Which gauges should stay "old school" in a glass cockpit

[L.Adamson]

Originally Posted by N355DW

But while I love all the gadgets, I am very aware that each and every one is just another fancy toy that can break or just mess up. Electronic toys with computer chips especially. I will never put all my trust in them, no matter how many there are, especially when for very little money I can have a simple mechanical back up.

NO......................

They are NOT a fancy toy! I literally hate that interpretation! When I see another plane crash............such as last evenings, into the mountains in Arizona............I have to question, which "fancy" toy they apparently didn't have along. If you can tell, I take this very seriously! My "toys", would have kept me, miles away. I've studied CFIT for decades now. It will be "electronics", that will go along way to eliminate the phenomenon.

L.Adamson --- RV6

[N355DW]

Originally Posted by L.Adamson

NO......................

They are NOT a fancy toy! I literally hate that interpretation! When I see another plane crash............such as last evenings, into the mountains in Arizona............I have to question, which "fancy" toy they apparently didn't have along. If you can tell, I take this very seriously! My "toys", would have kept me, miles away. I've studied CFIT for decades now. It will be "electronics", that will go along way to eliminate the phenomenon.

L.Adamson --- RV6

Didn't mean to rile you so! But I don't mean it literally, it's very difficult on the internet to choose the right words everyone will understand the same way. I think if you read all the posts I have made on the subject you might see I consider these to be more than just toys.

Yes these are useful tools, and can help keep people out of trouble. I've used them professionally (earlier versions) and plan on using them privately as well.

Nevertheless, they are machines, complex machines at that, and can and will continue to fail. People have been avoiding flying into cliff faces for years before these nice new tools we have now. (I am not passing judgement on this accident mind you) I plan on keeping as many options open as possible, including the use of "old" technology.

I also don't believe all this exciting new technology will ever keep people from having accidents.

Believe me, I am going to fill my panel with these nice tools, and I will enjoy their use. I hope you understand I have great respect for these tools, and would suggest that if I am willing to spend 30 or 40 k putting them in my airplane that maybe I might take them seriously as well, but I will never put all my trust into them, my experience with machines makes this quite clear to me.

[Brantel]

I had an eighth grade science teacher that argued with me that computers would never catch on and that they were just toys. That was in 1982!

Old schooler's always reluctantly accept change no matter what the subject is.

[L.Adamson]

Originally Posted by N355DW

People have been avoiding flying into cliff faces for years before these nice new tools we have now.

And while many haven't, there is far too many who have. I live in the mountain west. Out here, the terrain is dotted with many accident sites. We use to average three a year. It has slowed a bit.

L.Adamson

[912ry]

I went with two 10 inch dynon skyviews, each with a back up battery. Dual ADARS. SL 30 navcom, so 2 sources of navigation. Heated Pitot. Counting the alternator and the ships battery, triple redundant power for the skyviews. No mechanical gauges. Technically IFR legal, but I consider that to be a safety net. The mission is day/night VFR.

[Doug]

Paul,

You have more experience and hours than I would dream to ever have. I defer.

On the question of vibration and equipment reliability - I think these lists are filled with examples of equipment failures due primarily to vibration. VHF radios, transponders, alternators in spades have failed and my conjecture is that these are primarily vibration related. Usually when a product is weak the word is quickly out, the manufacturer either recovers or goes under. When a manufacturer has done their engineering right the products end up being bullet proof. We are indeed fortunate with some of the very complex modern circuit boards, components are very small and held in place with relatively large solder pads, lead free solder is also stronger, so we see relatively few failures for the complexity of the boards. Good for us.

On the question of the ASI and ALT - my comments were in the context that these were your only instruments. True if you lose the pitot you lose all airspeed but rpm, manifold pressure, trim, gps ( to a very limited extent) can be used for guidance. If all this is black - how do you get your clues near stall speed?

Regarding my experience with experimental EFIS, does it count if I built my own? Unfortunately I didn't have the wads of cash to buy GPS, EIS and Horizon only available at the time in separate instruments. I wanted a single MFD with all these in one instrument. I build my own paying attention to the details I have come to appreciate as important. It has let me down once in the 60 hours, my fault, finger problems.

I have some experience with other electronics devices for experimental Aircraft. Mostly these are exemplary, two independent system are almost certainly going to give the redundancy required. Myself, I have chosen well established suppliers for my other avionics. The options for my VFR RV-6 is if I have an electrical failure - the equipment is isolated, if I continue to have a problem the master switch is set off, and I fly home with compass, ASI and altimeter.

Just my view of the world,
Doug Gray

[N355DW]

Originally Posted by L.Adamson

And while many haven't, there is far too many who have. I live in the mountain west. Out here, the terrain is dotted with many accident sites. We use to average three a year. It has slowed a bit.

L.Adamson

Not arguing with that fact. We are both right.

I remember an accident several years ago. Ball player in a Cirrus. Can't say for sure but odds are it was a pricey glass cockpit in there.

CFI on board.

VFR day.

Smacked right into a building.

You can put all the technology you want into an aircraft, people will still manage to find ways to kill themselves. How long have stall warning horns been in aircraft? How many stall spin accidents every year?

I'm not against the new technology, I think it has the possibility to enhance safety. I'm not an "old school" purist. I embrace these tech wonders, plan on using them extensively in my new plane, but I will never trust them completely. I want simple, uncomplicated, inexpensive backup. Why does that seem to get some folks back up so much? I'm not telling you what to put in your airplane, I'm simply saying what I want in mine and why.

My last flight, my back up handheld Garmin 386 suddenly stopped receiving the GPS signal completely. Still won't pick up any satellite signals. I have no idea why.

[L.Adamson]

Originally Posted by N355DW

I remember an accident several years ago. Ball player in a Cirrus. Can't say for sure but odds are it was a pricey glass cockpit in there.

CFI on board.

VFR day.

Smacked right into a building.

We don't really want to use that as an example of glass cockpits and avoiding obstacles do we? Anyone that's aware of the cause and outcome, would realize that it had nothing to do with glass or electronics.

If I choose to fly below the peaks of a mountain canyon, the GPS will plainly show that I'm doing so. And I actually do that a lot. If I attempt to make a 360 degree turn that doesn't work out, due to speed and turning radius..........it's not the electronics fault. An electronic voice screaming "terrain, terrain, pull up, pullup", would have proceeded the event.

When I refer to CFIT's...............most all, are cases of where the pilots and passengers had no idea they would hit terrain within the next few seconds.

L.Adamson RV-6/Garmin 696

[N355DW]

Originally Posted by L.Adamson

We don't really want to use that as an example of glass cockpits and avoiding obstacles do we? Anyone that's aware of the cause and outcome, would realize that it had nothing to do with glass or electronics.

If I choose to fly below the peaks of a mountain canyon, the GPS will plainly show that I'm doing so. And I actually do that a lot. If I attempt to make a 360 degree turn that doesn't work out, due to speed and turning radius..........it's not the electronics fault. An electronic voice screaming "terrain, terrain, pull up, pullup", would have proceeded the event.

When I refer to CFIT's...............most all, are cases of where the pilots and passengers had no idea they would hit terrain within the next few seconds.

L.Adamson RV-6/Garmin 696

No, it's an example of how all the technology and back up (CFI on board, day VFR) you might think of will not prevent accidents. I am referring to your comment of how these products will go a long way to "eliminate" the problem. I am skeptical of the "eliminate" part.

You mentioned CFIT incidents have gone down in your area in the last few years. That's great, but how does it compare with the amount of hours flown? I suspect that has dropped sharply in the last few years as well.

You don't need a glass cockpit to keep you "miles away" from a cliff face or a building. As a matter of fact I think it's quite likely that these new tools could easily lull some people into a false sense of security and they will actually fly closer to hard objects than they would if they did not have them installed. Nobody should ever be in a position where they are seconds or even minutes from impacting terrain or objects higher than them. I know people who will fly a lot closer to thunderstorms with XM weather than they used to. I love XM weather. I have years flying professionally in aircraft with on board radar and I like XM weather better. But I give myself a big margin with it, and will go a hundred miles out of my way to fly around a line of storms rather than penetrate it.

Is it overkill? Maybe, but it works for me.

[N355DW]

Originally Posted by Brantel

I had an eighth grade science teacher that argued with me that computers would never catch on and that they were just toys. That was in 1982!

Old schooler's always reluctantly accept change no matter what the subject is.

You miss my point. I love the new gadgets, I'm going to spend some money buying them. I'll have a ball with them, and use them to both make my flying easier and safer.

I've used personal computers since 1982. Apples, PC 's, whatever. I've not had one yet, including my iPhone, iPad, television, automobile, almost anything with a computer chip in it where the computer or part of it did not malfunction at one time or another.

Anybody here have a computer that has never crashed, locked up, lost data?

I just want something besides a computer giving me data. That's all.