How EFIS may be killing pilots

[phr8dawg]

Those who have never been in the world of piston-poppin', mixture-leanin', cowl-flap flailing, frost-scrapin', world of 91/135 single-pilot have no idea what a blast it really was. I still miss it, but the money is in big tin. Time to move on.....

 

[scangadah]

Those who have never been in the world of piston-poppin', mixture-leanin', cowl-flap flailing, frost-scrapin', world of 91/135 single-pilot have no idea what a blast it really was. I still miss it, .....

Amen to that!!!!!

 

[wrxpilot]

I'm fairly certain ERAU or a number of other schools already did a study on this and they found that pilots raised on "moving map" displays and EFIS who moved back into the steam-gauge world had an edge in visualization skills over those raised on pure steam gauge. It was a bigger struggle for steam gauge drivers to go to all-glass.

I'd like to see the supposed study you're referring to. As a CFI, I trained students on both "steam" gauges and the G1000 "glass" avionics package. It was much, much easier to train students with a good scan to transition to "glass" than it was to transition students who learned on "glass" to steam gauges.

As far as visualization, that's what occurs when you're using traditional instruments and an approach plate. After awhile, the student develops situation awareness in their head. The guys that were raised on glass were completely incapable of this. As a result, I flat out refused to do initial training for students on glass IF they were planning on becoming professional pilots. After they'd developed a decent scan during instrument training, we'd begin the transition to the G1000. Fortunately there was a CFI shortage at the time, so the school management had to put up with my decision. I did have a couple of students that were not interested in professional flying and were planning on always flying glass, so I did all of their training in the G1000.

I fly an all glass airplane now (even our standby instruments are glass), and I know without a doubt my scan has become rusty. I get to use a sim every once in awhile to stay fresh on "steam" gauges, so when/if I lose my current job I won't kill myself if I get back into an old Navajo or something.

 

[wrxpilot]

Not really, but since most rj operators have mins at well below 1000 and 135 operations have minimums above 1000, do the math.

Now when I say not really, I am unemployed so I am required to apply to at least 2 companies a week, so then yes I have.

That was in the past, and we won't see that for a long time (if ever again). Right now there are 135 operators hiring. There are no regionals hiring, and I think pretty much all of them except Skywest and Colgan have people furloughed. Years from now, when the regionals are hiring again, the minimums will be hire than 135 mins, you can be sure of that.

 

[avbug]

I've had the same experience, and in talking with other instructors and with the FAA, it's generally agreed that pilots with a six pack scan transitioning to glass do much better and are more versatile and situationally aware, than pilots who are trained on a single display moving to a six pack.

Not long ago I attended a FAA conference on the topic, specific to training pilots going each way, and it was universally agreed by those participating, all instructors and examiners, that the better students and the more situationally aware and adaptable students, are those coming from the six pack to glass.

This doesn't mean that a pilot trained on a glass display is inherently weakened or flawed, but to go from a display where everything is presented in one, to multiple radios, instruments and functions, among which one's scan and interpretative functions must be rapidly and frequently divided, is a more demanding move than going the other way.

Do a little research on "children of the magenta line," and you may find, original poster, that it's not the EFIS, it's the training, and the blind following that goes with it.

 

[bizicmo]

The minimums may as well be 1 hour of total time IF NOBODY IS HIRING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So Mr. Unemployed, you might have to slum and go to a freight hauler.

I would rather do freight then go to a rj company. But I have my eyes set on jobs that are either non-flying or sorta flying.

 

[kingairyahoo]

Why would new pilots do entry level freight or part 135? It takes them 3 times as much flight time to get on with those jobs versus an RJ.

...because you are posting in the 135 section of the board, not the regional section.

airlines are not the end-all of aviation jobs

 

[phr8dawg]

I defer to those CFIs with glass-given as a more credible source. I think the actual article may have been in AOPA some time back whereby they stated that moving-map experience helped with overall visualization skills and that glass had the advantage. I'm still flying in the stone age. S'cuse me, gotta kick the panel again to wake up them squirrels spinning the gyros.

 

[avbug]

I think it's certainly reasonable that the greater one's exposure to various mediums and the more experience one has in a given environment, generally speaking the better an opportunity one has to enhance one's situational awareness.

Multi-function displays and combination instruments frequently seen in glass displays these days do certainlly tend to enhance situational awareness to some degree, yet manage to inhibit it in others if the user moves mindlessly forward with no effort beyond following the magenta line.

Several years ago an operator for whom I flew had a first officer who fit this mold...he was absolutely unwilling to put out any effort to expand his understanding. When tasked with something simple, such as falling back to laying in a manual course instead of selecting something from the FMS, he had no way to set up an airway, a radial, or fly a hold. One day he was enroute, somewhere in the middle of the country, and his captain pointed outside and asked this individual to tell him what airport he saw. The kid looked at his display, then at the airport, and said "it's in about the right position to be this one, but that can't be it."

The captain queried, "why can't that be it?"

"Because look at the runways. They don't go the same way as the ones in the display."

The captain noted, "Do you realize that the same symbol is used for all airplanes in the display...and that if an airport on the ground looks the same, it would be strictly a coincidence?"

This individual did not understand. Given his difficulty in followin the basic automation, and his inability to perform simple tasks when his attention was divided, I can scarcely imagine his incompetence with a basic six pack in a Seneca or a Baron.

One can never stray far from the basics, no matter what information is provided. Get get outside the loop and rely too much on automation or technology is to invite trouble when a lapse in either occurs...and it does, and will.

 

[QOL_is_great:)]

It's great that high tech equipment has been made less expensive so it's found in the GA community. I do believe that basic flight instruction and basic instruments should be taught in an aircraft that has "old fashion" flight instruments and navigational equipment. It allows one to build on a solid foundation. Once the basics are taught then introduce the high tech world of a full glass flight package with FMS and GPS. Sometimes when all else fails one must go back to the basic (raw data) or green needles. What stops an individual from using a GPS during a cross-country flight when the skills required are a compass, eyes, clock, dead reckoning and while using T/D/H? They are only cheating themselves.

Recent incident and accidents we've seen have not been caused by lack of skills and knowledge in EFIS or full glass cockpits. Look at the Q400 crash in BUF, Air Frace Airbus crash, CRJ200 core freeze crash and how the LEX takeoff crash. Now of those had anything to do with a pilots lack of ability flying an airplane with EFIS or full glass.

Has a series of incidents/accidents in the GA world under Part 91 or any events in the Part 135 world happened due to the failure to a pilot's ability to handle the technology? I am not aware of any. Even the Cory Lidle crash in NYC along the East River was not due to his failure to understand the technology his plane had.