There are a number of functions in the G1000 which are
missing from MSFS. The depictions and moving maps do make life much
easier, especially when coupled with an autopilot which can couple and
do procedure turns and holds which are part of an instrument approach
(missed approach hold, hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn).


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really
learn
anything of huge value. I took the King course as well but the G1000 has
way
to many menus, submenus, windows etc. compared to the MSFS version that I
felt fairly lost once I sat in front of the real thing. Still the G1000 is
awesome and a lot of fun to learn!

A much better option for getting familiar with the G1000 system is to
buy the $5 CD from Garmin. The simulator is customized to the
aircraft series it's in (Cessna NAVIII for example) and has the
appropriate things enabled for that airframe, and contains all the
features of the G1000 system (just like the 430/530 simulators did for
those boxes).

Yeah I have seen those available just haven't got around to getting it. I
was hoping the King's course had something with it like that, but alas, no.

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 16:13:50 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:


"Peter Clark" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:31:03 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:


"Peter Clark" wrote in message
news On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:37:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:



My questions a

1. For those who fly instruments behind a glass panel, is the depiction
of
the G1000 in MS Flight Simulator close to accurate? Is it REALLY that
easy?

Yes and no. There are a number of functions in the G1000 which are
missing from MSFS. The depictions and moving maps do make life much
easier, especially when coupled with an autopilot which can couple and
do procedure turns and holds which are part of an instrument approach
(missed approach hold, hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn).


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really
learn
anything of huge value. I took the King course as well but the G1000 has
way
to many menus, submenus, windows etc. compared to the MSFS version that I
felt fairly lost once I sat in front of the real thing. Still the G1000 is
awesome and a lot of fun to learn!

A much better option for getting familiar with the G1000 system is to
buy the $5 CD from Garmin. The simulator is customized to the

The original Garmin sims were downloadable for free.(IIRC)

aircraft series it's in (Cessna NAVIII for example) and has the
appropriate things enabled for that airframe, and contains all the
features of the G1000 system (just like the 430/530 simulators did for
those boxes).

Yeah I have seen those available just haven't got around to getting it. I
was hoping the King's course had something with it like that, but alas, no.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Mar 6, 7:31*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Peter Clark" wrote in message


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really learn
anything of huge value.

Well what do you expect? It's not a simulation but a game (and not
very good at that) in every repect.

Cheers

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:35:02 -0800 (PST), WingFlaps
wrote:

On Mar 6, 7:31*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Peter Clark" wrote in message


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really learn
anything of huge value.

Well what do you expect? It's not a simulation but a game (and not
very good at that) in every repect.

Please make sure you get your quotes right, I wasn't the one who wrote
the above paragraph.

"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On Mar 6, 7:31 am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Peter Clark" wrote in message


I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really
learn
anything of huge value.

Well what do you expect? It's not a simulation but a game (and not
very good at that) in every repect.

Cheers

I didn't expect much and I wasn't disappointed.

I was surprised by how little of the G1000 made it into MSFS, I thought it
might be a good way to at least familiarize myself with the G1000 before
eating up Hobbs time but it was so basic on MSFS that I didn't really
learn
anything of huge value.

Is this in the latest version of MSFS?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"