A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

LINUX flight software



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #24  
Old February 26th 04, 04:28 PM
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"André Somers" wrote in message
...
John Gilbert wrote:

Angular guages perhaps. Sweeps of 180 to 270 degrees are quite
readable, I agree. But what does the study say about altimeters with
dual needles, that rotate multiple times? How many times have you
misread the altitude or had to think hard to get it right? This has to
be the most confusing instrument to read, unless you don't really care
about knowing about that last +/- 1000 feet.

Well... hardly ever, but maybe that's because our meters are, well, in
meters :-) That means a full spin round is 1000m. Not something you'd
easily misjudge I think.

André


I've flown airplanes with metric instruments (And Russian placards too).
The airspeed, rate-of-climb, RPM, manifold pressure were no problem.
Numbers is numbers I guess - fly with the needles in the green arc and
everything works. But that damn metric altimeter was impossible - no way to
read trends on an instrument that insensitive. With an altimeter that reads
1000 feet (304.8 meters) per rev of the big hand, you can thermal by
watching the trend of the needle.

Responding to "YO": Some people like analog gauges and some don't.
Ergonomic studies just produce averages which may be useful to marketeers
but what's important individually is what works best for that particular
user. If the data are displayed on an electronic screen, the user can
select the display method in a setup dialog box. i.e. check box one for
round gauge analog, box two for vertical tape with a digit window etc...
Check another box for metric or imperial units. With altitude in meters,
expanding the scale of a vertical tape gives the same sensitivity as with
imperial units.

I've also flown with both vertical tapes and round gauges. At first the
tapes were confusing but once adapted to the idea of having all the "V"
speeds floating alongside the tape with the trend indicators, going back to
round mechanical gauges seemed like the stone age. I vote for computer
graphic displays of primary flight data.

Graphical displays are inevitable anyway since all those little watchmakers
who built and repaired mechanical instruments are all retired or dead now.

Bill Daniels

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Free Flight Planning Software Dean Wilkinson Products 0 September 18th 04 10:44 PM
Flight instructors as Charter Pilots C J Campbell Piloting 6 January 24th 04 07:51 AM
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Piloting 25 September 11th 03 01:27 PM
Real World Specs for FS 2004 Paul H. Simulators 16 August 18th 03 09:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.