Dials or Glass? Your Preference?

[Heavy Set]

For those of us who have been flying for awhile, glass/EFIS is new and can be a bit intimidating... Most new pilots have been playing Microsoft Simulator and are fully familiar with glass cockpits before they step foot in an actual aircraft. Seems like many next generation cockpits require more "monitoring" than actual "flying" (at least after takeoff and before landing).

So, if you had a choice, what would you choose - an all analog aircraft (say a 737-200 or DC-9-30) or a full glass cockpit (say an Airbus A320 or B737-800) and why? Let's assume short-to-medium hall routes. Let's also assume that basic GPS is installed in the analog aircraft. If you fly all-glass, do you get bored at times and wish for more dials and switches?

 

[njcapt]

Hey! I was the first vote. I can't imagine why anyone would pine for an antiquated instrument presentation. I've flown the spectrum of instruments, and love the instant comprehension of EFIS. Having said that, though, I haven't flown a more integrated, fine flying aircraft than the 737-200. I hear the same thing from the DC-9 guys.

So. I guess the answer is to retrofit EFIS into old-ass aricraft. Just like UPS does.

 

[flx757]

Having been around long enough to have flown a significant amount in each, it is no contest. An all glass cockpit wins hands down. It is far less workload, particularly at times when that is exactly what you need. Less workload. This leads to a safer operation. Boredom is not a problem at this stage of my career. I'll take being "bored" over the alternative any day.

 

[BlueBusDriver]

GLASS

 

[TonyC]

Is there any comparison?

There's no substitute for Situational Awareness, and that which is afforded by glass is head and shoulders above anything you can get with steam guages.

FMS Speed, NAV, Prof to MDA... it's a beautiful thing.

 

[Formula1]

Definitely Glass!!

I agree 100% with those in favor of an all glass cockpit. Being able to see where you are at at all times on your moving map, see the airport or waypoints and crossing restrictions in front of you is awesome and makes the job much easier as well as safer.

Glass is the only way to go!!

 

[becket]

I'll choose glass anyday,

However, that being said, I'm glad I got to fly the 737-200 and her classic steam dials. I'll always remember her fondly.

 

[Heavy Set]

Great replies - I hope to hear more. I started this poll because I have a friend who used to fly for United (A320 and 737-300) before he was furloughed. He now flies for MESA (J4J situation) on the Dash 8 and it is completely analog with zero glass - and he LOVES it. Claims it is like flying a big Piper Warrior and he doesn't miss the glass at all (he does miss the paycheck though...).


Look forward to more opinions...

 

[Indapool]

how 'bout the glass cockpit with round dials??
gotta LUV it

 

[typhoonpilot]

I would take a choice in between, the MD-83/88 with FMS. It is the best of both worlds. An airplane that has most of the new features of glass while retaining the ability to hand fly with real control feel. I would say the MD-90EFD as this is an all glass aircraft with the same DFGCP as the MD-80 but there are only 29 of them, and those are in Saudi Arabia. I would choose this as it retains most of the control feel and systems of the original DC-9 while having the protective features of a glass airplane.

I currently fly the 777 and it is a great airplane but my hand flying skills are eroding and that, to me, is the biggest danger of glass.


Typhoonpilot

 

[B6Busdriver]

This is a great thread. How long will it take untill it's hijacked with a bit of mud slinging? When I was furloughed I went from flying an Airbus to a Citation II. It was fun to fly round dials for a while but I sure am glad to be on the bus again. I expected the transition back to round dials to be a bit rough but it wasn't too bad(although it was a Citation).

 

[enigma]

I prefer the panel that's attached to the airplane that pays the most.

cheers,
enigma

 

[j41driver]

I currently fly the 777 and it is a great airplane but my hand flying skills are eroding and that, to me, is the biggest danger of glass.

If the 777 had steam guages would you hand fly it more often?

 

[TonyC]

I currently fly the 777 and it is a great airplane but my hand flying skills are eroding and that, to me, is the biggest danger of glass.

It seems to me that the tendancy to use the autopilot to the exclusion of hand-flying is not so much an issue of glass vs. round dial as it is us being lazy, or trying to be smooth, or... whatever, name the excuse.

I've seen lots of guys hand-fly the MD-11 to leveloff, and below 10,000 to landing, and they use glass to their advantage. I've also seen lots of guys afraid to handfly anything above 500'. Same glass, different outlook on life, I suppose. I'm a staunch advocate of letting the autopilot do the work when airspace or radio frequency is busy and my eyes or attention should be outside or doing something more important. But any chance I get, the autopilot takes a rest. After all, I enjoy flying, and I want to be good at it.

And I still love the glass.

 

[MachBuffet]

MD88 Best Panel.

I agree that the MD88 series is the best of both worlds. The ones I flew had FMS/VNAV/GPS and all NAV information on glass displays, but most of the engine gauges were old dial type. I strongly believe a dial gauge gives more info with a quick glance. As far as hand flying: auto pilots are the great equalizer. You can train any jackass with 300 hours to push buttons and make callouts, but let me see a guy loosen his tie and roll up his sleeves when the door is bolted shut and I get a smile on my face. Newark 7 departure followed by several leveloffs, all hand flown, SMOOTHLY, no loss of flying skills on that guy. There are aviators and there are pilots. Where have all the aviators gone?

 

[FearlessFreep]

Glass cockpit - sure I fly lots of aicraft with glass installed. Mostly there are numerous small circular pieces of glass festooned all over the cockpit!

 

[Purple Haze]

I voted for glass, but for hand flying I think I prefer steam. My instrument crosscheck was better with round dials than with digital displays. Also, glass tends to suck you in to going head-down and programming when you most need to be head-up and flying.

BUT- for knowing exactly where you are, to visualize your options, and for long legs, glass is sweetness. As an older lazy guy, I would like to go back to glass (but any window seat will do ).

 

[General Lee]

When I started at Delta I "flew" the panel of a 727, which was the worst pilot job at the airline. I felt like "Radar O'Reiley" from MASH trying to reach "Sparky" on his phone when I had to click on the generator breakers after trying to sync the light bulb flashes. Then I moved on to the 737-200 at Delta Express and had to ask for vectors enroute because the "Vor/LOC" button on the mode control panel wasn't very accurate and caused s-turning on the airways. Then off to the 737-800---which was all glass and had great terrain mapping, and then to the current 757/767 which isn't as advanced as the 738, but still nice. I like the glass better.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[typhoonpilot]

Geez, this is a tough crowd. The answer to the question,

If the 777 had steam guages would you hand fly it more often?

is probably, but that isn't the real reason. It tends to be cultural. By that, I mean different airlines have different cultures and even different fleets within the airline have different cultures. When I first joined USAir in 1989 on the DC-9 it was the culture to hand fly up to and down from FL180. Later at another outfit we made it the culture to hand fly up to and down from cruise. When I went back to USAirways on the 737-300/400 it seemed the culture was to get the autopilot on pretty quickly after takeoff and not disconnect until landing was assured. I didn't really like that so I rebelled a little. The Captains were somewhat lazy and they hated someone asking them to change things on the flight guidance panel while I hand flew the airplane. That is a general statement of course, as some didn't mind too much. At my current airline the culture is much like the USAirways 737-300/400 culture where it is very rare to see someone hand fly much over 1000 feet after takeoff or disconnect much above 1000 feet on landing.

FMS and glass do tend to detract from hand flying because pilots are either enthralled with all the information inside or too busy programming the box to disconnect and hand fly.

I haven't had the opportunity to fly the DC-10 or the MD-11, but the pilots I know who have really love the airplane. I'm betting they handle much better than the 777 as McDonnell Douglas really knew how to make an airplane that pilots liked.


Typhoonpilot

 

[General Lee]

Typhoonpilot,

Most of the MD-11 guys I have talked to at Delta (a dying breed---most will be parked by JAN), say they disliked the MD-11. Apparently it doesn't handle very well because fuel is shifting between tanks and through the tail, causing weird pitch problems. I am sure some FEDEX guys will disagree, but most of the MD-11 guys at Delta bid it or stayed on it for the money. I am sure there are some out there that actually liked it, but most I asked did not.

Bye Bye--General Lee