G1000 vs Steam guages initial thoughts...

You're missing the point, the G1000 displays some much
information in picture form, the pilot WILL almost certainly
come to rely on the system to work and stop doing that
"basic IFR" thinking. Sort of like pilots forget to check
the runway heading. With steam gauges, the pilot is forced
to THINK about the navigation situation, with the G1000
thinking is done by the machine.



"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| But when it all goes TU, a heading and time to find by
DR,
| the place within fuel endurance that is VFR, and being
| prepared to just hold an altitude and heading, and have
an
| idea of where you are when you break out an hour or two
| later at 8,000 feet 300 miles from you last knew your
| position and then find an airport.
|
| That's just basic IFR training. The same thing can happen
in a steam
| gauge airplane. The only difference is that G1000 has more
backups. If
| you lose your single alternator in a Bonanza and you're
IMC for an hour
| or so, short of a handheld, you're in the same situation.
| However, the original discussion was about second guessing
the accuracy
| of the information. That is critical in steam gauges since
they often
| fail in strange ways (like my night IMC "tilted but
functional AI").
| However, its MUCH less likely in the G1000. In the G1000
you'll either
| get red X's or, worse case, blank screen, but not slightly
off data.
|
| -Robert
|