Glass cockpit to Vintage Cockpit IFR concern

[jetbluedog]

I am wondering what you CFII's are doing to prepare your Instruments students for transition between these fancy GLASS cockpits and your "vintage" cockpits. A lot of these new single engine planes have a "primary flight display" or "EFIS".

So let's say you train a pilot all the way through his instrument rating flying one of these fancy glass cockpits. Do you trust these students when they crawl behind a panel of the basic 6 in an older aircraft? (Airspeed, Attitude, Alt, TC, DG, VSI)

The accident below wasn't caused by this, but it makes me wonder......
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?...131X00119&key=1

 

[noslonlo]

Taa

The flight school I work at has a 2004 C182 with a G1000. Transitioning either direction, glass to 6 pack or 6 pack to glass, takes some training. We require 5 hours of dual instruction to rent the C182.
I believe the FAA will classify airplanes like the ones we're talking about as TAA (Technologically Advanced Aircraft). After this classification, it will probably require a certain amount if flight and ground training along with an endorsement to transition "either direction". I think it will be a lot like high performance, complex, tailwheel, etc.

 

[minitour]

noslonlo,

I hope you're right, but I hope you're wrong.

I think it's going to be necessary, ESPECIALLY going from glass with a PFD to round gages. I just think that it's soo much easier to "scan" a glass screen rather than the 6 pack, I mean...it's all right there...then you glance down and there's your heading and NAv info....

However, if they start anymore endorsements, we'll need one for "day crosswind landings in low wing aircraft on Tuesdays after 3pm in the Mountain Time Zone on odd days in Spring while carrying 300 pounds or less of fuel". I know that seems rediculous, but you see where it could be going. Want to fly low wing aircraft? Low wing endorsement. Same with high wing. Three blade prop? Endorsement. Moving from a plane with single slot flaps to a plane with plain flaps? Endorsement. It could get very ugly very quickly.

Those glass cockpits look nice, especially to "reduce" workload (if that's possible) during high workload peirods in IMC, but I really wish maybe it was a requirement to get your instrument rating on the round dials...of course that really wouldn't solve anything either since I'm sure some people feel like the round dials are better for situational awareness/scan.

Anyway...yeah, there's no real easy answer but I'm sure the feds will come up with something.

-mini

 

[Swerpipe]

Not a symmetric transition

I was trained in round dials like most pilots. Most of my time is on a Metroliner, no autopilot, no flight director, no FMS. I fly glass and round dials now back and forth. As an instructor, I think that I can take a pilot who is sharp in instrument dials and teach him glass fairly quickly rather than taking a pilot who was taught in glass and make him sharp on round dials. My assumption is based on what happens when the workload is high (just shot two missed approaches, is at night in poor weather) and now I take away the glass or primary instruments. I think the pilot with the round dials background will handle it much better. It's just an opinion. I am sure that glass students could be trained.
The more we fly glass the more lazy we get. Maybe the day will come that when everything fails the last backup will still be glass powered by a completely different power source in which case it will not matter to have the round dial background.

BTW mini. I agree with requiring the round dials for the instrument ticket.

 

[noslonlo]

In 2005 the C172 will have the G1000 option.

 

[Lead Sled]

I was trained in round dials like most pilots...I think that I can take a pilot who is sharp in instrument dials and teach him glass fairly quickly rather than taking a pilot who was taught in glass and make him sharp on round dials...

I agree with Swerpipe...

I've flown both and the transition from steam gauges to glass does take a little time, but usally not much. Another thing to consider is what happens as you climb the "class ladder" so to speak. That is when you transition between the 1st generation EFIS stuff (ie Collins EFIS 85 and the like that basically used electronic instead of mechanical basic displays.) to more advanced stuff like the Proline IV and Proline 21. A couple of years ago I had to transition backwards from current generation stuff to an airplane that was equipted with early EFIS. It definately took some getting use to again. The big items were the lask of airspeed and altimeter tapes and trend bars - they sure are nice to have and it's amazing how quickly you come to depend upon them.

Do we need to have another rating for guys trained on glass? I don't know. This arguement seems to come up every time we incorporate new technology into the mainstream - "Real pilots don't use autopilots"; "Real pilots fly taildraggers"; "Real pilots don't do this"; or "Real pilots don't do that". There are some good arguements on both sides. Personally, I think that some dual and an ICC probably should be enough.

As far as training goes, it takes a lot of imagination to come up with a scenario where you've lost all of your video capability. (I'm talking multi-engine aircraft, I never flown a single with the fancy stuff.) The various scenarios usually involve total power failures. Total power failures are easy... you just have to hurry up and get the thing one the ground before you run out of battery - the type of panel you have makes no difference. Anything less than a total failure with a glass panel is resolvable by moving displays from one display to another. Which brings up another point. How do you teach partial panel with a glass cockpit? Myself, I make the student cover one eye.

'Sled

 

[JediNein]

My training course for the G1000 transition is pending FAA FITS acceptance.

My training course for the "Steam Gage" transition course is still in writing.

Insurance companies are happy to let the FBOs rule themselves for now. If accidents and claims increase, they'll require more training. If you want Avemco insurance to fly a TAA, you'd better complete a FITS accepted training course. There are currently not that many FITS courses out there.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[minitour]

An attitude indicator is an attitude indicator... if you need "transition" training you've got problems and probably don't have the capacity to be a decent instrument pilot regardless of what you're looking at.

If you're only using an Attitude Indicator to fly instruments, you "probably don't ahve the capacity to be a decent instrument pilot regardless of what you're looking at."

What's nice about the glass displays that I've seen is everything is right there. The scan is done for you, so there's almost nothing to omit or fixate on.

When you're on round dials, you've got to cross check your instruments and it's pretty easy for newbies like me to fixate on an instrument or omit another one.

That's why I think it's important to start your instrument flying on the basic "6 pack" and then move into more complex stuff (even though some could argue that the glass displays are less complex).

-mini

 

[Lead Sled]

An attitude indicator is an attitude indicator... if you need "transition" training you've got problems and probably don't have the capacity to be a decent instrument pilot regardless of what you're looking at.

I've got to disagree with you on this one...

The problem with the glass cockpit isn't the attitude presentation - it's all of the other stuff that comes with it. You know things like the various display presentation options, FMSes, etc. I had my instrument rating for 15 years and had a few thousand hours PIC jet when I got behind my first glass panel and yes, it was intimidating for the first few hours. (I found out how a dog must feel when it watches TV. ) The time to find out how all of those whistles and bells work is in a training environment, not while you're solid IFR and after you've been cleared for the approach.

'Sled

 

[Lead Sled]

That's why I think it's important to start your instrument flying on the basic "6 pack" and then move into more complex stuff (even though some could argue that the glass displays are less complex).

And what if the guy is never going to fly the "basic 6-pack"? A wise man once said, "Fly as you train, train as you fly."

'Sled