Opinion on automation/glass cockpit

[Tired Soul]

Garmin just certfified Synthetic Vision.
It's absolutely stunning.
Should everybody fly it? Probably not.
Doesn't matter for a student what they start on.
Their problems are the same. Six pack or Glass, you have to beat them with a stick to look outside regardless.
Primary students have less trouble with this then experienced pilots transitioning in my opinion.
Student assumes this is the norm and acts accordingly if instructed properly.
I have seen many a grown man look like a dog watching TV and not being able to break the habit.
There is simply more personal discipline required in order not to become a slave to the machine.

Remember the old " identify and verify"?

The PFD is to identify, the MFD (if required) to verify, but train to not rely on it for help.
If you can't fly on the PFD only, you need help.

 

[pilotyip]

We fly old steam gauge airplanes. We find it is more difficult to train a glass experienced pilot in our DA-20's or DC-9's than a pilot who has been looking at steam gages. The glass pilots have weak scans; they are looking clues that are not present, such as the 10-sec future speed calculation. We had a 10,000 RJ pilot who could not shoot a raw data ILS, then there is the 250 hour "All ATP" pilot flew it to ATP standards. In the standard six-pack you have to use all six instruments to fly the airplane, with glass you can look a one gauge and do everything. Many have not flown raw data approaches since they started glass, even worse many have not flown a non-coupled approach in years. I have also have a concern, how can you do a cross-country in G-1000 C-172 and have any practical experience in developing the skills to read charts? To do DR calculations to keep track of your location and most of all keep your head out of the cockpit in VRF conditions. I have noticed this in some students who have logged 1000 hours of PC sim time prior to starting flight training; their eyes are always in the cockpit. Having flown glass I will say it easier, but it does let your scan deteriorate, and since I have the old C-47 IFR, with less instrumentation than the standard C-172, I got to keep my scan working.

 

[Tired Soul]

There is simply more personal discipline required in order not to become a slave to the machine.

That's what I said.
As a CFI you have even more responsibility to teach somebody right.

G-1000 C-172 and have any practical experience in developing the skills to read charts

By the CFI taking away your MFD and forcing you to go "old school".

 

[ALIMBO]

We had a 10,000 RJ pilot who could not shoot a raw data ILS, then there is the 250 hour "All ATP" pilot flew it to ATP standards. In the standard six-pack you have to use all six instruments to fly the airplane, with glass you can look a one gauge and do everything. Many have not flown raw data approaches since they started glass, even worse many have not flown a non-coupled approach in years. I have also have a concern, how can you do a cross-country in G-1000 C-172 and have any practical experience in developing the skills to read charts? To do DR calculations to keep track of your location and most of all keep your head out of the cockpit in VFR conditions.

It seems ridiculous that pilot with 10,000 hours cannot shoot an ILS but then again once you do something long enough its second nature and he has obviously become accustomed to coupled approaches. I was talking with a gentleman who fly's a G1000 Skyhawk and he says its no fun because its nearly impossible to get lost and makes flying almost effortless. To me this is bad I think it can lead to the pilot being complacent.

 

[Tired Soul]

Pilot complacency is human factors and has nothing to do with EFIS
The pilot will always remain as the strong or the weak point.
Glass is meant to make flying safer, despite the pilot's efforts.

 

[JAFI]

It seems ridiculous that pilot with 10,000 hours cannot shoot an ILS but then again once you do something long enough its second nature and he has obviously become accustomed to coupled approaches.

When you do the same thing for 10,000 hours using one way you may find how diffulcult it is to do another way. As you age your brain becomes "hard wired" to specific pathways and "new" ways of doing things become harder. It can be so hard as to make it impossible. My favorate quote from a Captain going from round gauges to a full EFIS aircraft: "I now know what a dog is thinking as he stares at a TV set, I have no Idea what this thing is....." Most can make the transition but some can not. I knew a pilot who had 10,000 hours in a Twin Otter. When his company went to the Beech 1900 he was unable to handle the speed difference. He retired shortly after.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I get so frustrated teaching the Cirrus because folks just can't take their eyes off those big, fancy displays. It's a problem with low-time and high-time pilots alike, they just spend too much head down time in the airplane.

.

Can you put 'post it' notes over the "guages"?

In a faster jet, one HAS to look inside allot. So much is happening so fast, and there is so much information that looking outside too long can be hazardous! Even on VMC approaches.. one has to see the trends...

As far as learning on steam guages or glass... do we teach/learn navigation with sextants!?

 

[woutlaw]

Can you put 'post it' notes over the "guages"?

In a faster jet, one HAS to look inside allot. So much is happening so fast, and there is so much information that looking outside too long can be hazardous! Even on VMC approaches.. one has to see the trends...

As far as learning on steam guages or glass... do we teach/learn navigation with sextants!?

I totally hear you.

Yeah, I usually cover up the PFD with a sheet of paper when we're doing steep turns and my guy is looking inside. I'll do it on landings too if they're having trouble getting the sight picture down. If they're looking inside constantly I fail the PFD and let 'em fly it on the backup gauges and that lovely big window out front.

Running them through the commercial maneuvers is great as well. There's no good way to fly a lazy eight or Chandelle looking inside.

If we're doing instrument stuff, no problem, 2.5 degrees of nose-up pitch and hold on the PFD gets you a level steep turn, but for basic airwork it's easy enough to fly a Cirrus properly looking outside.

I totally get the need to look inside, but unless you're IMC those eyes need to be outside 90-95% of the time. Sadly, they're eyes inside fiddling with something 90-95% of the time.

I had one guy break out his laptop in cruise and start looking at e-mail. WTF?

It's like watching a kid in front of a television, they just can't take their eyes off the display and look outside for what's going to hurt 'em.

In some respects the Cirrus is a little more "jet like" than "piston like" given how we teach it: Standard profiles and procedures, much closer attention to airspeeds, power settings and pitch attitudes along with a large reliance on automation. But in the end, it's still just a piston single and there's no reason to be looking inside 95% of the time.