G1000 vs Steam guages initial thoughts...

The G1000 is less expensive for a airframe manufacturer to
install. The big screens and moving maps are easy to
interpret and getting lost in the middle of an approach will
be hard to do. [As long as it works]. But when you learn to
navigate with no dials or steam gauges, you train your mind
to act as a "moving map" and you know the situation.

The pilots who learn from zero time with a glass cockpit
will have to be cross trained in some way to use the windows
and a sectional, or their partial panel procedures will be
reduced to hoping radar vectors are available to an airport,
since even in VFR, they may not be able to navigate.

The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the weakness
in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the displays.
If you get to fly a King Air class airplane, with a gyro
package and displays that cost more than a new G1000 Cessna
172, you'll see 5 or 6 inch AI and HSI, in a dual
[independent] panel. It is easy to control and steady.
There is real performance monitoring of the gyros, not just
a failure on the power flag.


wrote in message
...
|I have just finished two concurent aircraft learning
programs
|
| 1)Getting my instrument currency back.
| doing some paractice, taking a IPC.
| All done in a round dial 172.
|
| 2)Getting checked out in a G1000 182.
| I've finished the King G1000 VFR and IFR course and spent
about
| 6 hours in the G1000, I've also finished theG1000 182 VFR
checkout.
|
|
| Today we went up and did some IFR work in the G1000 182.
| My prior three flights were doing some instrument practice
in the
| round dial 172.
|
| I'd been doing quite well at mastering the G1000, but
putting the
| hood on at 700 ft in the G1000 was really hard after
flying my IPC
| yesterday in a round dial 172.
|
| Holding altitude is hard the Altitude bug is too small and
the rate of
| climb indicator is such a different presentaion tha tI
find it hard to
| track.
|
| I t feels like transitioning back and froth from G1000 to
round dials
| is going to be hard.
|
| When one uses the autopilot in the G1000 182, everything
is easier,
| one has lots of time to think and the situational
awareness is
| awesome.
|
| I'm begining to believe that 90% of this is the autopilot
and that the
| super G1000 integration is not that big of a benift.
|
| The things I really like:
| 1)Rock solid autopilot.
| 2)The terrain display.
| 3)The big map situational awareness.
| 4)Traffic.
|
| If one upgraded an airplane to
|
| 1)Good autopilot
| 2)Big screen GPS with traffic and terrain
| 3)HSI
|
| I believe that you will have gaind 90% of the benifit of a
G1000 at a
| fraction of the cost
|
| One could probably get 75% of the way there with an
Autopilot S mode
| xponder and Garmin 496.
|
|
|
|
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote:
The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the weakness
in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the displays.
If you get to fly a King Air class airplane, with a gyro
package and displays that cost more than a new G1000 Cessna
172, you'll see 5 or 6 inch AI and HSI, in a dual
[independent] panel. It is easy to control and steady.
There is real performance monitoring of the gyros, not just
a failure on the power flag.

Once you've got all electronic data in one place like a G1000 does, I would
think it would fairly straight forward to do some basic data consistency
checking.

For example, if the AI says you're in a 10 degree nose-up attitude, but
airspeed is near the top of the green arc and increasing (and altitude is
decreasing), something has to be wrong. Likewise, if the AI says you're
wings level, but your heading keeps changing, something has to be wrong (I
know, you need to factor in the slip/skid data, but you've got that too).

It's all the same cross-check we learned to do in instrument training, but
done by a machine that never gets bored, distracted, or confused. It may
have other failure modes, but bordom, distraction, and confusion are not
among them. Those are reserved for the wetware.

I guess I'm an old fart, I think that making it so easy that
mental skills might degrade. Just as PC users get used to
having spell-check, G1000 users might become so dependent
and "lazy" that they would have real problem with a failure
of the G1000 and the comm. radios.


"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin"
wrote:
| The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the
weakness
| in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
| accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the
displays.
| If you get to fly a King Air class airplane, with a gyro
| package and displays that cost more than a new G1000
Cessna
| 172, you'll see 5 or 6 inch AI and HSI, in a dual
| [independent] panel. It is easy to control and steady.
| There is real performance monitoring of the gyros, not
just
| a failure on the power flag.
|
| Once you've got all electronic data in one place like a
G1000 does, I would
| think it would fairly straight forward to do some basic
data consistency
| checking.
|
| For example, if the AI says you're in a 10 degree nose-up
attitude, but
| airspeed is near the top of the green arc and increasing
(and altitude is
| decreasing), something has to be wrong. Likewise, if the
AI says you're
| wings level, but your heading keeps changing, something
has to be wrong (I
| know, you need to factor in the slip/skid data, but you've
got that too).
|
| It's all the same cross-check we learned to do in
instrument training, but
| done by a machine that never gets bored, distracted, or
confused. It may
| have other failure modes, but bordom, distraction, and
confusion are not
| among them. Those are reserved for the wetware.

Jim Macklin wrote:
I guess I'm an old fart, I think that making it so easy that
mental skills might degrade. Just as PC users get used to
having spell-check, G1000 users might become so dependent
and "lazy" that they would have real problem with a failure
of the G1000 and the comm. radios.

The computer does all the cross checking for you and presents you with
giant red X's if anything doesn't check. It would be extreamly unlikely
for the AHRS to fail in a mode that showed you 10degrees pitch up.
There are no moving parts in the computer.

-Robert

That's all great, but the battery and alternator run it all.
I want myself and my students to have their minds actively
involved, not just a spectator.


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| I guess I'm an old fart, I think that making it so easy
that
| mental skills might degrade. Just as PC users get used
to
| having spell-check, G1000 users might become so
dependent
| and "lazy" that they would have real problem with a
failure
| of the G1000 and the comm. radios.
|
| The computer does all the cross checking for you and
presents you with
| giant red X's if anything doesn't check. It would be
extreamly unlikely
| for the AHRS to fail in a mode that showed you 10degrees
pitch up.
| There are no moving parts in the computer.
|
| -Robert
|

Jim Macklin wrote:
That's all great, but the battery and alternator run it all.
I want myself and my students to have their minds actively
involved, not just a spectator.

You would have to lose the alternator and 2 batteries (the G1000 has
its own emergency supply). In anycase if you did lose power you
wouldn't get 10 degrees pitch up, you'd be a blank screen, in which
case you use the 3 emergency round dials below the Garmin system. My
point is that failures in the G1000 should be very, very obvious and
teaching students to second guess the pitch attitude from the AHRS is
probably not as big a bang for the buck as the suggested training layed
out in the FITS manuals.

-Robert

Mt point is that the G1000 is easy that the pilot WILL
become totally dependent on the nav display for situational
awareness. If it fails, the pilot will not have any idea on
how or where to go. Backup battery is fine, but in many
areas there isn't an airport of any king within 30 minutes,
and an IFR approach will be difficult. I'm not worried
about the control being lost, I'm worried about the pilot
being lost.




"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| That's all great, but the battery and alternator run it
all.
| I want myself and my students to have their minds
actively
| involved, not just a spectator.
|
| You would have to lose the alternator and 2 batteries (the
G1000 has
| its own emergency supply). In anycase if you did lose
power you
| wouldn't get 10 degrees pitch up, you'd be a blank screen,
in which
| case you use the 3 emergency round dials below the Garmin
system. My
| point is that failures in the G1000 should be very, very
obvious and
| teaching students to second guess the pitch attitude from
the AHRS is
| probably not as big a bang for the buck as the suggested
training layed
| out in the FITS manuals.
|
| -Robert
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:6mVJg.6550$SZ3.5989@dukeread04...
The G1000 is less expensive for a airframe manufacturer to
install. The big screens and moving maps are easy to
interpret and getting lost in the middle of an approach will
be hard to do. [As long as it works]. But when you learn to
navigate with no dials or steam gauges, you train your mind
to act as a "moving map" and you know the situation.
....
The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the weakness
in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the displays.

Something like this might be more better!
http://www.xbow.com/Products/product...ls.aspx?sid=59

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:6mVJg.6550$SZ3.5989@dukeread04...
The G1000 is less expensive for a airframe manufacturer to
install. The big screens and moving maps are easy to
interpret and getting lost in the middle of an approach will
be hard to do. [As long as it works]. But when you learn to
navigate with no dials or steam gauges, you train your mind
to act as a "moving map" and you know the situation.
...
The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the weakness
in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the displays.

Something like this might be more better!
http://www.xbow.com/Products/product...ls.aspx?sid=59

Too quick on the SEND button

I was wondering if these could replace the mechanical gyros even if you're
still running steam gauges?

You'd need ARNIC or remote AI and HSI, either mechanical or
electronic, that appears to be a cabin class piece of
equipment.



"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
|
| "Matt Barrow" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Jim Macklin"
wrote in message
| news:6mVJg.6550$SZ3.5989@dukeread04...
| The G1000 is less expensive for a airframe manufacturer
to
| install. The big screens and moving maps are easy to
| interpret and getting lost in the middle of an approach
will
| be hard to do. [As long as it works]. But when you
learn to
| navigate with no dials or steam gauges, you train your
mind
| to act as a "moving map" and you know the situation.
| ...
| The solid state gyros are the best thing IMHO, the
weakness
| in the small GA airplanes is the poor sensitivity and
| accuracy of the gyros and the small size of the
displays.
|
| Something like this might be more better!
| http://www.xbow.com/Products/product...ls.aspx?sid=59
|
| Too quick on the SEND button
|
| I was wondering if these could replace the mechanical
gyros even if you're
| still running steam gauges?
|
|
|
|