Glass cockpit hard to read

On Oct 6, 11:21?am, Arno wrote:
Hello,

I am computer scientist and usually really like fancy technology. But
I just had my first flight with a "glass" PFD (Avidyne) and must say I
am not impressed. In particular reading altitude and airpeed from
these scrolling bands requires a lot more attention than with regular
gauges, just like reading a digital clock takes longer than reading an
analog one. Glancing at it and checking against a known picture, like
"speed at 3 o'clock is fine on final" or "altitude at 20 minutes past
midnight is minimum", just does not work anymore, instead I end up
reading the actual numbers every time I look. Does anyone feel the
same? Am I missing a particular technique?

Arno

Take a look at the EFIS 1200 at www.teamtango.com, go to the
options page. The ADI screen has BIG digital numbers for airspeed,
heading, and altitude as well as round dials underneath. I have
flown other EFIS systems with displays similar to what you describe.
I got used to them , but in some instances preferred round dials. No
more. I have about 140 hours with the EFIS 1200 and find the BIG
digits easier to read and interpret. Initally I looked for the
altimeter needle at the bottom of the dial when flying at VFR
hemispheric altitude, but now I pay more attention to the digits. I
don't need tapes or ladders for trends. IMHO we could eliminate the
analog dials at this point and I wouldn't miss them. Just as a big
horizon line is easier to interpret than a two inch standby gauge,
size matters when it comes to glancing at those important numbers.
The guy who builds the EFIS 1200 agrees with you on the Avidyne and
similar displays and built what he thought was a better display. I
like it. There is more to come, but that is a different topic.

Denny

On Oct 7, 7:58 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
You gotta have some good old fashioned stuff for backup..

Well, until recently you did anyway!

I fear what may happen when there is no longer a back-up--or when pilots
forget how to use the back-ups.

Also, while you may have some back-up instruments, a situation that would be
both safe and manageable with a complete avionics suite in working order can
become dangerous and unrecoverable if you have only a handful of instruments.
There are some things that you can do with fancy avionics that you cannot do
with just two or three steam gauges ... otherwise there'd be little point in
the fancy avionics. But this inevitably means that there will be situations
that are safe with the fancy stuff that become deadly without it, even with
back-up instruments.

Flying with three or four instruments is fine as long as you limit your flying
to situations that can be handled by those instruments. Of course, if you
have a fancy glass cockpit, you may well go far beyond those situations, and
if the glass cockpit then fails, you're in deep trouble.

MX,
I am gonna break a cardinal rule here and respond to one of your
posts.I am doing this because you have raised a question others might
be interested in. I cannot speak for other jets ( I am sure they are
similar) , but the Boeing uses an ADIRU which has 2 sets of three
laser ring gyros either set will sufice to measure acceleration, pitch
and roll. And there is an ADIRU for each side of the cockpit (Capt &
FO). The IRS will also provide attitude info and there are two of
those also. Keep in mind you can switch the display to all on system
one or two. With this level of redundancy we dont even practice
partial panel or raw data stuff in the sim, it is simply not
necessary. Years ago I flew an approach with just backup instruments
in a turbo prop after a total EFIS failure and it was no big deal. I
think you might be making more of this than you need to.
KB

Union Thug writes:

I am gonna break a cardinal rule here and respond to one of your
posts.I am doing this because you have raised a question others might
be interested in. I cannot speak for other jets ( I am sure they are
similar) , but the Boeing uses an ADIRU which has 2 sets of three
laser ring gyros either set will sufice to measure acceleration, pitch
and roll. And there is an ADIRU for each side of the cockpit (Capt &
FO). The IRS will also provide attitude info and there are two of
those also. Keep in mind you can switch the display to all on system
one or two. With this level of redundancy we dont even practice
partial panel or raw data stuff in the sim, it is simply not
necessary. Years ago I flew an approach with just backup instruments
in a turbo prop after a total EFIS failure and it was no big deal. I
think you might be making more of this than you need to.

I was talking about small aircraft with the kiddy glass cockpits, like the
G1000. I realize that large airliners have a great deal of redundancy built
in. They also have more ergonomic instruments and less of a tendency to
bundle everything into a single package.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

You gotta have some good old fashioned stuff for backup..

Well, until recently you did anyway!

I fear what may happen when there is no longer a back-up--or when
pilots forget how to use the back-ups.


Why, you don't fly fjukktard.




Also, while you may have some back-up instruments, a situation that
would be both safe and manageable with a complete avionics suite in
working order can become dangerous and unrecoverable if you have only
a handful of instruments.


Nope, I can do a hand flown landing nearly to touchdonw on the standbys.


Proving once again that you have no idea what you are talking about.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Union Thug writes:

I am gonna break a cardinal rule here and respond to one of your
posts.I am doing this because you have raised a question others might
be interested in. I cannot speak for other jets ( I am sure they are
similar) , but the Boeing uses an ADIRU which has 2 sets of three
laser ring gyros either set will sufice to measure acceleration,
pitch and roll. And there is an ADIRU for each side of the cockpit
(Capt & FO). The IRS will also provide attitude info and there are
two of those also. Keep in mind you can switch the display to all on
system one or two. With this level of redundancy we dont even
practice partial panel or raw data stuff in the sim, it is simply not
necessary. Years ago I flew an approach with just backup instruments
in a turbo prop after a total EFIS failure and it was no big deal. I
think you might be making more of this than you need to.

I was talking about small aircraft with the kiddy glass cockpits, like
the G1000.


Stil dn;'t know what you are talking about.



Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Nope, I can do a hand flown landing nearly to touchdonw on the standbys.

"Nearly" to touchdown doesn't count!

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Nope, I can do a hand flown landing nearly to touchdonw on the
standbys.

"Nearly" to touchdown doesn't count!


LHow would you know you dumb ****?

You don't fly.

Bertie

On Oct 8, 9:32 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
Nope, I can do a hand flown landing nearly to touchdonw on the standbys.

"Nearly" to touchdown doesn't count!

We don't do CAT III landings in GA aircraft so it is good enough.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
ups.com:

On Oct 8, 9:32 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
Nope, I can do a hand flown landing nearly to touchdonw on the
standbys.

"Nearly" to touchdown doesn't count!

We don't do CAT III landings in GA aircraft so it is good enough.

-Robert



Even so, if needs be and there's no ther option, a hand flown ils to
touchdown is quite do-able with a bit of practice.


Bertie

Robert M. Gary writes:

We don't do CAT III landings in GA aircraft so it is good enough.

How can any flying that does not include landing be "good enough"?