Ex FSO GRIFFO

From the AvWeb site....


REPORT: NO SAFETY ADVANTAGE TO GLASS PANELS
The safety records of airplanes with glass panels are about the same as airplanes of the same model with analog cockpits, according to a new study by the Air Safety Institute, a division of the AOPA Foundation.

However, "glass-panel aircraft may be more susceptible to accidents during takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds," the study found.

The available data were insufficient to conclude what caused that difference. Some factors, according to the study, might include transition training, a tendency to fixate on the glass panels instead of external cues, or difficulty in interpreting airspeed and altitude from the glass-panel readouts compared to interpreting analog displays. The complete study, which provides an exhaustive and complex analysis of the data, is available free online (PDF).

I don't use them often enough to become 'automatic' at looking for
IAS / Alt......

Your thoughts??

(Glass of red, snack....)

Cheers

Jabawocky

Having a lot of time on Glass, and learning on steam, I would say I am happy with either.

The advantage of modern EFIS systems is all the litttle extra's that may not directly influence ability to fly on instruments, but can make for better flying safety due to good info.

An example of this is real time wind vectors, you are not needing whiz wheels or calculators and taking your eye off the bigger picture as much.

IVSI is easier to hold altitudes with when hand flying....once I learned to use that well ....thanks Chuckles

Situational awareness improves with the moving map gear as well. At a glance you can get a better SA picture.

As for ability to hand fly in so much as "handling" the aeroplane, I would say no big deal. For a newbie to glass, initially I would say it is worse, until they get some time on it. After doing my CIR on steam I found the change hard work for a bit, so I forced myself to fly to TOC by hand, until I was used to it. Now I still do it, no AP, just to keep on top of it all.

So how about a nice little EFIS in ya Tiger Griffo? You will need a battery

nomorecatering

Flying Glass, especially G1000 is infinitely safer in the long run. Yiu have a huge horizon, a HSIthat yu dont have to reset like a DG, HDG bugs, speed and ALT trend vectors, moving map, you can have the nearest airports displayed in a list. Also ALT alerts. it all means you can fly more accurately, you always know where you are, you literally cant get lost with a G1000.

However, if you cant fly in the firstplace, the G1000 wont save you. To that effect, I do the first half dozen lessons with the screens covered, get them flying visual attitude first.

The G1000 doesnt make a bad pilot a good one, but it does make a good one even better due to the increased situational awareness.

As for IFR flying, its just the bees knees, when I started flying 23 years ago I woudl never have dreamed of a C172 with a flight director.

Ex FSO GRIFFO

Hi Jab....I just KNOW that was a case of 'get ya tongue outa ya cheek'....

Yeah, the donk has a generator too....to power the - ugh - radio for JT & X/ponder.....
Thought about putting a 'Dynon' or similar in it - when the price comes down - just so I won't infringe the UL of CTA........

Cheers

ForkTailedDrKiller

Hmmm, my first experience with "glass" was in Jaba's Retard Vehicle "Space Shuttle". Not a problem! I just had to add an additional item to my pre-TO list - "Just point to the ASI, Jaba"!
I think infomation overload is initially an issue but soon overcome with some training and experience.

G1000 is an awsome bit of kit, but I am not particularly surprised that it doesn't appear to be leading to an increase in safety. I wonder if any potential safety enhancement is countered by an increase tendency to allow technology to exceed ability!

Sorry, but I just can't see it!

The little one on the AH seems to work fine.
The Bonanza that I currently fly has that
Yup - got that too
maybe not the former, but "yup" to the latter - I think its called a VSI
Yup, G430/530 has that and the G495 even has pretty colours!
Personally, I would not fly G1000 without a portable GPS (ie G495) as backup anyway.
Yup, got that in G430 and G495
Lots of AP have that
I think I fly pretty accurately now
Pretty hard to get lost with any sort of GPS on board

Dr

The Green Goblin

I would like to see glass displaying traditional flight instruments. I think the PFD setup we use in airliners is a marketing company (boeing, airbus) wet dream, but a stick and rudder pilots chagrin.

There is a reason why the six pack was settled in and used so successfully for so long. The human eye detects sudden movement, not small changes like a PFD. Round dials with hands give a better overal pictures of the flight path and health of systems IMO.

I often wonder if the AF330 accident would not have happened if there was a round altimeter winding down at a great pace, vs the alt tape.

When the altitude tape is whirring down at a great of pace, it becomes easy to ignore as the movement is not pronounced.

Trent 972

Studies in the USA on accident satistics of vehicles fitted with ABS brakes have continually shown that these vehicles are involved in as many if not more accidents than vehicles not fitted with ABS.
Risk Compensation
ie. "My cars ABS brakes are so good I can reduce the distance between me and the car travelling in front"
or
"My glass cockpit displays so much information, I couldn't possibly get into trouble".
.. I've flown Glass for 24 years and 14 years of steam prior to that with a bit each-way in between, and I am in no doubt that Glass is really good but not the panacea for flight safety that some may think.
TGG makes a good point about Glass Cockpit displays with rapidly changing flight parameters. May as well p!ss into the breeze.

The Green Goblin

Yeah I find with speed and altitude tape you have to read the number and then comprehend the information.

With a round dial for altitude you need to keep the long hand at the top! The airspeed needs to be pointing in the right spot (next to the bug for approach etc) and you're sweet.

Whos bright idea was it to change it all?

Flying Binghi

.

Yeah, i were on the 'glass' one take off and one little insect in the pitot and NO glass....

Still like the 'glass', though i'm lookin to put a standard six pack back into the aircraft on the off side panel... just in case..





.

morno

To be able to be safe in an automated and glass cockpit environment you need 2 crucial things:

1. PROPER TRAINING! Understanding what it's telling you, is the most important thing.
2. Proficiency. If you go out and only do one or two flights every 6 months in a glass cockpit, then you can't expect to be safe.

I've spent various hours on half glass setups and full glass setups. The half glass setups, while good, are still not really that much better than traditional steam. The full glass setups though, the level of information you can have as well as the capabilities of the system (when you're talking automation added into it) is beyond what you and I can do by ourselves without a lot of thought and hands on flying.

Glass can give you a lot of information, but you still have to remember the basics, KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid. Another words, it might be nice to have some information on a screen, but if all it's doing is clogging up space and distracting you, get rid of it. Information overload can put you into a dangerous situation probably more than information underload (is that a word?) can.

The 3 rules of glass and automation (they go hand in hand these days):
1. What's it doing now?
2. What's it going to do next?
3. What have I told it to do?

Those 3 things have kept me alive so far, .

morno

Jabawocky

Maybe you need a better supplier of your glass. One little bug up my pitot coming back from YHBA one day, and it was all OK.....VA Captain beside me was mighty impressed. We fried his ass with the pitot heat too! Took some removing when we got back.

So, not all glass is created equal

mcgrath50

Swings and round abouts really, glass provides a wealth of information that can save your life or distract you to your death.

In the same vein, I find it easier to know exactly at what altitude I am at any moment in a climb (say 3,546) but glass gives me a better understanding that that is 1/2 a dial away from 4,000. It's for this reason the fuel gauges on the G1000 for example are still 'bar graphs' so you have a visual reference.

This I find becomes an issue for students who have learnt on all glass systems when on approach and to a lesser extent climb. They get obsessed with chasing a speed to the exact knot rather than making sure the needle is pointing around the right spot and playing with the feel of the aircraft. They seem to want to fly by numbers.

As others have said, it all boils down to a product of the training systems and what you are used to at the time.

Flying Binghi

.

My thoughts at the time. I'm told all the TSIO'd stuff is the same re pitot blockage problems so nuthuin i can do unless i go experimental - or a second pitot.




.

The Green Goblin

Guys, it's one thing to talk about a glass flight deck in an Airliner, it's another thing entirely to then compare its operation with a G1000 in a light aircraft and state how good they are.

Yeah a G1000 is the ants pants, but you can still look at the window, you still have bell cranks and cables connecting everything together and the power lever is still connected to the engine. The autopilot operates (if installed) in basic modes of operation and is generally used in the cruise when you feel like a break. If your lucky it can be coupled to the GPS and operate in Nav mode.

A glass flight deck in an airliner is a portal to the computers that are running the show for you. And there is a computer for everything with a second computer to that computer. There is even a computer that operates the bloody landing gear and alternates between it's backup every cycle. When you lower the gear, you don't even wait for three greens, you call gear down and rely on one computer telling another computer that it's not down and informing you via ECAM. The information on your screens is delivered by information interpreted by computers and you operate accordingly. The computer tells you the procedure, then lights up the buttons you need to press, before informing you which systems are affected.

So with all due respect, it's one thing to talk about how great it is to be a weekend warrior with some fancy toys, it's another flying an automated machine at flight levels 8/10s the speed of sound relying on glass cockpit information derived from a mountain of computers.

Jabawocky

Depends what you are putting it in I guess. Is it a certified machine?

forever flying

Initially when training on a glass cockpit (referring to a G1000) I found there was a tendency to read the altitude or speed exactly as it was, and an attempt to correct it.

For elaboration; on steam gauges 'keeping the needle at the top' or wherever it needed to be and holding it there meant you were maintaining altitude. I found when using the G1000 that reading altitude as '1980' when I was trying to maintain 2000 made me have a tendency to correct it, even though 20 feet really isn't that much difference.

Now with quite a few hours using them it's become natural to understand what to feel...but for new students who are learning on the G1000, I personally find it's all an information overload for them at that stage in training.

Preference: steam for lighties.

Ultralights

give me steam anyway when VFR. can monitor the vitals in your peripheral vision while still keeping eyes out of the window. no need to even read the numbers, just memory of where the needle should be.

Piano Man

I agree with Ultralights.

Any VFR flying that involves a "feel" for the aircraft then glass is a complete waste of space. Eyes should be outside most of the time, and your eyes should be checking the six pack just to verify that all is ok

Feather #3

One argument for glass in VFR is that it's cheaper to maintain than steam.

IFR is another matter. A mate purchased an Aspen 1000 for less than the cost of overhauling the AH & DG!

The problem I had in converting to glass was coping with tape readouts, especially in any rough air. After that, fine.

G'day

Jabawocky

I disagree with piano ad UL, when vfr you fly the same way, once you can safely use glass, your quick glimpse feeds you all the info just the same.

A G1000 in ya Beaver would not be a good look though