This thread started with a question of the safety of Cirrus. I notice in many posts the unchallenged statement that glass cockpit is the way forward and that it is very difficult to manufacture and sell an aircraft with conventional instruments. Why so?
Understandably, glass has made its way in to the airlines, where the whole process of aviation is very different. However, does glass make for a safer cockpit? There may well be a false assumption amongst buyers that it does and this may be where the problem lies. Essentially the same information is presented in a more compact format. It is questionable whether the format is any safer and personally I have found these instruments more difficult to read as part of a scan than conventional dials. Interpreting a speed or altitude from a ribbon and figures is not as effective under pressure as reading the position of a needle. Furthermore, does this expensive instrumentation contribute to the depreciation, by having a high(er) initial cost along with greater difficulty of maintenance (as IO has alluded to)? Modern glass instruments also seem to suffer from far more frequent upgrades leading to buyers perhaps chasing the latest version and flooding the second hand market.
Discuss
