Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep

Airline pilots that transitioned from "steam gauge" to the tape altimeters and
V/S often had problems at first. But, those folks are type rated and restricted
to type.

That's the problem with this new "gee wiz" Light A/C G/A stuff. No
standardization and no type requirements.


While you have a point, IMHO one has to be very careful not to fall into the "it#s
bad because it's different" trap. Otherwise, we would never have (had) any
progress at all.

At other times, we complain about too much regulation in flying. In this case,
you're calling for it. I don't think you can have it both ways - and I DO think
most pilots are still able to learn, and many might even enjoy it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Airline pilots that transitioned from "steam gauge" to the tape altimeters and
V/S often had problems at first. But, those folks are type rated and restricted
to type.

That's the problem with this new "gee wiz" Light A/C G/A stuff. No
standardization and no type requirements.


While you have a point, IMHO one has to be very careful not to fall into the "it#s
bad because it's different" trap. Otherwise, we would never have (had) any
progress at all.

No, "it's" not bad at all. How "it's" used will be either good or bad, or somewhere
between. For the airline pilot, the fancy stuff is good because he or she is isolated
to that equipment with adequate training and exposure for proficiency to occur.

And, keep in mind the airline crews have two sets of eyes, two pairs of hands, and FMS
alphanumeric keyboards with which to enter data, as opposed to twisting knobs.



At other times, we complain about too much regulation in flying. In this case,
you're calling for it. I don't think you can have it both ways - and I DO think
most pilots are still able to learn, and many might even enjoy it.

I don't believe I called for regulation, although you apparently inferred that from my
comparison to type ratings.

The record for light aircraft IFR operations is not good. Making the equipment more
complex, albeit more capable, could make things worse without really good training
(i.e., not the blind leading the blind) and a commitment to currency and proficiency.

In article , wrote:

The record for light aircraft IFR operations is not good.

huh? While it's not perfect, and some other categories of operations
are better, the record for light aircraft IFR operations is
in fact pretty good.

--
Bob Noel

Bob Noel wrote:

In article , wrote:

The record for light aircraft IFR operations is not good.

huh? While it's not perfect, and some other categories of operations
are better, the record for light aircraft IFR operations is
in fact pretty good.


I guess we have different ideas of what's good. ;-)

wrote in message ...


Bob Noel wrote:

In article , wrote:

The record for light aircraft IFR operations is not good.

huh? While it's not perfect, and some other categories of operations
are better, the record for light aircraft IFR operations is
in fact pretty good.


I guess we have different ideas of what's good. ;-)

Well, then I guess you would have to say that the record for light aircraft
in general (not just IFR) is not good.

Making the equipment more
complex,


Yes, but is it? A GPS moving map approach is more complex than an NDB
approach? Or a DME arc? or anything else very complex? You sure? I'm
not.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Making the equipment more
complex,


Yes, but is it? A GPS moving map approach is more complex than an NDB
approach? Or a DME arc? or anything else very complex? You sure? I'm
not.


You fly GPS approaches using the moving map? I use the CDI and the along
track distance cross-checking with the approach chart.

Once the approach is loaded from the database, and the pilot is headed
for the correct fix as per the procedure for the circumstances, flying an
LNAV approach is easier than flying an NDB approach, and far more
accurate. But, it is more difficult than flying an ILS approach and not
as safe. Flying a Baro VNAV approach (once all the database issues are
resolved) is very similar to flying an ILS and is about as safe.

But, so far as I know, no light aircraft has IFR-certified Baro VNAV.