Glass big learning curve?

Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass cockpit.
In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
$200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I sat
in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me because
my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
that I could fly behind that panel today.


Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
-Robert, CFI

I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
transition.

It depends on two things - how complete a transition do you want, and
what is your experience going in.

For a novice IFR pilot who wants (or maybe needs) all the automation
and functionality the system has to offer, it can actually take longer.
For an experienced IFR steam gauge pilot who only wants as much
functionality as he is used to having, 15 minutes is closer to the
mark.

Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I sat
in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
problems with any of the operations.

That was my experience as well. The first flight I ever took in the
Cirrus, I needed about 15 minutes to come up to speed on how everything
worked. 30 minutes into the flight I was teaching the owner how to use
his engine analyzer to operate LOP. At the end of that flight, the
pilot botched an ILS approach enough to peg the GS needle (in IMC, but
with a fly-down indication). By then, I was so comfortable with the
plane, I was able to talk him through a recovery to the approach.
There is still functionality there that I can't effectively use, but
what I can use is way more than what I have available in my Twin
Comanche.

So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.

Actually, I think the long transition is for those who are not already
experienced steam gauge pilots. Think about this - did you learn how
to program the flight plan capabilities of the map display, or were you
doing it all in direct-to mode? I do the latter - after all, that's
all we ever had flying fix-to-fix with VOR/DME. Can you program the
vertical guidance for enroute descent, or do you just figure that at
150 kts you need 5 nm per 1000 ft at 500 fpm, and at 180 kts you need 6
nm? Basically, what I'm saying is that there is probably a lot of
automation capability you're not using, but as an experienced IFR pilot
you probably don't need it.

The all-glass Cirrus has a set of emergency instruments - a card
compass, an ASI, altimeter, and AI. It also has dual 430's. If the
PFD fails, the factory recommends you couple up the A/P to the 430 and
not try to hand-fly it. I would almost certainly screw up trying to do
that. On the other hand, I have no doubt I could fly a good GPS
approach simply using the 430 map and the available panel. Partial
panel with an AI? Luxury!

Basically, I think most of the people getting into the Cirrus are NOT
experienced steam gauge IFR pilots. They mostly don't have the skills
to effectively fly such a fast and slippery airplane IFR in IMC without
the automation the system offers. Therefore, they need the long
transition to learn how to use the automation. For someone with 100+
hours of actual in Mooney/Bonanza/Comanche or similar airplanes with a
steam gauge panel, the complex automation is not at all necessary -
thus his transition is quick.

Michael

Don't compare the two systems. They do not operate the same.
Cirrus: 430's and Avidyne displays; independent/dependent systems
C182: G1000 integrated avionics system

Go to the Garmin website and download all the Cessna G1000 pdf files.

Don't compare the two systems

So you don't think the learning curve of one is representative of the
learning curve of the other?

-Robert

In article .com,
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

Don't compare the two systems

So you don't think the learning curve of one is representative of the
learning curve of the other?

If you have flown with Garmin 430/530's, you already know how to work
them. You know what knobs to turn and what buttons to turn to get what
you want. The Avidyne displays are just that, displays.
The G-1000 is and integrated comm/nav/transponder/(and soon to be
autopilot)/display.

A local FBO uses 5 hours for a transition into the DA-40-180 with the G-1000
system.
If you do your homework and use the ground based computer training system,
that is more than enough.

A 15hr checkout for someone who already can fly a C-182 is highway robbery.

I will agree that you need to know the failure modes of the system and know
which pages to find which displays to avoid un-needed heads down in the
cockpit.

I nice new C-182 w/G1000 is nice.. but at $200/hr I can fly the Seneca II
and still buy that $10 hamburger for lunch.

BT

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ps.com...
Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass cockpit.
In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
$200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I sat
in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me because
my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
that I could fly behind that panel today.


Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
-Robert, CFI

Don't compare the two systems

So you don't think the learning curve of one is representative of the
learning curve of the other?

If you have flown with Garmin 430/530's, you already know how to work
them. You know what knobs to turn and what buttons to turn to get what
you want. The Avidyne displays are just that, displays.

Yeah sure, except for those little unimportant parts called the air data
computer and attitude heading reference system.

The G-1000 is and integrated comm/nav/transponder/(and soon to be
autopilot)/display.

Given a pilot already knows how to work the GNS430, the Avidyne Entegra
system is still much easier to learn in less time than the G1000.

The all-glass Cirrus has a set of emergency instruments - a card
compass, an ASI, altimeter, and AI. It also has dual 430's. If the
PFD fails, the factory recommends you couple up the A/P to the 430 and
not try to hand-fly it. I would almost certainly screw up trying to do
that.

I don't see how. Assuming your 430s have a flight plan and you're following
it, all you've got to do is engage GPSS and ALT. Or GPSS and VS and then
dial in the vertical speed you want on the autopilot.

On the other hand, I have no doubt I could fly a good GPS
approach simply using the 430 map and the available panel. Partial
panel with an AI? Luxury!

Robert,

So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.


After reading the articles and spending 30 minutes flying the Entegra
system on a clear VFR day, I tend to agree with your view.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 18:36:22 +0200, Thomas Borchert
wrote:

Robert,

So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.


After reading the articles and spending 30 minutes flying the Entegra
system on a clear VFR day, I tend to agree with your view.

Computers were my profession and I have my degree in the field. So,
starting from there.

I've never noted hardly any learning curve to "fly" an airplane VFR
with a glass panel. It seems natural to me.

OTOH it's not that simple over all.

You have to break the flying by the glass system down into the basic
flight instruments. The navigation instruments, and the MFD is it has
one. Of course there are other instruments as well, but this are the
main ones.

Unfortunately there is zip for standardization between most of the
instrument makers. Many of the GPS units are not intuitive for
inserting and removing way points. Some are awkward even when you are
used to them. By the same token, the integrated VORs may not be
nearly as simple as the old "dial it and go" receiver and head.

Prior to GPS many of the LORAN manufacturers had the same lack of
standardization. That lack of standardization makes moving from one
system to another more difficult than it needs to be.

When you are getting the snot beat out of you in turbulence while
trying to dial in an approach, or change way points and discover the
plane you are in uses a different sequence of keys than what you are
used to, it can get sticky in a hurry.

I learned in the old system, but I much prefer the new glass panels.
Unfortunately my budget says my first one is going to be in the G-III
if I ever get it done. I fitted the horizontal stab night before last
and spend the entire last evening block sanding the leading edge of
the stab straight. That sucker is built like a tank.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com