Instrument Rating Question

Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye candy!
They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old) but they
have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam gauges for
my private but not sure which way I should go for my instrument. As time
goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more and more common but I
don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

On Aug 24, 11:41*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye candy!
They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old) but they
have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam gauges for
my private but not sure which way I should go for my instrument. As time
goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more and more common but I
don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

Even if you fly glass cockpit there are backup partial panel gauges
you're going to have to learn to use, so go for the more advanced
cockpit. I trained mostly in 172s, but for XC in real IMC you may
find, as I did, that they just don't have the legs you'll want. Even
if it's soft IFR if you're under a big weather system you'll have to
refuel after 90 minutes just to have legal reserves. The point is,
you'll probably move on to different SELs with a more complete suite
of advanced instrumentation, so why not deal with the glass cockpit
now?

Good question, it'll be interesting to read other opinions.

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in message
...
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye
candy! They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old)
but they have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam
gauges for my private but not sure which way I should go for my
instrument. As time goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more
and more common but I don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with
or not. Any thoughts?

Learn on the equipment that you're likely to be flying.

In article , "bds" wrote:

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in message
...
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye
candy! They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old)
but they have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam
gauges for my private but not sure which way I should go for my
instrument. As time goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more
and more common but I don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with
or not. Any thoughts?

Learn on the equipment that you're likely to be flying.

I have to disagree with this. I'd go for the steam gauges. I think it
will make you a better pilot. When you don't have a moving map, you
have to learn to build and maintain a much more complete mental picture
of your situation in your head. Also, having to tune and ident VORs all
the time adds to the workload and makes it that much harder. If you
learn to do that, switching to a moving map is very easy. But going the
other way is nearly impossible. One day when you're in the soup and you
lose your MFD you will have a much easier time dealing with it if you
got more practice flying VOR needles back in the day.

rg

Darkwing wrote:
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for
my Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics
is my biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's
with G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent
for VFR because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I
like eye candy! They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4
years old) but they have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I
trained on steam gauges for my private but not sure which way I should
go for my instrument. As time goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft
will be more and more common but I don't know if that is a crutch for
learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

It is later easier to transition from steam gauges
to G1000 than the opposite direction. If I were you,
I'd start with the traditional ones.

--

Tauno Voipio (CPL(A), CFII)
Steam gauges: OH-PYM, PA-28RT201T
G1000: OH-STS, DA-42

On Aug 24, 10:41*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:

Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye candy!
They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old) but they
have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam gauges for
my private but not sure which way I should go for my instrument. As time
goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more and more common but I
don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

You should train on traditional instruments (steam gauges). The
transition from traditional to glass is much easier than going from
glass cockpit to traditional instrumentation. If a good simulator is
at hand, why not train on both, whilst focusing on the steam gauges?
Speaking of simulators, I spent A LOT of time in them during my
instrument training and it was a huge benifit to my training. The sim
is more difficult to fly than the real thing, which makes for good
training & practice, failures than are not practical in the air can be
safely practiced, and the sim is a lot less expensive to "fly." I
would suggest spending lots of time in a simulator. Do train on "steam
gauges," though, and the switch to glass will be easy. 172s with
traditional instrumentation are probably less expensive in rental than
the glass ones, too.

Ricky

On Aug 24, 10:41*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye candy!
They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old) but they
have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam gauges for
my private but not sure which way I should go for my instrument. As time
goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more and more common but I
don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

Not trying to hijack this thread - good subject, IMO, but please:
When VFR (and IFR in VMC), LOOK OUT THE BLEEDING WINDOWS!!!! Eye
candy is nice, but a midair really, really sucks.

Kirk
LS6-b "66"

wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 10:41 am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
Well I think I am going to finally put in the time and effort to go for my
Instrument Rating this fall but exactly with what aircraft avionics is my
biggest question. Where I fly they have basically all new 172SP's with
G1000's for rent. Obviously this is the aircraft I prefer to rent for VFR
because of all the cool and nice tools they have on board, I like eye
candy!
They also have a couple older 172R's (by older I mean 4 years old) but
they
have steam gauges only plus Garmin 430 GPS's. I trained on steam gauges
for
my private but not sure which way I should go for my instrument. As time
goes I'm sure the glass cockpit aircraft will be more and more common but
I
don't know if that is a crutch for learning IFR with or not. Any thoughts?

Not trying to hijack this thread - good subject, IMO, but please:
When VFR (and IFR in VMC), LOOK OUT THE BLEEDING WINDOWS!!!! Eye
candy is nice, but a midair really, really sucks.

Kirk
LS6-b "66"


Actually the #1 thing that worries me the most in flying (just for the
record, I know it IS illogical % wise but I tend to worry about the least
likely scenarios in most things in life) is a mid-air so even with cool eye
candy I am very vigilant for traffic. Eye candy or no eye candy I am VERY
vigilant for traffic outside the windows. It has been the #1 thing that
concerns me when flying since the day I started, engine out, onboard fire,
electrical failure, all these things take a back seat in my brain to a
mid-air.

In response to the other threads, I kind of figured the consensus would lean
toward steam gauges and I do agree for a lot of reasons. I think the G1000
will actually make IFR that much easier once I get proficient with steam
gauges.

On Aug 24, 4:28*pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:

eye candy or no eye candy I am VERY
vigilant for traffic outside the windows. It has been the #1 thing that
concerns me when flying since the day I started, engine out, onboard fire,
electrical failure, all these things take a back seat in my brain to a
mid-air.

When you are IMC, guess your priorities will change LOL. In this case
you have no choice but put your faith into the ATC system.

With regards to your original question, I am so glad I learned on
steam gauge. Immediately after getting my 430 installed, on my 2 or
3rd IFR flight, guess what stopped working? Wasn't my Nav1 or Nav2.

Antenna to the back of the 430 was not secured on and vibrated off the
unit. COMS worked great though! Ended up having to pull out my IFR
enroute map, amend my flight plan and file airways when picking up my
clearance. So things do happen :-))

Good question - good thread.
Lots of divergant responses, with good reasoning behind them.
For what it's worth, I chose to do my IR on the traditional panel, for the
reasons mentioned by other contributors. I figured it would be easier to
transition from gauges to glass than the other way around, also as a
non-owner there is always a strong possibility that a plane I rent (at
least in the immediate future)would not be glass, so good IFR familiarity
on the traditional panel seemed a must for me. Finally, I figured the
transition from steam to glass meant more dual instruction, and I take that
as an advantage, even if it comes at a cost.

Related question : Autopilot or no. I chose to do my IR without autopilot,
for similar reasons to the above, however I am a strong believer in
autopilots, have studied their use, and consider them to be an important
safety feature in single-pilot IFR. Others aill disagree.