Hi V1 and Flight Tester you seem to be the rightguys in that particularly V1 you appear to have been working on similar program that of integrating an new EFIS with an old Flight Director system. Looks like a very good match.
The after sales support comment is interesting perhaps we are talking to the wrong guy!
The problem I have is that over the years with the constant upgrade of avionics, ETM and more annunciators appear to be scattered around the instrument panel I am trying to persuade the guys who design the panel (and often don't fly aircraft) that they have to be logical in the layout.
What appears to be fine on the Catia / drawing doesn't always work out when you sit an average sized pilot in the P1 or P2 position.
Many annunciators are being hidden under the glareshield.
Many switches are not placed logically.
Many none essential decals are being unnecessarily applied right in view of the pilot when there are better places.
I've just had none see through decals stuck on see through Rosen Sun Visors which were fitted as the old ones were none see through! I am not happy.
The Cooper Harper scale defines what is and what is not acceptable from a handling point of view. Several decades ago there was a similar Flow Chart (possibly German) that assessed the position of all of the essential and optional items on the flight deck starting with access to the cockpit.
For example
1. Could a normal person actually access the seats without having to step on the central pedastal / power levers up trouser leg. Were there sharp objects in the way of access. Did they have to hold on to a piece of equipment rather than provide a hand hold.
Does the P1 /P2 seat have adequate tracking, vertical adjustment with adequate headroom with headset, can it go low enough to provide full and free controls without having to spread your knees? Full roll control by P1 with the P2 writing up the tech log on his lap?
Some manufacturers are fitting overpadded seats and then sheepskin covers thus reducing headroom when what is needed is the correct type of absorbant seat foam.
Moving on to the instrument panel, could switches and levers be reached with harness locked.
Was layout logical and one that could be understood by Capt Average.
Stowage and accessability for POH and checklists. Is the POH say A4 size so that it cannot be used on the Flight Deck without blanking out the view ahead and instrument panel.
My complaint is that annunciators are now being hidden under the glareshield and cannot be seen by the average pilot sitting in the average position.
Master warning lights are being placed right in front of the pilot when they could be moved to the right, still well in view of P1/P2 but not creating 'visual noise'.
Logically the pilot should, on finals, be able to transition from EFIS to visual with a 5deg vertical movement of the head/eyes and not be faced with 'looking through' non essential warning lights, decals and minor switches. On approaching minima I want to know if I can see the approach lights, if not back on instruments not staring at a decal to reminded me to switch of the aircon prior to take off!
In the 80s if you took your MET or MEP from Big C in for service then it would come out plastered with big white decals saying Aviation is hazardous and can result in death! Not 1 but 2 decals.
If you flew brand B from ICT then on the older MEP they hid most of the CBs under the instrument panel. Not good at night.
Big P had fuel gauges in the roof, not good to make such a movement with the head at a critical time.
With an upgrade we have the opporunity of 'getting it right' and have an obligation to do so.
If I remember correctly
The Flow Chart started with considering each item and assessing it as being:
Non Acceptable
- Non compliant (regs) = Re-design
- Safety issue = sharp object, damage equipment, unlock or set off fire extinguisher
Acceptable
- Barely = seriously consider whether this could be better placed
- Moderately = could it be better placed
- Good = no change needed at this time
- Excellent
I know I have not used the correct terminology and it doesn't result in a numbers score rating but does get people thinking and hopefully making decisions and building better/safer aircraft.
The NASA TLX is a sound basis but rather like a consumer survey from Readers Digest!
I know I cut out the article and safely saved it for a later day. That day has arrived.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.