New pilots learning on glass.. Problem down the road?
- Thread starter Flysher
- Start date
EatSleepFly
Well-Known Member
I don't think so. Or at least I don't see how. We fly single pilot in old turbine airplanes that commuters (remember those?) flew with two pilots. (One even sets a record for flight time in that type of airplane every time it flies
). We don't have GPS (except for a few special ones), and many don't have autopilots. Glass is not even a fraction of a thought here yet, and I hope it isn't for a very long time- it would be a bad use of money for sure. If anything, GPS, a basic autopilot, or even some sort of basic terrain avoidance (considering the abundance of rocks around where we fly) would come first. No company in their right mind is going to convert airplanes with 20,000-50,000(?) hours on them to glass.
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
Not sure about 10 years down the road, but while this transition is happening, it will be the prospective pilot's problem. We will start seeing companies such as aerial survey, cargo, etc., companies rejecting applicants because they don't have enough time with 6-pack flying, especially if these companies have problems with people not hacking it in training due to all-glass time.
Over the long run, yes eventually it will be the company's problem, but for now, it will be a pilot's problem, since there are enough people out there with steam gauge experience.
Of course, I could be all wrong on this, and there won't be any problems with the transition, but I have a feeling it will happen...
Fandango Flyer
Well-Known Member
I attended an FAA Safety Seminar on the G1000 about a month ago and the speaker stated that Cessna's 2007 production line will only have seven steam-gauge-only planes (all 172's). 2008 and on will be all G1000 for their entire line. I have not been able to verify that information but, if true, it struck me that we're going to need a whole lot more CFI's proficient in teaching glass.
CapnJim
Well-Known Member
I think I have the answer:
"Tax breaks", "Cessna Certified Pilot Centers" and other "discounts". The quotes are to underline the idea that the actual benefit recieved is about as shady as my knowledge of how the programs work. My old school (old skool?) has a couple of new 172's based on those kinda economics. Plus, the draw of the 'amazing new glass toys' is a boon to biddness. Seems to work just fine, 'cause there appears to be no shortage of rich folk who just can't fly anything but the best. I reckon there's more than a few rich-folk plane owners who buy them as well to keep up with the Jonseses.
As for the 'ol run-o-da-mill broke-assed students, they fight for the g-models. Less g-money that way. G-money. Ha! I kill me.
"Tax breaks", "Cessna Certified Pilot Centers" and other "discounts". The quotes are to underline the idea that the actual benefit recieved is about as shady as my knowledge of how the programs work. My old school (old skool?) has a couple of new 172's based on those kinda economics. Plus, the draw of the 'amazing new glass toys' is a boon to biddness. Seems to work just fine, 'cause there appears to be no shortage of rich folk who just can't fly anything but the best. I reckon there's more than a few rich-folk plane owners who buy them as well to keep up with the Jonseses.
As for the 'ol run-o-da-mill broke-assed students, they fight for the g-models. Less g-money that way. G-money. Ha! I kill me.
JaceTheAce
Well-Known Member
I hate the glass idea for training aircraft. I think it's stupid! Students should be learning to fly the a/c with outside references, not with some shiny LCD screen. Until all aircraft are glass, no flight school should be restricting VFR and even IFR training environments to glass.
Steam gauges should be tought in primary IFR learning environments...students can always learn to fly glass down the road. I think it'd be a lot easier to transition from steam guage to glass than glass to steam guage.
Steam gauges should be tought in primary IFR learning environments...students can always learn to fly glass down the road. I think it'd be a lot easier to transition from steam guage to glass than glass to steam guage.
desertdog71
Girthy Member
I have said it before.................
GLASS IS FOR GIRLS!!!
GLASS IS FOR GIRLS!!!
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Didn't read this whole thread so ignore me if somebody already said this, but...
Cessna isn't making steam gauges anymore, at all.
They're ONLY procuding G1000's now as it's cheaper for them to put two LCD's and a few computers into an airplane than it is for them to pull together all the various round dials and throw them in. There won't even be an option to buy a new Cessna with round dials soon.
Though I still side on the idea that until the entire fleet is glass, professionals should be trained on round dials. You can very easily go from round dials to glass but it's nearly impossible to go the other way (it has to do with your scan as I think somebody mentioned, the glass stuff puts everything on one location and you don't need to think at all).
Cessna isn't making steam gauges anymore, at all.
They're ONLY procuding G1000's now as it's cheaper for them to put two LCD's and a few computers into an airplane than it is for them to pull together all the various round dials and throw them in. There won't even be an option to buy a new Cessna with round dials soon.
Though I still side on the idea that until the entire fleet is glass, professionals should be trained on round dials. You can very easily go from round dials to glass but it's nearly impossible to go the other way (it has to do with your scan as I think somebody mentioned, the glass stuff puts everything on one location and you don't need to think at all).
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
I don't think so. Or at least I don't see how. We fly single pilot in old turbine airplanes that commuters (remember those?) flew with two pilots. (One even sets a record for flight time in that type of airplane every time it flies
Subsequent questions, then - would it be smart for a manufacturer to subsidize retrofitting some of the aircraft to deploy the systems to allow operators to ease the burden?
And as a freight dawg (I love that term
) wouldn't you prefer flying with a glass cockpit for all of the extra data and decreased workload? As to my original question about operating costs, I was wondering more along the lines of maintenance. During the poll about Garmin vs. Avidyne the consensus was that the costs of glass were less to manufacture/deliver were less than a six-pack. So I was wondering if any of those cost savings translated at the operator level.
Further, I don't know if any NTSB statistics could indicate an improved safety record as a correllation with glass avionics. I have no idea if such data exists or even if such a hypothesis is valid. It would SEEM to make sense, but at the layman's view, I don't know.
It appears that glass is coming; the more practical question is how do you - as pilots - and those of us who are aspiring pilots - position ourselves for what looks like a sea change?
Or is that overestimating the situation?
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Subsequent questions, then - would it be smart for a manufacturer to subsidize retrofitting some of the aircraft to deploy the systems to allow operators to ease the burden?
And as a freight dawg (I love that term
As to my original question about operating costs, I was wondering more along the lines of maintenance. During the poll about Garmin vs. Avidyne the consensus was that the costs of glass were less to manufacture/deliver were less than a six-pack. So I was wondering if any of those cost savings translated at the operator level.
Further, I don't know if any NTSB statistics could indicate an improved safety record as a correllation with glass avionics. I have no idea if such data exists or even if such a hypothesis is valid. It would SEEM to make sense, but at the layman's view, I don't know.
It appears that glass is coming; the more practical question is how do you - as pilots - and those of us who are aspiring pilots - position ourselves for what looks like a sea change?
Or is that overestimating the situation?
In my opinion there's no difference between having a G1000 in front of you or a Garmin 430. They will present the exact same data (though the 430 obviously has a smaller screen, which really doesn't matter much), but the 430 is only $7,000. Heck I'd take a Garmin 430 over an autopilot 99% of the time.
Timbuff10
Well-Known Member
I hate the steam gauges idea for training aircraft. I think it's stupid! Students should be learning to fly the a/c with outside references, not with some clunky dial.
Glass cockpits should be taught in primary IFR learning environments...students can always learn to fly the old gauges down the road. I think it'd be a lot easier to transition from glass to steam than steam to glass.
The arguments can be made either way.
What I don't understand is why it seems cool to be the pilot that flies the oldest equipment out there? Sometimes it seems that if you are shooting an NDB approach to mins in a 70s model airplane you are looked upon as the ultimate hottness.
Personally, I would rather be the one flying the glass cockpit with weather radar, TIS and all the goodies while using the autopilot on an ILS and enjoying my time.
Do you want to drive a 60s model bug or a brand new Beamer? I don't see the difference really?
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Because flying an NDB approach (espically no gyro) takes a lot more skill than flying in a glass panel aircraft. And I don't mean a different skill, I mean straight up less skill. So many people are lost without moving maps these days and when the lights go out they're fux0r.
Further, I like flying airplanes; not being a systems manager. I didn't get into this gig because I wanted to play with a computer at FL350. I can do that on the ground and get paid better than some guy flying an RJ. I do this gig because I enjoy to actually fly the airplane.
desertdog71
Girthy Member
Reality is that not all aircraft are set up this way. MOST aircraft in the Freight environment are the basics and no more. I gurantee that an IFR student trained on glass would not be able to handle the workload involved with flying in IMC on steam guages.
Timbuff10
Well-Known Member
Ok, I can understand those points of view for sure... If you are getting into flying to be a freight dog then without a doubt I agree older airplanes are the way to go. I am yet to meet a student that told me on day one that he wants to fly old airplanes at night though. From what I have seen at my flight school, the two types of students out there are either the future airline pilot, or the guy who has a good job and always wanted to learn how to fly and is at a point in life where they can try it now.
I like a good old airplane, the problem is from what I have seen, the older the plane, the more mx it needs and the more downtime it has. I am yet to have a G1000 clunk out on me. In the end it isn't really how new the plane is though, it's how good of a mx program it has going with it and how good the pilots treat it.
I like a good old airplane, the problem is from what I have seen, the older the plane, the more mx it needs and the more downtime it has. I am yet to have a G1000 clunk out on me. In the end it isn't really how new the plane is though, it's how good of a mx program it has going with it and how good the pilots treat it.
Bignellyxx
Well-Known Member
Personally i don't think private pilot training in glass is a problem. No they should not be staring at the TV screen to learn to fly. But in VFR flight the Glass is not much different than steam guages. The CFI should make sure the student isn't staring inside the cockpit. The good thing with glass is if they are starring at the big shiny screen you can dim it for teaching something like steep turns.
I think the issue with glass will come when teaching instrument students. First thing is teaching something like unusual attitude recoveries. The glass obviously doesn't tumble. A student who learns on glass will most likely recover with the Giant Attitude indicator this could pose a problem if they go and fly a standard 6 pack. The second issue with teaching primary instrument training on the glass is that glass has a projected track line that makes tracking on any approach just too damn easy. Students who learn on glass will have a huge issue when it comes to learning how to track a straight line.
It was mentioned earlier by someone about learning about pitot/static blockages on a glass. The glass will be affected the same way as a standard 6 pack at least on the avidyne.
I think the issue with glass will come when teaching instrument students. First thing is teaching something like unusual attitude recoveries. The glass obviously doesn't tumble. A student who learns on glass will most likely recover with the Giant Attitude indicator this could pose a problem if they go and fly a standard 6 pack. The second issue with teaching primary instrument training on the glass is that glass has a projected track line that makes tracking on any approach just too damn easy. Students who learn on glass will have a huge issue when it comes to learning how to track a straight line.
It was mentioned earlier by someone about learning about pitot/static blockages on a glass. The glass will be affected the same way as a standard 6 pack at least on the avidyne.
desertdog71
Girthy Member
You need to be realistic with your students. Guess what the MAJORITY of flying jobs out there are in older airplanes, and they will simply need those skills at some point during their career. Not everybody gets to fly the big iron with thge latest equipment.
I would much rather be in the position where I have the skills to get a job ANYWHERE, as opposed to preparation geared specific to the airline route.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
So what happens when these guys end up as flight instructors in round dial aircraft in actual? Remember primacy is a pain in the butt and when it hits the fan, they'll stop scanning and go back to where they think the information *should* be presented.
Timbuff10
Well-Known Member
I couldn't agree more... I think the best way to start out is to use a NavII Cessna, then after you get your private start mixing it up between the two. After seeing the ins and outs in both the steam and glass planes you will be fine changing between the two cockpits and should be fairly good on both styles by the time the Instrument ride comes along.
When the IFR ride comes along though, I would rather take it in a glass any day, and I am saying this even though I have no IFR time in glass planes.