Glass panel vs conventional

[ClayR_9A]

Even though an EFIS might come out cheaper initially, if it only lasts 5-8 years vs. conventional instruments lasting 20+(?) then have you really saved any money?

An EFIS WILL rapidly depreciate because there will always be newer, cheaper, and better models coming on the market. If you try to sell your plane in 5+ years, the buyer is likely to value your EFIS at nearly $0 because they're going to figure they'll be buying a new one soon.

Don't forget the labor cost of installing a new EFIS in an old plane. This could be easy if it is an "upgrade" from the same manufacturer but will likely still involve cutting some metal if the form factor changes. If the engine instruments are involved, it is a MUCH BIGGER DEAL to swap it out for a new one. This is why I now recommend to separate the engine instruments from the EFIS... they're less likely to need to be upgraded as soon or to be obsolete.

(Don't ask me how I know all of this)

[blandess]

All great insights. I do agree with Clay 9 on the glass stuff becoming obsolete quickly and keeping the engine instruments seperate. I like the idea of "this is my PFD and handles flight instruments and that over there is where the health of my engine is reported." I am a former F-16 Avionics guy and want to arrange the cockpit to be ergonomic and easily memorized so I can act without looking. Given that I have that background and my current job as an avionics tech I can upgrade my panel for just the cost of parts because I will do all the wiring and integration.

Another thought I had was: What if my airspeed or altitude tape fails in the glass setup vs conventional? Conventional I simply replace the broken component---glass; I have to take the whole thing out and send it away, which I'm assuming isn't cheap. Anyone with the AFS3500 had this happen? If so, what was the repair cost minus S&H?

[Chino Tom]

Originally Posted by blandess

How is the screen resolution on it? I was planning on just the PFD version and have the EDM 930 seperate. Are the bar graphs for EGT/CHT large and easy to read? How about LeanFind function? Are there any things that it doesn't have that you wish it would?

The screen resolution is fine. No problems in bright sunlight. The engine
instruments are VERY easy to read. The AFS gives you two choices of
displays for EGT/CHT, bar graphs or a cylinder display. The lean to peak
function works great. AFS also continues to upgrade their system. The new software version has a flight director function (with command bars) that is nice. I don't have the map feature and don't know if i will add the synthetic vision when it is available in August. I really like this system and as it goes folks recommend what they have. I know the Dynon is cheaper, but i liked the display of the AFS and that is why I bought it. I have 70 hours on my -8A. There are so many functions like checklists and weight and balance that are useful. They can be adjusted on your PC through a SD card on the front of the EFIS. New software is loaded this way also. You have to be somewhat computer literate to really use all the functions but is no big deal. The biggest problem I have is looking at the thing to much when airborne.

[N131RV]

Originally Posted by ClayR_9A

Even though an EFIS might come out cheaper initially, if it only lasts 5-8 years vs. conventional instruments lasting 20+(?) then have you really saved any money?

Properly provisioned, installed and maintained, computers (EFIS) can (and do) last for decades. So, yes. I'd say the possibility exists. Depending on vendor, you can ask for the MTBF on the equipment and the resultant repair cost and make a good decision.

An EFIS WILL rapidly depreciate because there will always be newer, cheaper, and better models coming on the market. If you try to sell your plane in 5+ years, the buyer is likely to value your EFIS at nearly $0 because they're going to figure they'll be buying a new one soon.

This is a common fallacy. "Something that works, and works well, will become useless or without value because there is/might/will be something better". I don't agree. Something that works and works well will always have some value. Now, should the unit become an orphan, all bets are off.

Don't forget the labor cost of installing a new EFIS in an old plane. This could be easy if it is an "upgrade" from the same manufacturer but will likely still involve cutting some metal if the form factor changes. If the engine instruments are involved, it is a MUCH BIGGER DEAL to swap it out for a new one. This is why I now recommend to separate the engine instruments from the EFIS... they're less likely to need to be upgraded as soon or to be obsolete.

(Don't ask me how I know all of this)

My upgrade was actually MUCH easier than the original 6 pack install. Of course, I had "thought ahead" and used a modular panel.

The wiring was easier and I used all my original engine sensors as well.

Finally, ask yourself this. Given the choice of two planes, otherwise equal, will a buyer WANT the six pack airplane?

Some will for sure. But after you've gotten used to the enhanced awareness and convenience that a good glass cockpit gives you, you won't want to go back. I know I don't.

Just MHO, worth every cent it cost.

[Ron Lee]

Joe may be right. My plane has normal instruments. While I fly all over and probably have zero negative impact from not having a glass panel, it may be a negative if I ever sold.

I know that certain engine choices are automatic NO-Go for me. The same may apply to glass panels vs 6 pack.

PS, a RV-8 from SW Kansas was just in a 00V and needed some help. The panel had a 6 pack, autopilot, Garmin GNS 530, SL30 (I think), and an Advance engine monitor.

It sure looked good and personally I would not thought anything negative about it were I to consider buying it.

[turbo]

why decide? combine both in one panel. take out the vac system replace ai and dg with dynon or your choice. get what you want. nothing will be perfect for resale. 496 for wx, trutrak ap for ifr and good back up. it only needs power. then 430 or your choice for nav/com. what does that cost? too much? probably $30 thousand. 2 cents........

[Kyle Boatright]

One of the big issues I see with the EFIS products is long term support. This is enough of a niche industry that some players will not survive, so if you pick the wrong manufacturer, there may be no support for you down the road.

The second issue is that electronic components are not manufactured/stocked indefinitely. If the watzit in the EFIS dies and the component manufacturer stopped making that particular watzit a couple of years ago, it may not matter if the EFIS manufacturer is still in business, because if the part isn't available, it isn't available. Which means the $$ glass panel is unsupportable. I've already faced this issue (but on a smaller scale) with the timing indicator from my Electroair ignition. No longer available and its absence leaves a strange little hole in my panel.

With steam gauges, even if you can't get yours repaired, you'll always be able to find a similar product down the road. And replacing one round gauge will be far less expensive than replacing a glass panel.

On the flipside, I do believe buyers are attracted to *modern* glass (not the model from 5 years ago). So you have to consider whether you ever plan to sell the airplane, and if so, how far down the road will that be?

[CNEJR]

Originally Posted by blandess

All great insights. I do agree with Clay 9 on the glass stuff becoming obsolete quickly and keeping the engine instruments seperate. I like the idea of "this is my PFD and handles flight instruments and that over there is where the health of my engine is reported." I am a former F-16 Avionics guy and want to arrange the cockpit to be ergonomic and easily memorized so I can act without looking. Given that I have that background and my current job as an avionics tech I can upgrade my panel for just the cost of parts because I will do all the wiring and integration.

Another thought I had was: What if my airspeed or altitude tape fails in the glass setup vs conventional? Conventional I simply replace the broken component---glass; I have to take the whole thing out and send it away, which I'm assuming isn't cheap. Anyone with the AFS3500 had this happen? If so, what was the repair cost minus S&H?

Yep, Glass is just a passing fad, I wouldn't do it if I were you. Why did you even ask?

[frankh]

Lets see... Put a six pack in do a few acro manouvers and trash the gyros. While your at it replace the vacuum pump every few hundred hours at, How much do they cost again?..I sure hope the VP doesn't wear out in IMC!

Sounds like a bargain compared to glass to me..NOT!

Oh and fuss with precession too...With an EFIS you won't know what precession is!

Frank

[islandmonkey]

Originally Posted by CNEJR

Yep, Glass is just a passing fad, I wouldn't do it if I were you. Why did you even ask?

A passing fad?

Glass is not a passing fad. It is the result of years of R&D. For example:

Compare this:

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace...de-cockpit.jpg

to this:

http://winrt.files.wordpress.com/200...80-cockpit.png


Both the above aircraft are examples of cockpits of iconic aircraft representing the status at the time of the level of technology available to aircraft designers.

The trouble these days is that if you want to go glass in your own pet project your going to have to bite the bullet and go for what is available at that point in time, knowing that in a couple of years your panel will be regarded as old. This is the case with many things these days from cars to computers. If you want to live in the Jurassic past then go for the six pack, thats your choice and don't let anyone dissuade you. If you want the latest and greatest then be prepared for the world to move on but again don't let anyone dissuade you.

This forum is for posing questions and getting answers and opinions. Do not be afraid to ask a question. There is no such thing as a stupid question, if you do not know the answer.