Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.

Glass vs. Gauge

Old 6th Jan 2015, 19:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 24
Glass vs. Gauge

Just to satisfy my own curiosity, because I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of different opinions.

There are two pilots A and B. (same experience and licences)

The pilot A has done his training in new aircrafts equipped with glass cockpit such as G1000 or Avidyne

The pilot B has done his training in old aircrafts with "old" gauges instruments.

Is pilot A more employable (e.g better chances during sim checks) than B because he has glass experience?
FRALH is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2015, 19:48
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Istanbul
Age: 35
Posts: 38
you can always start with a gauge and get your ppl and ir maybe and for your cpl you can fly with a glass and get used to it. you'll get your foundation in gauge.

i got my ppl and se ir with a glass and cpl with a gauge, i do not feel any kind of drawback or advantage. in both situation you get used to new very quickly. but the first option seems much wiser.

on the other hand most of the airline companies in my country train their cadets with glass all the way.
shinigami is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2015, 20:00
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 2,427
Train on glass.
In my experience its easier to transition from glass to analog then the other way around.
Glass teaches you to consider and process more information at the same time.
You 'brain processor speed' is increased especially during your IR training.
Fly analog for recreation and glass for work......
B2N2 is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2015, 20:22
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 24
Thanks for the answers!

It was just my curiosity to know the opinion from people who are experienced because I "voted" for the glass.
In my opinion it's better, if I can say it, because today the aircrafts are all glass and, even in a small aircraft obviously less coplex than a liner, the layout it's similar and with a training in a glass you're familiar with it.
FRALH is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2015, 20:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,234
Experience in glass is more sellable then gauge experience, because it is more common in commercial aviation, BUT ... when it comes to critical situations I would lay my life in the hands of the steam gauge captain. Reason from my experience: the glass cockpit captain may be able to brain process more computer data displays, but the steam gauge captains butt knows intuitively what the physics of flying means.
ChickenHouse is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2015, 13:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 475
I would also tend to disagree slightly with B2N2.

I think glass experience is becoming a more important thing when job hunting. How much it will help to have done your basic training in glass idk, but there are more and more jobs looking for x amount of hours EFIS time.

In my opinion though it is better to learn steam and transition to glass, because I think it's harder to go steam after learning on glass. The differences of opinion on this may suggest that this is purely a personal thing, but to me (learnt on steam)getting used to the glass basically consisted of saying 'oh that's cool/clever/easier' and getting used to navigating menus and submenus. I can imagine the other way around being 'that's stupid/user unfriendly'. Simple things like reverse sensing cdi's and auto-idents etc.. things that you can do on glass that won't cause you any problem but do the same on steam and it will.
OhNoCB is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2015, 13:37
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 24
This is why I had this curiosity. I've found a job offer ( now it's expired ) for cadet with low hours but all EFIS. For sure "old gauge" are better for learn but EFIS training is more sellable and in my opinion they are heavier in a CV. I think that every thing has its pro and its contra
FRALH is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2015, 16:56
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 475
Problem is that to an airline or any operator, often your experience that would make you a more rounded pilot or perhaps a better fundamental pilot (not saying that training on either leads to this) is often not the important thing. It's how quickly you will adapt to or how well you already know the systems and type that THEY are USING. Its all very well being able to fly to absolute perfection using only a wet compass, but how well are you going to fly a Caravan with a G1000 system in it, or a 737NG etc.
OhNoCB is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 01:41
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Hopping
Posts: 89
I think good experience of both is vital unless you already know your aircraft type you will be working on
seymoreskye is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 12:00
  #10 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,029
Cool

There is little doubt that doing your ME/IR training on say a DA42 is far easier than something like a PA34.
You are probably a more rounded person training on the Seneca, and then doing your MCC/JOC on a glass cockpit such as 737-800 or similar complexity.

The basics need to be built on sound foundations, and not easier options.

Sim rides for job interviews are often conducted on round dials.
Choose your options carefully.
parkfell is online now  
Old 12th Jan 2015, 22:39
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 2,427
but the steam gauge captains butt knows intuitively what the physics of flying means.
....and that is exactly what you're NOT supposed to do when it all hits the fan.
Trust your instruments and not your 'feeling'.
Your IR will teach you that.
B2N2 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 09:54
  #12 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Handmaiden
 
Join Date: Feb 1997
Location: Duit On Mon Dei
Posts: 4,285
BN2N Perhaps what the poster meant was that if an instrument fails, e.g. the speed tape, you don't do any thing silly such as zoom climb the a/c when at altitude to wash off the apparently increasing speed, when nothing else has changed. (Power + Attitude = Performance)
redsnail is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:12
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 627
parkfell - yes and no. DA42 better in calm conditions, PA34 better in rougher weather as heavier and more stable.

I learned on steam and would always recommend that before transitioning to more modern cockpits. Steam teaches you the fundamentals, glass just makes it easier to fly them.
Parson is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.