Dials or Glass? Your Preference?

[ILStoMinimums]

Easy Mach... You know that the Arctic Eagles can fly circles around any SEA or LAX guy - just ask us!
This company has an outstanding group of aviators. We have to, due to the environment in which we operate.
Unfortunatley, there are those who rely so heavily on the magic, that they stuggle if the magic is turned off and they have to look outside to fly a visual. I've seen it from the JS- cleared for a visual or runway change and both guys go heads down and start typing! The runway is right there fellas, no need to type, just fly.

Try turning your flight director off for a takeoff and see if the Captain doesn't have something to say. Try disconnecting everything at TOD, no autothrottles, no flight director, no map - go raw data HSI and see if the captain doesn't get a little grumpy. That is what I'm talking about. Now put one of those captains inbound to rwy 2 at OME, and you know what happens.

I am sure that you do a fine job and work hard to keep your skills sharp. Not everyone "outside" does.

On another note. Didn't you want to bid ANC? Did you get a slot on the last bid? It is a wet, slushy, sloppy day up here today - winter is on the way!
AK737FO

What a great post! I've never been into Nome myself. Would you mind expanding a bit and explaining what is the catch?
Thanks.

 

[michael707767]

That's why you turn off the FD as well!! Then you don't have to command any button pushing at all, just ask the other guy to do whatever he needs to do to back you up

Thats exactly how I do it. Everything comes off, AP, AT, FD, and I tell the other guy to do what he needs for his display.

 

[jbDC9]

Glass panel? I love the fancy glass stuff. Steam gauges? Like that stuff too, not that picky about it. After flying a trip in a shiny NG 737 it's kinda nice to trot over to the local flight school and rent a Citabria for an hour or so. Steam gauges? It barely even has that! Just set the altimeter and you're good to go. Simple, basic, with a tailwheel and a stick... fun flying.

 

[ILStoMinimums]

Not many taildraggers out there to rent now-a-days.

 

[jimcav]

Too many glass pilots out there who can type 100 words a minute but couldn't fly a kite.What bothers me is former tprop guys who have never flown a jet before get into a glass cockpit and rely so heavily on the automation.They hand fly to cruise auto throttles and FD engaged which in my opinion is like manually controlling the autopilot. Then they use the autopilot until the the plane is fully configured and trimmed then hand fly the last 500 feet.This occurs on the most beautiful days.I mean don't they care about practicing their airmanship or more importantly ,for the rookies, getting a REAL feel for the airplane they "fly"? I just wish people would hand fly a little more. I have also heard about captains getting upset with the fo for turning off the autothrottles, I won't even get startrd on that.




fd

 

[Super_Cub_2414P]

I like these http://tinmouse.org/screenshots.html

 

[On Your Six]

Glass - I like the magic. I just look at the PFD and let it do its thing.... I love watching TCAS as we enter a busy but unfamiliar pattern - I don't know how people used to get along without it...

 

[philo beddoe]

Steam gauges and wood-burning VORs and NDBs.

Someday when all we have is the takeoff and land button, we'll wish we could reverse it.

All that future automation is gonna make it harder to demand good pay as well. Something to think about.

Save a job - outlaw an EFIS.

 

[Swede]

Guys who claim that glass = erosion of pilot skills, I think are off base. Lack of skills comes from relying too much on the AP/FD, nothing else, and even the "steam" jets have those.

Most Boeing glass CP's have the ability to reproduce standard HSI/RMI displays. Turn the fancy crap off, and let the software reproduce round nav guages if that's what you want. Tapes take some transition, but ultimately are no better or worse than round airspeed and altitude.

Glass gives you the ability to be as advanced or primitive as you want. Some days, when fatigue or laziness is a factor, all the magic comes on, and Otto flies... other days, hand flying around puffies to a visual is a joy.

I agree with those who have a beef with Herb K. The NG 737 is a horrible mash of old and new to retain commonality with the older 737's. The 737-800 is very similar to the 777 across the main panel (map/engines/PFD). Everywhere else (overhead and throttle pedestal), it retains the old 737 switchology. The 737-800 lack of eicas basically sucks. Even the lowly MD80 has a superior warning system.

My dream jet - 777 with side stick. Yokes are horrible. I'd like to go back in time and choke the life out of Glenn Curtiss, who installed a yoke on his airplanes for who knows what reason, maybe because it was like an automobile and looked familiar.

 

[semperfido]

this is pretty nice- beyond glass

http://www.gulfstream.com/product_enhancement/planeview/

 

[Chronic Jetlag]

Glass...hands down. I've had the privilege of flying the super old Beech-18 to partial glass B75/76 to full glass MD11/A320. For SA you can't beat glass. Although it takes lots of self discipline to stay sharp in glass....I think that's the key! Old round dials by nature and design forces you to stay sharp.

 

[sbn340mech]

My father is definatly a stick and rudder pilot. Started with UAL in '66. When he was introduced to the glass ckpt concept (B757) in the mid 90's he absolutly hated it. At that time he was a capt on the 727. He was lookling to go to a bigger a/c and when the 757 didn't work out he went to the old school DC-10. When the 10's were retired he gave glass another try with the 747-400 and ended up catching on fairly well. He retired on '03 and now enjoys boring holes in the sky in his J-3 Cub.

 

[TonyC]

Dials or Glass? Your Preference?

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?

Old thread that I "voted" on a long time ago, but never posted. Now that I've gone from "Round Dials" to "Glass" and back, and since semperfido revived the thread today, I thought I'd toss in a thought or two.

First, it's apparent to me that the issue of "Round Dials" vs "Glass" is often confused with the issue of automation versus hand-flying. That does a disservice to the original question.

"Round Dials" and "Glass" are both methods of presenting information to the pilot. "Round Dials" require very little, usually NO work on the part of the pilot to present the information they can present, and no amount of work will enhance that information. The exception to this observation, of course, is the navigation information, which depends on the frequency dialed into radio control heads, and sometimes courses and headings "spun" into the individual instruments.

"Glass," on the other hand, requires a bit more work during preflight, usually in the form of typing into a computer keyboard interface. An FMS is the common tool, here, and it should be noted that it is this computer and the information that it presents that distinguishes "Glass" from fancy or modern forms of "Round Dial" instruments. A computer screen that displays "pictures" of round dials, or even other shaped instruments (tapes, lights, whatever) is nothing more than a glorified "Round Dial." It is the collection of various forms of intrument readings and the superimposing of computer-generated information on that basic instrument that constitutes the "Glass" difference. In other words, a computer screen that shows a picture of an RMI is no different than a regular old RMI (which, ironically, usually has a glass cover). However, when you superimpose a radar picture, TCAS traffic, and a line depicting your current flightpath onto that RMI, you have "Glass."

That said, I am a huge fan of "Glass." The situational awareness that is afforded by the prudent use of the tools of glass simply cannot be matched. I believe the work done during preflight to program the FMS is paid off many times over by the superiority of the information that is returned. I've witnessed that one of the most common problems that people learning glass have is not in having too little information, but in finding the information that is most pertinent at the particular moment in time. There's usually MORE than enough information available, and it's convenient, too. It's just a matter of learning where to look and when. I miss my glass!


On the other hand, my preflights are much shorter when I don't have to initialize the FMS. I can do everything in my preflight in the 727 at a very methodical, casual pace, very thoroughly, in much less than 10 minutes. The same can't be said for the Captain's preflight in the MD-11. Programming the FMS for the OAK-SFO leg takes more time than the flight, if you know what I mean.

On the separate issue of hand-flying versus automation... there's an appropriate time for both. When the autopilot can fly the airplane, your attention can turn to other things that might be important - - like traffic at lower altitudes. Use the autopilot too much, though, and your skills begin to suffer. I lke to handfly, whether it's glass or "steam guages," and, believe it or not, the wings don't really care what I'm looking at.

 

[aa73]

Nice thing about AAs MD80s, you can go from full steam gauge to half efis/steam gauge to full efis/digital gauges, all during a 3-leg trip. I don't even notice the difference anymore.

That said, I defintiely prefer the full EFIS/digital layout just for convenience... not to mention that the steam gauge 80s have these puke-green cockpits - actually, it is the same as a DC9 cockpit color. Whoever designed that color spent a few years looking at a jail cell wall.

 

[semperfido]

believe it or not i didn't resurect this thread--i know it looks like it--but it was there in the #1 spot ...who knows-computers

 

[TonyC]

believe it or not i didn't resurect this thread--i know it looks like it--but it was there in the #1 spot ...who knows-computers

Somebody must have voted on it - - that bumps it to the top of the New Posts list without letting anybody know who did it. (That's what kept happening that drove the board crazy and led to the deactivation of polls altogether, and the removal of most.)

You posted and left a trail!


.

 

[semperfido]

aha... i enjoyed reading your thoughts on the subj just the same

 

[CatYaaak]

I don't think there's any question that glass is superior. Used correctly by non-complacent crew, it provides at-a-glance situational lateral and vertical awareness, tailored levels of information, and allows a wider variety of program-able visual cues/interface for more critical regimes of flight such as W/S alert/recovery, declutter mode, etc.

It's as far a step above round dials as HUD is above glass-only...and hand flying (especially in a Falcon...god I hate having to compliment the French) with HUD is a dream. Granted, not as fun as tooling around in a round-dial Waco, but about as much fun as you'll find in a civilian-world job.

 

[Whale Rider]

Dials work fine but Glass RULES!

 

[Guitar Guy]

My vote is for glass over round-dial. As a former 1900 pilot, I think it's important to have the great scan that the round-dials force one to develop. (The 1900D has "glass" but it's really just electronic CRT's that look very similar to the old analog guages.) But once you've got the background in understanding the instruments, a well-implemented glass cockpit with a crew that knows how to use it is superior for situational awareness.