Primary training in a SR22...

I spent most of my primary training in brand new Cessna 172 G1000s, back when the G1000s were just starting to get into the Cessnas. They costed a bit more but it's a mixed bag on whether or not I thought I suffered from it. I transitioned to multiple steam gauge aircraft afterward, and actually did all of my instrument in a steam gauge Archer.

I think if I could do it again, I would probably still do glass, but only if it cost the same as the six packs. If it didn't, I'd do the six pack for sure.
 
sounds like fun to me. wish i could have afforded to do all my training in an SR22.

that being said i'm glad i got my private in a 1977 172M with one set of comm and nav radios (that didnt always work). the faded paint, missing knobs, and horrible interior added to the nostalgia of the "old school" way to learn how to fly. cant beat a plane with good ole' steam guages, carb heat, and manual fuel primers!
 
Wow. I'm surprised how many people would rather train in glass than steam gauges.

I really hated teaching in the G1000... Took all of the decision making, pilotage and dead rec out of the equation.

Had I not used steam gauges during my instrument my head would have been spinning when I first started at FLX...
 
Call me old schooled (I'm 21) but we NEVER used the GPS during my primary training. These days at my school it's perfectly ok to use the GPS on your PVT checkride for the XC.
 
The ab inition using glass should be a challenge, but at least they're not beginning in a retract. That's where the expense will come in- after ting, ting, ting
"Uhhhhhhhh gear down",.......
 
Insurance for the solo is the only real issue as was mentioned. sure it will take longer, but a student will get used to a more complex aircraft and wont know the difference. I will be starting my third student from 0 hours in a Turbo 210 in a few weeks, its really not that big a deal (so long as cost is not their concern).

As to instrument training in glass then going to steam gauges, yes, that is a huge issue that I get to deal with a lot; Instrument rated pilots, completely lost in a six pack. I don't see how these guys plan on getting a job in anything but a shiny jet; which is going great last I heard ;)
 
PGT said:
These days at my school it's perfectly ok to use the GPS on your PVT checkride for the XC.
Click to expand...
Do you have a problem with that? Don't you think that a person should be proficient with ALL AVAILABLE forms of navigation available? Heck, if a person had a handheld (496 or something) I'd want to see that they knew how to use that in addition to pilotage, DR, and VORs.

In my experience, that is one reason that training times for private have been getting longer at my former flite skool...we have added GPS and glass system management to the already extensive list of things a student has to know to be a competent private pilot.
 
Roger said:
Do you have a problem with that? Don't you think that a person should be proficient with ALL AVAILABLE forms of navigation available? Heck, if a person had a handheld (496 or something) I'd want to see that they knew how to use that in addition to pilotage, DR, and VORs.

In my experience, that is one reason that training times for private have been getting longer at my former flite skool...we have added GPS and glass system management to the already extensive list of things a student has to know to be a competent private pilot.
Click to expand...

Oh absolutely, I think a student/pilot should be familiar with everything in the cockpit and how to use it. However, using the GPS is a breeze, it takes about 45 seconds to input a flight plan and everyone can follow the magenta line.
What if the GPS fails? Then what? I think the ideal situation would be to let a student program it, get an initial on course heading, then fail it to see if they can find their checkpoints and follow a heading without it.

I don't know, my GPS never came on in my PVT checkride, but it was a 396 on the yoke, and the KLN94 "failed" after my GPS approach on my IR checkride. I survived :)
 
PGT said:
Call me old schooled (I'm 21) but we NEVER used the GPS during my primary training. These days at my school it's perfectly ok to use the GPS on your PVT checkride for the XC.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying. A few people over here are getting too reliant upon handhelds and as a result have trouble with basic airways navigation when checkride time comes around.
 
bdhill1979 said:
As to instrument training in glass then going to steam gauges, yes, that is a huge issue that I get to deal with a lot; Instrument rated pilots, completely lost in a six pack. I don't see how these guys plan on getting a job in anything but a shiny jet; which is going great last I heard ;)
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself. I would love to be the sim instructor at a prospective employer watching a guy try to fly a steam gauge Baron sim when they've got little to no time in a standard 6 pack a/c. Next...
 
Well it's not like they can't fly. With glass you are used to looking at all of the steam gauges superimposed on each other in one spot. When your going back to steam it's just a matter of cross check, interpretation, control. Some get it most don't but with time they do. Can't complain if your an instructor nowadays about it. Your getting the extra bucks to teach em "the basics"
 
I started from my first flight in an SR20 up until recently, getting both my private and instrument in it and at times, I felt that it was a pretty good aircraft to learn in. Now that I am working on commercial and have built up some time in airplanes such as the Warrior, 172, and 182, VFR and IFR, I felt that doing my instrument in the SR20 benefited the most. Granted, it took a little longer than I expected because of some issues and habits I developed during instrument training, it was a good aircraft and made things so much easier to do in 172s and 182s.

Now insurance issues are definately an issue, and is probably why I recieved low PIC/solo time (less than 6 hours) in the Cirrus and yet still got my private/instrument. I would recommend doing the training in a different airplane for the private for this very reason. Now, for instrument, with the longer cross countries, the Cirrus is definately a better airplane to be in, and stresses SRM/CRM at a very early level in the training, becuase it has a little extra power and level of complexity. Although after a while these become long forgotten.

As for the issue with steam, glass, I feel that there needs to be at least some time in steam. Looking at a glass cockpit sometimes does not give a student a complete understanding on the gauges and what not. At least some time doing basic maneuvers in a steam cockpit even if it is in a sim will allow the student to excel.
 
jtrain609 said:
I've had to train people from glass to steam gauges, and they would have become smoking holes without me sitting there next to them. We're talking about IFR flying, BTW.
Click to expand...
Did the transition myself. Wasnt hard. Having a basic sim is a great resource for something like that
 
I'm with the minority here, the old school camp. I'm all for technology and the move towards gps, glass panels, etc ...it's amazing how far we've come in that facet especially in GA in the last 10 years...however i'm very much in the camp that primary training is more fulfilling, more complete, if you will, in an old steam gauge clunker. I think skills like pilotage and dead reckoning, as well as stick and rudder techniques can be lacking just because so much is done for you on the navigating and situational awareness platform, you're wowed by the gizmo's you lose the edge you'd have if you were completely on gauges and 2 radios of each type and an adf. old skoolin, baby
 
Does the Cirrus have an IRS or AHRS system?

I guess looking at it one way is dealing with failures. When a gyro fails generally it will fail slowly and if your scan is weak, it can really get you into trouble.

I know on AHRS systems and IRS stuff that when something gets a miscompare or whatnot it alerts you and generally when it is failed it becomes an X.

An example is the Citation Ultra, this uses the Primus 1000 system that is found in the Citation 560 Excel as well. However, the difference between the two is that the Excel uses an AHRS system, where as the Ultra is just a Glass Display of what the mechanical gyros are actually telling it. I am not sure how the Cirrus is set up, I am assuming it has an AHRS style sytstem.

When the ADI fails in the Excel, it just goes blank with a red X and ATT flag. However, in the Ultra, when the ADI gyro fails it actually precesses and tilts and acts like an actual gyro, because the P1000 display is just a digital presentation of whats the gyro is inputting.

Looking at it from that POV, if someone has never flown gyro driven instruments, and they experience a failure in IMC, then it can definitly get dicey.

You see where I am coming from? Of course, the reverse is true as well.
 
Crockrocket94 said:
Does the Cirrus have an IRS or AHRS system?

I guess looking at it one way is dealing with failures. When a gyro fails generally it will fail slowly and if your scan is weak, it can really get you into trouble.

I know on AHRS systems and IRS stuff that when something gets a miscompare or whatnot it alerts you and generally when it is failed it becomes an X.

An example is the Citation Ultra, this uses the Primus 1000 system that is found in the Citation 560 Excel as well. However, the difference between the two is that the Excel uses an AHRS system, where as the Ultra is just a Glass Display of what the mechanical gyros are actually telling it. I am not sure how the Cirrus is set up, I am assuming it has an AHRS style sytstem.

When the ADI fails in the Excel, it just goes blank with a red X and ATT flag. However, in the Ultra, when the ADI gyro fails it actually precesses and tilts and acts like an actual gyro, because the P1000 display is just a digital presentation of whats the gyro is inputting.

Looking at it from that POV, if someone has never flown gyro driven instruments, and they experience a failure in IMC, then it can definitly get dicey.

You see where I am coming from? Of course, the reverse is true as well.
Click to expand...
You know I never even thought of it in those terms, how a Gyro doesn't just up an quit and doesn't immediately alert you to its failure, but that is a very very important point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top