What's the point of this? (multiple glass with portable GPS)

Re: What's the point of this?

We just upgraded to G600 with 430/530 WAAS. Guess what, we also have a panel mounted 496. It's independently powered so if the glass goes dark, we still have a navigation source. Overkill, probably. But, if we ever lose the glass, it might come in handy.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Heaven forbid... one might have to fly IFR using a CHART! (You know, how pilots navigated for say... ~70 years of aviation history... before the days of backup backup redundant GPSes.) But hey, it's your money. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
Re: What's the point of this?

TwoTwoLeft said:
I was thinking the two larger screens were a little overkill...
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:​

I figure 5 more years and I'll tell stories of how I flew over oceans with a sixpack. Oh My!!!

I realize I didn't even to it all that much, but I'll ride the wave.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Polar742 said:
:yeahthat:​

I figure 5 more years and I'll tell stories of how I flew over oceans with a sixpack. Oh My!!!

I realize I didn't even to it all that much, but I'll ride the wave.
Click to expand...

Funny that a G1000 can probably do just as much, if not more than the FMS you guys use....A six pack with a dual nav/comm plus DME is plenty for me. A 430 is a nice to have, but not a need to have.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Polar742 said:
I figure 5 more years and I'll tell stories of how I flew over oceans with a sixpack. Oh My!!!
Click to expand...

It boggles my mind that someone would feel the need to fly a Cessna with two screens and multiple portable GPSes to feel safe, when the Concorde successfully flew across the Atlantic at twice the speed of sound for 27 years with nothing but a six pack and 3 INS (not even an FMS!).

Those guys were GOOD! :rawk:
 
Re: What's the point of this?

I would take the 496 with me into whatever I was flying. We've had the 430 more than once in a single day lose GPS reception, which makes it turn into a worthless $10k piece of equipment in the dash. We've had more than one problem with the 430 and we're not impressed at all. The 496 however, has been amazing and as far as I know, has never failed.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic with a heck of a lot less than that!! (Concorde that is) I've got a Lowrance Airmap 2000C in my airplane, and only use it about half of the time I fly. I much prefer the satisfaction and challenge of pilotage.

Where is the challenge in pressing direct-to, and then following a magenta line for hundreds of miles? No thanks.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

In Lindbergh's day they flew through a lot, but it is unlikely any modern pilot would feel comfortable trading their flying for one of those air mail routes. Heck, the same thing applies to cars. It is fun to own a classic, but there is always a reminder in the back of the head that the safety devices and crash attenuation just aren't there. It's a matter of changing expectations.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

We can all brag about how we know how to fly at night, in the fog, from one signal fire to another just like they did it "in the old days". What we all have to face nowadays is that technology is catching up everywhere. In only 7 years of me owning a cell phone, I've gone from a phone that could only hold 20 contacts to checking into my southwest flight tonight on my "smart phone". We all have differing opinions so I am just throwing mine in. I enjoy all the technology and resources that you can now get in an airplane; it makes it very appealing for those rotten weather days. But would I go up in a cub with 2 working instruments? Sure. I have no problem either way.

It's the wave of the future. Eventually, we'll all get used to it.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

JulietBravo said:
We can all brag about how we know how to fly at night, in the fog, from one signal fire to another just like they did it "in the old days". What we all have to face nowadays is that technology is catching up everywhere. In only 7 years of me owning a cell phone, I've gone from a phone that could only hold 20 contacts to checking into my southwest flight tonight on my "smart phone". We all have differing opinions so I am just throwing mine in. I enjoy all the technology and resources that you can now get in an airplane; it makes it very appealing for those rotten weather days. But would I go up in a cub with 2 working instruments? Sure. I have no problem either way.

It's the wave of the future. Eventually, we'll all get used to it.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree, I'm not condemning the advent of all of these new techno-navigation instruments and what not by any means. They have obvious advantages especially in the IFR environment. However, if given the choice between piloting said Piper Cub, and a new fangled 182 with a G1000, I'd take the Piper Cub everyday and twice on Sundays.

It's difficult to beat the satisfaction of arriving at your destination using nothing but pilotage/dead reckoning. I have a feeling these skills may eventually become as useful and common as celestial navigation. I hope I'm wrong though.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

I've flown an aircraft, that the owner had a 696 on the left yoke, 496 on the right and a three screen G1000 in the panel.

Different strokes for different folks.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

I've seen a pipeline patrol 182 that was conventional guages that carried 3 of the portable garmins, a laptop, and an extra radio. Oh and he had a G430 in the panel with WAAS I believe. Maybe extra position monitoring??

Or the Wx thingy...
 
Re: What's the point of this?

I know we all love being badasses. And don't get me wrong, I'm a badass, I learned how to fly on instruments in a non radar environment in a /U Cessna 172, shooting partial panel NDB approaches because the attitude indicator rolled over!

But at the same time, you can pry my glass cockpit away from my cold, dead hands. CAN I fly without all the gee whiz stuff? Sure. Do I WANT to have automation to help make things easier at work? You betcha!
 
Re: What's the point of this?

jtrain609 said:
I know we all love being badasses. And don't get me wrong, I'm a badass, I learned how to fly on instruments in a non radar environment in a /U Cessna 172, shooting partial panel NDB approaches because the attitude indicator rolled over!

But at the same time, you can pry my glass cockpit away from my cold, dead hands. CAN I fly without all the gee whiz stuff? Sure. Do I WANT to have automation to help make things easier at work? You betcha!
Click to expand...

Agreed. But there's automation, and then there's overkill. Especially in a Cessna, things are not happening very fast. If those big fancy screens go TU, it doesn't take long to reach into the bag and fire up the backup. No need to have 17 gps's mounted in the cockpit.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Okie_Pilot said:
I would take the 496 with me into whatever I was flying. We've had the 430 more than once in a single day lose GPS reception, which makes it turn into a worthless $10k piece of equipment in the dash. We've had more than one problem with the 430 and we're not impressed at all. The 496 however, has been amazing and as far as I know, has never failed.
Click to expand...

You have a 430 in a Dash?
 
Re: What's the point of this?

jtrain609 said:
I know we all love being badasses.

<snip>

CAN I fly without all the gee whiz stuff? Sure. Do I WANT to have automation to help make things easier at work? You betcha!
Click to expand...

I have gone through my flying career exactly that way -- as a dude who flew without autopilots, without automation, in TACAN / ILS / VOR aircraft, and was proud to be that way.

I think I might be coming down with a case of the automation fever, though. I just recently learned to fly a Proline 21/FMS 3000 aircraft, the first real "autopilot"/FMS-equipped aircraft for me. I've gotta say, all of those gee-whiz toys make it REALLY DAMN EASY to do what I used to work my butt off doing. For someone who knows how to do it "raw data", it is an amazing set of automation to see in action. I think I could get used to FMS-flown RNAV/LNAV/VNAV approaches!

My fear is people who aren't proficient at using raw data, or worse, have never even been exposed to it in training, because they've been brought up exclusively on this level of automation. Of course, the old timers probably think that same thing about me, with my "non-vacuum instruments" and "HSIs", etc. What a danger I'll become to the aviation profession without having done in "old school" like they did!
 
Re: What's the point of this?

Is it a lot of information? yep.

Does it make you weak? That depends on who you are.

Personally, I'm in favor of anything that does away with dependence on dry vacuum pumps. Seriously, those things are killers. Now the downside is that most of the flat panels only come with one AHRS, I wish they had a backup.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

They are tools. Just tools. But they are very complex tools and many do not understand or know what the defaults are or what to do when a button-punch does not produce the expected result. In fact, I have seen many punch the button and continue on without ensuring they get what they expect. Then the confusion fog sets in.

I have no problem with the technology or the automation. I do have a problem with people in cockpits who view it as little more than a moving video game and in the short time I worked with some Cirrus owner/operators, it was evident they were completely dependent on all the magic working. The use of the RWI (real world indicator.. the window) was something not often seen.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

trafficinsight said:
Is it a lot of information? yep.

Does it make you weak? That depends on who you are.

Personally, I'm in favor of anything that does away with dependence on dry vacuum pumps. Seriously, those things are killers. Now the downside is that most of the flat panels only come with one AHRS, I wish they had a backup.
Click to expand...
In the midst of our panel upgrade here, it was decided that the existing left-side instruments would move to the right side, and a third attitude indicator installed on the left. (We have the room for this - not all GA airplanes do, sadly.) We're sort of tinfoil hats when it comes to attitude information.

Orange Anchor said:
They are tools. Just tools. But they are very complex tools and many do not understand or know what the defaults are or what to do when a button-punch does not produce the expected result. In fact, I have seen many punch the button and continue on without ensuring they get what they expect. Then the confusion fog sets in.

I have no problem with the technology or the automation. I do have a problem with people in cockpits who view it as little more than a moving video game and in the short time I worked with some Cirrus owner/operators, it was evident they were completely dependent on all the magic working. The use of the RWI (real world indicator.. the window) was something not often seen.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

Folks who learn how to fly in TAA don't move the mental airplane.
 
Re: What's the point of this?

I've been in the cockpit of an MD-80 flown by a certain airline based in Nevada in which the CA had a 496 suction cup'd to the left window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top