Glass or traditional gauges?

[cezzna]

I would recommend both. For private pilot training, I would oick the airplane with the least guages possible, preferably a tail dragger. Too many newbies stare at the guages and 85% of the time should be looking outside the cockpit. After you get the private then transition to glass. As a private pilot canidate you should not be looking at glass or GPS. You need to develop skills that will save your bacon when that glass GPS craps out.

 

[say again]

Starting out should be on the steam gauges, I believe!!! Get the basics down first, and transition to more complex aircraft as you go!! Besides, primary students should learn by looking outside anyways, and with the glass you know that won't happen!!! There are plenty of people who do just fine with the transition, me in particular. You have to remember that pilots who start out on glass, most likely will get a job flying the steam gauges first, ie. flight instructing, charter jobs, freight etc, flying aircraft with a traditional panel.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Well some valid points have been made but I would recommend learning on the most technologically advanced aircraft available if you have a choice, it's much easier going back to learn steam gauges than the other way around. I remember transitioning to "glass", in the interview they asked me if I had any "glass" time, like it was something magic. Nowadays corporate and airline equipment is pretty much all glass, I would say learn early.

I would have to disagree with you, the older guys seem to have more trouble with the glass, I have never seen a younger guy that grew up in the computer age ever have problems with going to glass......now the other way around.......ooooooo boy have I seen some uglyness from several of the RJ and corporate glass types trying to figure out how to get a 737 from point a to point b. Moving map cripples big time.

 

[Say Again Over]

Hell, from what I've been told, the aircraft will fly itself, shoot the approach, land, and roll to a stop on the centerline anyway. What's the problem? (J/K!!!) by troy

Yes you can train a monkey to fly the airbus, now that I think of it, it was older aviators that had the worst time of it. it's definitely an airplane I like to look forward and NOT see an old grey haired dude in the left seat (no offense meant to anyone on the board). I understand the point made about the instrument training too.

 

[VNugget]

For the private, glass is fine. It's all visual anyway. The VOR/HSI/etc is there for "secondary" navigation.

I think glass is even worse for the private. I don't see anyone can learn how to navigate with a huge moving map spoonfeeding you your position the whole time.

 

[DrewBlows]

I don't recommend glass for primary training. There is enough to learn already without having to worry about programming a flight plan, learning system logic, ect. Learn how to fly first then transition to glass.

I have a hunch that instrument students who learn on glass will be more precise pilots, for the simple reason that electronic depictions are more precise. If your altitude is off by 50' you will see it, and pitch changes as little as 1/2 degree are visible on the Attitude indicators. With the old equipment you are lucky to see 2 1/2 degree pitch changes, and while the student is trying to figure whether or not he is level the altitude changes (arrrrggghhhh!). Then your instructor says "altitude", you finally find level but it's 100' high...

Anyway, my point is that some glass time will do you good (training will go much smoother when you do get a job), but at the primary stage it's unnecessary.

 

[Lead Sled]

I am a fan of learning on the traditional stuff. The gee-whiz stuff can come later. Here are my main reasons:
1. The glass is based upon the steam guages. It has the same six instruments, just displayed in a different format.
2. Primacy. If you learn to FLY THE AIRPLANE, not to fly flight directors and autopilots, you will turn out a safer, more competent pilot. Along with the many ways this will benefit your flying skills, you will be able to produce your own situational awareness and judgment skills rather than counting on the glass to do it for you.
3. The glass presents too much information for a new pilot to absorb (trends, color coding, and also having to change displays, formats, etc becomes too much for the greenhorn). You must be an airplane pilot first, then a tech geek later.
4. It is more cost effective to learn in the old world.
5. Moving maps. As a professional pilot, I love them. As a flight instructor, I hate them. Too many pilots bust airspace and fail to learn how to navigate properly. In fact, airspace violations have gone UP since the glass has come out (and that was well before those crazy TFRs too).
6. If you learn on steam, and the glass fails, using the peanut gyro and stby ASI is old hat. If you learned on glass and the glass fails, you are in for trouble.

Just my observations based on 2000+ hrs of instruction and an additional 2500+ as sim instructor (including CRJ sim - which is glass).
Fly safe!
Terry

I probably would agree with Terry, at least for the time being.

I can imagine that our grandparents probably had this same conversation back in the 30's, 40's, and early '50s - only instead of talking about glass they were talking about the merits of allowing a student to use one of those new fangled artificial horizons. (Those were the same guys who flew hand flew their DC-2s and Boeing 247s down to 200-1/2 on the old 4-course range approaches with nothing but needle, ball, and airspeed.) Our fathers had a similar discussion on the virtues of using flight directors and autopilots (and even tricycle landing gear). Don't misunderstand me, I understand that you've got to be proficient at raw data flying; however, I've heard more than one old-timer tell me that real pilots fly taildraggers and don't use autopilots or flight directors.

Personally, it's getting more difficult for me to see where there is virtue to be gained in training on steam gauges - it's getting progressively harder to find them in the "working" airplanes - military, airline or corporate - that most of us aspire to fly. About the only place you encounter them any more is in civilian training aircraft. I doubt if there's been a jet manufactured in the past 25 years that wasn't glass. As far as piston-powered aircraft go, every manufacturer is selling glass airplanes - I read some where that Mooney hasn't built a steam gauge plane in a couple of years. Look at the airplanes (turbojet, turboprop, or piston) that are being sold today - essentially they're all equipped with glass.

After all is said and done, I guess that I am a proponent of the "train as you fly and fly as you train" philosophy. It wouldn't take of lot of imagination to come up with a scenario where a new pilot went his/her entire career and never flew a steam gauge airplane. (I haven't flown one in 15 years.) If that were to be the case, what benefit would training on steam gauges provide? We're not to that point yet, but it won't be much longer.

'Sled

 

[troy]

I think glass is even worse for the private. I don't see anyone can learn how to navigate with a huge moving map spoonfeeding you your position the whole time.

I like to shut off the map sometimes. It makes the student think instead of just looking at the screen and pointing. Also, I make the X-countries consist of different forms of navigation. One leg with a VOR, one pilotage, one GPS. That way, they get all the neccessary forms of navigation, and are not just hitting "direct" on the GPS and watching the landscape go by.

 

[CapnVegetto]

Train on whatever's cheaper. If price is not an object, stay away from the gee-whiz stuff until you actually learn how to fly. I got my instrument rating in a CE-152 with one VOR/ILS and one NDB. Flipping back and forth between VOR's to figure out an intersection, cross checking VOR and NDB radials, shooting a partial panel NDB approach, all of it makes you a BETTER pilot. Hell, I remember when I though DME was ultra cool. Learn it the hard way, and everything else will just be gravy. To this day, I can fly a full procedure approach with minimum equipment, no GPS, no moving map, anything, and always look right at an approach chart anytime during it (even while being vectored) and point to exactly where I am. I was surprised how many students I had couldn't do that.

Learn it the hard way for sure. Practice it when you're on line. I hand fly at least 75% of my approaches, and try to do at least one actual raw data approach a week. It's never a bad idea, because you'll never know when you'll need it. I have a regional buddy that's had to shoot an ILS into IAD on the peanut gyro. Last time I was at Simuflite, I had to do a single engine mins ILS on emergency instruments only. (Copilots airspeed, alt, atttitude indicator, and HSI). Of course, this was after telling the instructor to "try and kill me."

OK, enough rambling. You get the jist of it.

 

[Lazy8]

Like it or not glass is the way of the future for primary thru advanced training. Last I read Cessna has already ended production of 'steam gauge' 182s and 206s and I believe 2007 is the last year for 'steam' 172s to be ordered.

I've taught several students in both glass and steam. While glass panels do display a plethora of information there is no reason why a Private student cannot learn on it. In fact, it's been easier for most of my students with the G1000 panel. It's not like you need a computer science degree. The panel is very intuitive and pilot friendly. If anything, transitioning from glass to steam is MUCH easier than vice-versa because steam displays less information.

Worried about not being able to teach pilotage or dead reckoning with the pretty moving map? Easy- do alot of your training with the DISPLAY BACKUP engaged (which turns both screens into a PFD with no moving map) or simply dim the MFD to 0%.

Every time GA panels get higher-tech the aviation community has this argument that it's 'too much' or 'overkill' for training. I'm sure people were saying the same things when LORAN, VORs, ADF's, RMI's HSI's, etc.. were being introduced into GA cockpits. Folks, this isn't the dark ages anymore. Train on the latest technology, because chances are you won't be flying that piper cub with no electrical system and a jar of oil for a attitude indicator in the future.

Grove