Do Glass Cockpits Improve GA Safety?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do Glass Cockpits Improve GA Safety?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Dr, NO
Especially for ab initio. I find that the students get too distracted by the bright colours and flashy tapes etc. Resulting in their focus inside the cockpit vice having their eyes looking outside and flying the basic Power + Attitude + Performance.
Especially for ab initio. I find that the students get too distracted by the bright colours and flashy tapes etc. Resulting in their focus inside the cockpit vice having their eyes looking outside and flying the basic Power + Attitude + Performance.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I read the article and the NTSB reports and came to the conclussion that perhaps some folk had a geater belief in their ability to push weather (VFR into IMC) by the statistics suggesting an increase in accidents in a certain group. But there may well be hidden factors to that.
As Forkie suggests.... NO.
I like my glass panels but I am just as happy with a reliable 6 pack of clocks.
I am not happy with the failure rate of vac pumps etc
Far happier with Glass.
I am not happy with single six pack set ups however I seemed to fly better VOR's without the AH & DG for some reason
, but thats not suggesting I would want to do it often!
I like double glass, and double power sources, all in a 4 seat piston single engine powered machine! Wally's worst nightmare!
I think you are just as likely to live or die regardless.
Like so many things, if one goes U/S on you or becomes suspect and unreliable, its up to you to be able to determine which is telling the truth in a timely manner! And for some folk with an over reliant belief in their glass gear due to its greater accuracy and reliability it may be tempting to trust the wrong thing!
J
As Forkie suggests.... NO.
I like my glass panels but I am just as happy with a reliable 6 pack of clocks.
I am not happy with the failure rate of vac pumps etc
Far happier with Glass.I am not happy with single six pack set ups however I seemed to fly better VOR's without the AH & DG for some reason
, but thats not suggesting I would want to do it often!I like double glass, and double power sources, all in a 4 seat piston single engine powered machine! Wally's worst nightmare!
I think you are just as likely to live or die regardless.
Like so many things, if one goes U/S on you or becomes suspect and unreliable, its up to you to be able to determine which is telling the truth in a timely manner! And for some folk with an over reliant belief in their glass gear due to its greater accuracy and reliability it may be tempting to trust the wrong thing!
J
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oz
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have an SR22 with glass - very nice for an experienced pilot who is good with avionics/computer systems/autopilots, or has learned to use them. Excellent for IFR, still handy for VFR but can make you keep your head in the cockpit and get behind/Lookout complacency...
For teaching VFR is a bit of an extra hurdle for students to get used to setting up.
I have even found so far, when teaching IFR = BAD...
Student pilots spend far too much time inside on a MFD when they should be scanning the PFD or looking outside for the airfield lighting @ Minima!!!
Learning not to Fixate on instruments is part of the training, but it seems to give them so much more to fixate on other than the AH!
Personally, I love it - when I'm in control!
..but when things go dark and pear-shaped; give me LRT's any day!!! Not enough backup instrumentation for IFR in an SR22 IMO..!
____________________________
BTW: (LRT = Little Round Things)
For teaching VFR is a bit of an extra hurdle for students to get used to setting up.
I have even found so far, when teaching IFR = BAD...
Student pilots spend far too much time inside on a MFD when they should be scanning the PFD or looking outside for the airfield lighting @ Minima!!!
Learning not to Fixate on instruments is part of the training, but it seems to give them so much more to fixate on other than the AH!
Personally, I love it - when I'm in control!
..but when things go dark and pear-shaped; give me LRT's any day!!! Not enough backup instrumentation for IFR in an SR22 IMO..!
____________________________
BTW: (LRT = Little Round Things)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Risk compensation is an effect whereby individuals will behave less cautiously in situations where they feel "safer" or more protected.
I'm not in a position to comment but having just finished my CPL where pretty much after my GFPT onwards was done on glass I've gotta say that looking back on it I wouldve preferred analog.
Reason being in a g1000 you have that "comfort" when you are alone in the middle of nowhere (the same similar comfort u have when flying with another pilot) that even if you screw up and get lost you can consult the moving map.
Without the moving map you dont have that and your confidence (imo) rises much more when ALL you have to rely on is your actual map2ground etc, knowing very well you cant fall back on a gps.
Having said that the big screens imo do make it easier to quickly get information (airspeed/attitude/alt etc) as its all nice and big and grouped nicely together
Reason being in a g1000 you have that "comfort" when you are alone in the middle of nowhere (the same similar comfort u have when flying with another pilot) that even if you screw up and get lost you can consult the moving map.
Without the moving map you dont have that and your confidence (imo) rises much more when ALL you have to rely on is your actual map2ground etc, knowing very well you cant fall back on a gps.
Having said that the big screens imo do make it easier to quickly get information (airspeed/attitude/alt etc) as its all nice and big and grouped nicely together
Dr says no......until he gets a G600 retrofitted.
Seriously though, I am a firm believer that a better scan is developed using steam instruments and then transitioning to glass.
We are getting to a stage where there are enough glass sytems in existence to justify training in them. While commercial students aren't likely to get their first job on a G1000 equipped aircraft, the proportion of aircraft that have them is increasing and for an owner who buys a new SR22 and isn't going to fly anything else, why not?
Post WWII: "You young buggers with your ADF and VOR! You don't know how easy you have it! In our day we had to rely on four course radio range to get around!"
Post 2000: "Glass? Glass! You should have been around when we didn't have a nintendo to fly these thing around on!"
Do appreciate the problems with over-reliance on technology, though. Have already experienced PPL/CPL students doing LL Nav trying to pull up into overlying cloud as soon as the TAWS cranked up.
Seriously though, I am a firm believer that a better scan is developed using steam instruments and then transitioning to glass.
We are getting to a stage where there are enough glass sytems in existence to justify training in them. While commercial students aren't likely to get their first job on a G1000 equipped aircraft, the proportion of aircraft that have them is increasing and for an owner who buys a new SR22 and isn't going to fly anything else, why not?
Post WWII: "You young buggers with your ADF and VOR! You don't know how easy you have it! In our day we had to rely on four course radio range to get around!"
Post 2000: "Glass? Glass! You should have been around when we didn't have a nintendo to fly these thing around on!"
Do appreciate the problems with over-reliance on technology, though. Have already experienced PPL/CPL students doing LL Nav trying to pull up into overlying cloud as soon as the TAWS cranked up.
