[Louise Hose]

Mikey (my RV-6) returned home to me on Friday and the panel project is completed. All squawks have been addressed and Paul made a thorough shake-out flight from Houston to the D.C. area on Friday. It?s now time for me to focus on learning to fly him with the new instruments. For VFR flights, I need to change my primary indicators of:

altitude, vertical speed, airspeed, oil pressure, oil temperature, voltage, amperage, and fuel tank levels from round gages to the digital Dynons (180 and 10A). Other information that used to come as digital data (EGT, CHT, OAT) are also provided on the Dynons.

In addition, the Dynon 180, linked to my ?old? Garmin 396, now provides many new features like true airspeed, wind direction and strength, fuel flow, and even ground track.

Another big change (maybe the biggest to my flying) is the addition of the TruTrak ADI Pilot II autopilot. The old panel had a TruTrak ADI that I had purchased from someone who won it from Alex DeDominicis at the 2005 LOE raffle. I knew at that time that TruTrak has a great offer to upgrade their instruments for full retail value credit on an old TruTrak instrument, which played a big role in my decision to buy the ADI before I was ready for a full panel upgrade. When Paul urged me to add an autopilot during the panel upgrade, we talked to Alex and arranged to trade-in the old ADI for credit on a new ADI Pilot II.

Weather was clear (but COLD) yesterday and we chose to fly up to have lunch with friends who live just a little north of Philadelphia as a good exercise in using the new equipment. A direct path would have taken us over the Capitol....a poor option. So, we would have to deviate around the D.C. ADIZ.

I used the autopilot a little in Texas last month, but it wasn?t hooked up to the GPS yet. And, I had never used an autopilot before this one was installed. So, one objective was to use the autopilot while slaloming Mikey?s way around the D.C. ADIZ, the D.C. and Philadephia Class B airspaces, and random small restricted areas along the way.

After choosing my waypoints a home, we drove to the airport. After preflighting, fueling, and adjusting seats, etc., on the plane, I got in and went about setting up the route. I quickly learned that the Garmin didn?t recognize two of the small private strips I had selected as waypoints. With remarkable speed, the workload became overwhelming. I felt like some days early in my IFR training. The frigid cold temperature, my new position in the seat due to new seat cushions, an embarrassing mistake before ever arriving at the airport, the new checklist procedures, the missing fuel drainer that was apparently left in Houston, almost every piece of flight information in a different place than before, a new headset (Halo) that I haven?t really learned to use yet, the new placement of the control knobs, and the prospect of soon navigating some of the most challenging airspace in the country hit me like a wall. Time for a deep breathe.

I shared my concerns with Paul. We considered canceling the trip northeast and heading somewhere less demanding. But, we realized that all that was really needed was to re-visit and agree on our respective roles during the flight and then slow down the checklist process. (Paul likes to fly as a crew when we fly together and has been teaching me the safe way to share responsibilities in the cockpit. Thus, we generally brief before a flight and that really helped make this challenging exercise comfortable.)

But, frankly, it was a pretty stressful climb-out. Soon after departure, I had Paul take the controls for a minute or two while I adjusted the headset and radio (again). The lower atmosphere was bumpy, which added to my stress level. I resisted climbing above 3500? since it was so cold, but the stress of being banged around was also unpleasant. I found it really unnerving to have the plane's autopilot make (what seemed to me) abrupt changes in pitch or roll without any input from me. So, I climbed to 7500? and watched the OAT drop to -17C. But, the smooth air and success in using the autopilot soon calmed me. As I settled down, Paul pointed out the various features of my now ?Technically Advanced Aircraft?. Wisely, he introduced me to only one or two features at a time. Afterall, each flight took more than 1:15 thanks to a headwind in both directions. I learned the different ways to set the 2-axis autopilot (GPS vs. heading, adjusting a heading with the knob, etc.). I played with the mixture and watched the fuel flow and other readings on the monitor respond. By the time I landed at my home airport, I felt comfortable with plane again.

There have been a lot of changes to Mikey over the last two months and I quickly realized that I couldn?t just jump back into him and fly with the same confidence I had in November. I have not flown much lately and the interior of the plane (panel and seats) is very different. I also lack experience with a TAA, glass cockpits, or a wide variety of planes. But, I am happy to report that I quickly gained comfort with all the VFR features in the plane. I will have to work on learning to use the Dynon HSI and other IFR-type features at another time. My concern at this point, however, is that my schedule will probably not allow another flight in Mikey for at least three weeks. I wonder how much of my new skills/knowledge will be loss. I think my next flight will go away from the complex space to the north until I regain the confidence again.

I have several non-RV pilot friends who have fancy cockpit equipment that they never use. I can see how easily that could happened. I could have easily jumped into Mikey and flown him safely yesterday. I would have hand-flown him using the old Garmin for navigation. But, I would have taken longer as I wobbled back-and-forth across my desired track and I would have burned more fuel as I crudely leaned without the benefit of the fuel gage. Nothing wrong with that sort of flying. It?s all I?ve known in the past. But, why waste thousands of dollars on (somewhat) fancy instruments if you don?t learn to use them to the greatest benefit. I?m very fortunate to have someone who can act as a crew member and mentor while I stumble through the learning process. My next flight, however, while he?s in Houston, will probably be in airspace more friendly and forgiving if I fail to keep up with the bounty of new information that I need to learn how to process.

 

[Geico266]

Louise, I've been in your shoes many times ferrying RV's all over the country, and all I can say is give yourself some time. It takes practice, patience, and willingness to learn something new. I transition back and forth between aircraft all the time. Sometimes I even take notes to help me remember little things.

One thing I have found out about different glass gizmos is I like to "play" with them on the ground. Fire them up in the hanger and work your way though all of the menus. You may have to add a battery charger to keep the battery up. Start with the basic stuff first like adjusting the baro. Get familiar with all of the menus until you say to yourself; "Is that all there is?". Check all of the units of measure and put them where you like them. Inches of mercury, knots -v- MPH, ect.. Also, (this may sound strange coming from a guy) read the manuals. I mean really read them, 3-4 times. The people who built the unit wrote the manual. They are trying to tell you how to make it work.

Give your eyes time to adjust and soon you'll be locating all of the functions on the Dynon in an instant where before you had to move your eyes across the panel. It really does become more efficient.

Congrats on the new panel.

 

[rv6ejguy]

Great post. For those of us who don't get to fly as much as we want or should you touch on the difficulties in staying current on all aspects even without a new panel full of unfamiliar goodies.

I was giving a cockpit check yesterday in my 6A to my dad who is going to start flying the yellow peril solo. As we went through the switches and checklists, I was embarrassed that I couldn't recall how a couple things worked that I had designed and built myself and a couple of pieces of avionics that I use infrequently. Time for ME to get out my notes and manuals to refresh and start to use all these things while I'm flying more.

Now when to fit this in while I'm reading manuals for all the new gear in the RV10 panel...

Sounds like you have a good asset there.

 

[gnuse]

I am looking forward to flying my Rocket with some of these "technically advanced" items in the panel. They are certainly more advanced that some of the items in my 310R panel, so I look forward to the freedom of using technology without the chains of $$$$/certified aircraft restrictions. I am sure that I will come to terms with it all, but I plan to wade into the shallow end first. Heck, I don't even know what most of the abbreviations mean that are used around here. I do however enjoy the help that so many give so willingly.

 

[Ironflight]

I have been fortunate that my career has exposed me to a lot of the "fancy stuff" as it has been developed over the years. This has given me a chance to learn EFIS's sort of "generically", so that all I have to do is figure out the specific details of each one. I have the fundamentals down - but as always, the devil is in the details. It is fun to watch Louise pick this stuff up so quickly - yes, it will take time to really master the systems, but in the course of a couple of hours, she had the autopilot and it's GPS interface figured out pretty well. It is probably harder in her case because she has to unlearn so much from how the airplane used to be configured - switches are all different, controls in different places. If it was an entirely different airplane, she wouldn't have the "unlearning" to do.

What those of us who have been flying the newer technology panels have to remember is how it was to start out. I can tell you that it took me at least 50 hour of flying the Val before I felt comfortable trying to do instrument procedures with the EFIS/GNS430/Autopilot, and probably 20 hours of playing with it all in VFR conditions before I was ready to actually file. The basics can come quick, but the details take longer. Louise is a quick learner, and showed that this weekend. But yup....it's going to take some time to really get the comfort level.

Paul

 

[David-aviator]

I have been fortunate that my career has exposed me to a lot of the "fancy stuff" as it has been developed over the years. This has given me a chance to learn EFIS's sort of "generically", so that all I have to do is figure out the specific details of each one. I have the fundamentals down - but as always, the devil is in the details. It is fun to watch Louise pick this stuff up so quickly - yes, it will take time to really master the systems, but in the course of a couple of hours, she had the autopilot and it's GPS interface figured out pretty well. It is probably harder in her case because she has to unlearn so much from how the airplane used to be configures - switches are all different, controls in different places. If it was an entirely different airplane, she would have the "unlearning" to do.

What those of us who have been flying the newer technology panels have to remember is how it was to start out. I can tell you that it took me at least 50 hour of flying the Val before I felt comfortable trying to do instrument procedures with the EFIS/GNS430/Autopilot, and probably 20 hours of playing with it all in VFR conditions before I was ready to actually file. The basics can come quick, but the details take longer. Louise is a quick learner, and showed that this weekend. But yup....it's going to take some time to really get the comfort level.

Paul

There definitely is an element of pilot adaptability also. This factor is related to how much experience one has doing it the "old way". When EFIS type operations were introduced with the 767, some older guys who came up flying DC-3's, Connies and then reluctantly the 727 never did adapt to glass concepts. They were excellent stick and rudder pilots but were unable to accept the new stuff.

There may be an element of that in this world. It is quite different and does require the flight be planned, programmed and activated before departure; and may the Lord help the single IFR pilot if ATC should change it in route. That was a hand full with 2 pilots managing the systems who did it every day.

 

[frankh]

Reminds me

; and may the Lord help the single IFR pilot if ATC should change it in route. That was a hand full with 2 pilots managing the systems who did it every day.

When my CFII was going for his ATP...he wanted to fly some approaches in the RV on the principle that if he could hand fly "that thing" he could fly anything....he has since completed his own 7a...

Anyway, there we were cruising to the IAF all mapped out nice on the GNS430...When ATC said "cleared direct to somewhere we'd both never heard of"....With me still in IFR diapers I sensed a wave of fear comming across me...Instructor Jack does what is now obvious, looks at the approach plate (what a concept!)...reloads the approach on the 430 and teurns the airplnae in less time than it took to write this!...Did I mention he also works for Garmin on the 430?

Pretty impressive but you have to be on the ball!

Frank

 

[FlyerJumper]

Yeah... it takes a little getting used to!

For what its worth, here are some thoughts from a low-time pilot who made the transition to glass...

I started building when I had just under 100 hrs flying (all in round dial Cessna's) and no time with an autopilot. I even quit flying to ensure quicker payoff of the -10. I then got the bug to get back into flying... and rationalized it by thinking it would be a good idea to get some time behind some glass since that's what we plan to put in our plane! So, I got back into flying, and I now have about 25 hrs in a G1000 172S... Yeah... glass takes a little getting used to! My main focus is to not let it intimidate me. I also try to focus on the essentials necessary for flight, and then make it a point to try something new on each flight... although sometimes I'll revisit something that I think requires a bit more attention (like hammering home the specific keystrokes necessary to dial in the nearest field in an emergency -- was that NRST->Direct To->Scroll->Enter or NRST->Direct To->Enter->Enter )

I soon realized after I made a few flights behind the G1000, there's a ton of stuff to learn! I also realized its not something I'll be able to figure out on the fly. So, my strategy is to get frequent time behind the panel... not necessarily a ton of it. So, I make it a point to fly at least twice a week, even if it's just a few trips around the pattern. I feel (at least at my experience level) I'm committing some of the essentials of the system to muscle memory.

One thing I can definitely count on is since I'm renting, something new will happen that I didn't expect (like the time I was flying under the hood with an instructor, he pulled the engine on me, had me use the nearest function, but then spent the initial portion of our decent wondering why the airport he planned on me choosing as an emergency landing spot wasn't showing up in the nearest list. As I was turning towards the "nearest" field according to the list available all I heard was "hmmm... why's it not showing up in the list?" Once I realized he was planning on me choosing a different field that wasn't on the list I politely suggested the minimum runway length for nearest airports in the system set up was probably set too long. He confirmed it, and then told me "ok, you can remove the hood" )

Another surprise was when the system decided to stick itself in Reversionary Mode (both screens showing the primary flight instruments), and experience a crosstalk error (The left & right sides don't talk to each other) I learned the airplane will still fly even though there were red Xs showing in multiple places on the screens

My point is things can & will surprise you... so don't let it get the best of you. Learn as much as you can ahead of time. For those things that surprise you in the air, make a note of it, and make it a point to figure it out asap after the flight.

One step at a time...

 

[Rupester]

Louise,
Your post is much appreciated by us builders who will soon be on a similar learning curve. I'm reminded of the old saw, "So much to learn; so little time." And you truly are fortunate to have that guy in the right seat ... we ALL continue to learn lots from him.

 

[Louise Hose]

Louise,
....And you truly are fortunate to have that guy in the right seat ... we ALL continue to learn lots from him.

Believe me, I know how fortunate I am.

 

[TravisHamblen]

My next flight, however, while he?s in Houston, will probably be in airspace more friendly and forgiving if I fail to keep up with the bounty of new information that I need to learn how to process.

That sounds like a good idea. Just remember, all that new equipment doesn't change a thing. If you get totally frustrated and confused just take a breather and just fly the plane looking out the window until the blood pressure returns to normal!

On a side note, I have all the fancy glass gizmos in my RV-7a, and didn't have them in my RV-6A. Let me tell you, once you master them, you will NEVER want to go back! I feel like the autopilot and some of the other stuff has reduced my workload drastically at many critical times! In a couple months you will look back and wonder how you ever flew without them!!

 

[WilliamDCat]

I bit off topic...

I'm curious about everyone's thoughts regarding the FAA and the noise they're making about endorsements for Technically Advanced Aircraft (TAA).

I've yet to see a TAA that any private pilot couldn't just jump into VFR. Sure, the IFR enviorment means reading the book and playing with the glass on the ground, but IMHO that can be done in less than 10 hrs of really trying on any EFIS. I know people who claim 50 hrs or more, but in my experience that's "playing" with it till you learn 90%, or FD and EICAS and all the rest. I spent 5 hrs reading the Chelton book and got to fly it once before my CP made me do all the 135 initial trianing for it! It's just not that hard if you have an open mind and approach it in a methodical manner. I can't see that requiring an endorsement...but I can't tell the difference between 199 and 201 hp either.

What REALLY bothers me? Flying for a living probably makes it a LOT more obvious to me than many of you, but... There's a lot of schools now that use "100% glass" as a sales gimick. At first glance it sounds kewl and seems harmless enough, but I think it's deadly. What happens to that student in the "real world?" How can you get an ATP and not know how to use a mixture or prop control? ("Tell me how a constant speed prop works." "The tips go round and round." "How does a govenor work?" ...silence... "What's a speeder spring?" ...silence... "What're flyweights?" ..uhh.. That's from a CFI/II trying to make it through part 135 training) (part 121 training exercise... "Point to everything as I run through the chechlist..." "Altimeter" points at AS then reads it and looks some more then pauses and finally points at the altimiter triumphantly, ~10-15 seconds later. Same thing with other parts of the 6 pack) What's gonna happen when that kid gets a job with another penny pinching airline saving $ and has to fly round gauges IFR with a training program that wasn't thorough enough to wash him out?

"Sure is strange taking off in the dark"
"Yeah"
Sounds of compressor stall
Sounds of impact and break up

Would you want your kids sitting in the back with this guy driving? Me neither...but I guess the Feds don't care as long as the current heading is compared to the T/O heading and runway heading... (now required part 121) As if those really big numbers painted on the ground didn't tip us off.

PS If the moderators think of a better spot for this post, please move it!

 

[jclark]

You seem to make the point for it ..

I think there is going to be a need for it in the future.

Assume someone who does NOT fly for a living. They fly maybe 50 hours per year. Hop into a TAA and take off. Things are NOT where you think they might be or look the way you think.

What is worse is the nuance. Two displays ... different altimeter settings (baro settings). Which is correct and how do you set in real time. Yes, they should have read the book on everything but I am assuming that this might not have been done.

I just helped a friend come up to speed with a dual screen GRT. We concluded that the hours needed to become proficient on that was FAR greater than the transition from a Cessna 172 to the RV. And before that I had a nice discussion with a friend at NTSB about the very matter from a safety perspective. I would say expect more attention to be paid to this over the next few years.

The person you reference makes the point for the need for specific training and awareness at a DEEPER level, I think

 

[Steve]

CAP

The Civil Air Patrol is replacing all the Cessna 182s with new G-1000 equipped models. Here's how we did pilot transition training:
Two highly experienced CFIIs were sent to the new Cessna factory in Independence, KS for a weeklong CFI school. They spent approx 30 hours in the classroom and 5 hours in the airplane before they took delivery and flew the plane home.
The CFIIs then prepared a training plan for the other transitioning mission pilots. We spent 8 hours in the classroom studying systems stuff and a minimum of 3 hours in the airplane preparing for our checkride. The one point stressed again and again was, "It flies like any other 182." True. That said, I still occasionally connect the GPU to the plane and "practice" on the G-1000.

Steve

 

[DGlaeser]

Garmin has a PC simulator

That said, I still occasionally connect the GPU to the plane and "practice" on the G-1000.
Steve

Garmin has a PC simulator (needs a fast PC and a good graphics card) that I used when I started instructing in a G1000 C172. (I also got certified by Cessna). The one I have only shows one screen at a time, the newest one shows both screens (I haven't sprung for it yet - $25).

 

[Steve]

more CAP training

In the CAP organization, it is not a requirement that the right seater also be a licensed pilot. I find it very helpful if he/she is pilot, especially with the new G-1000 equipped aircraft. Toward that end, we are developing another course designed for the mission observer / copilot.
The CAP planes are equipped with a second audio panel (GMA 1347) located to the right of the MFD in front of the mission observer (copilot). We also have a third comm radio (COM 3) for use with other emergency service organizations. Additionally, the audio output from our direction finding radio is routed to the audio panel (ADF). Some CAP aircraft are equipped with a satellite phone system. It's output also goes through the GMA.
None of these systems are simulated in any third party add-on product, hence the need for in-the-aircraft practice sessions. The observer can be kept very busy on a CAP mission.

Steve

 

[Bill Wightman]

Surviving information overload

I'm curious about everyone's thoughts regarding the FAA and the noise they're making about endorsements for Technically Advanced Aircraft (TAA).

WilliamD: I don't think you're off topic at all. We now have a tidal wave of new products to choose from, all of which have great propensity to divert our attention from the most important task, which is to simply FLY THE AIRPLANE. I've read others saying how great it is that we can have cockpits in our RV's that are leaps and bounds more advanced than those of the best "heavy glass" out there. Maybe - depends on what you think is really important to have in front of you for the flying you do.

There's an information overload trend in place now that isn't new just to GA. We've been through a big-time learning curve in the heavy jets ourselves with the transition from steam to glass. This technology has brought us a whole new class of cockpit/crew problems we call "automation error": where the EFIS and autoflight systems don't always do what we think we're telling them to do. The "what's it doing now" problem has been a direct result of increased cockpit automation and information complexity. Those of us here who fly the heavy glass know exactly what I'm talking about.

Not only do we deal with automation error, those EFIS systems we fly behind compete for our attention with increasingly more complex interfaces. More and more display formats, more menus, more button pushing, more information density to look at..... you can see where this could (and does) lead many pilots astray. With sufficient training and experience, a pilot can use these systems to his advantage even under stressful situations. But in my observation, it doesn't always help a low time or under trained pilot achieve a safer outcome in abnormal situations.

I really agree whole-heartedly with the need to take a careful look at what you want to do with your airplane, and equip it accordingly. But I think its really easy these days to load up on goodies - which makes a visually stunning panel - and then fall pray to all that complexity when the heat's on and you have limited time and limited attention to handle a high workload situation.

The heart of my message here is to simply take a serious look at what you're thinking of putting in front of your face as a pilot in a light airplane. Would the planned panel help or hinder your ability to handle problem scenarios like ATC reroutes, unexpected weather, fuel planning, or even your ability to interpret basic flight parameters on the PFD. Question how you'd handle these situations within the context of achieving a safe outcome to the flight.

The B777 I fly has a very straight forward EFIS and autoflight system. But it's also nearly bullet-proof. We don't have and don't need anything in front of us other than basic navigation and PFD information. The flight management computer takes care of alot of the interfacing. Its big, and easy to use. Honeywell and Boeing have done a great job in keeping all the up-front controls simple and not too complicated to operate. That simplicity is a great thing to have, let me tell you. And remember, there are two of us with alot of training up there to handle the system, and even then we get behind sometimes.

If this sounds like a warning, well I guess it is. If you're building or flying an airplane with alot of complexity in the panel, just be very careful where your attention is when things get busy. Cockpit electronics do not generate lift or thrust. The accident trend among what we're calling "TAA" aircraft is rising, and the FAA and insurers are taking note. I think the reason for much of it is right under our noses, literally.

 

[Canadian_JOY]

The whole concept of transitioning to TAA, or at least glass cockpits, brings up a very important topic that hasn't been addressed here yet, and should be. It follows in the same vein as Bill's comments above.

All that new glass is wonderful to look at, but it's still up to YOU to SEE & AVOID. I know this sounds obvious but I've almost been mid-aired twice by the same G-1000-equipped Diamond DA-40 operated by a local flight school. And I know why those near-misses happened. It's because both CFI and student were "heads down" looking at the glass in a VFR environment. While glass is wonderful, don't forget that going heads-down to look at it while VFR will kill you or somebody else.

Now you're wondering if I have any authority upon which to base these statements, other than the near-misses. The answer is yes, I have experience upon which to base my observations. My aircraft came to me with only the most basic VFR panel. Not wanting to find myself in a cloud without attitude reference, I opted to install a Dynon D-100, coupled to a moving-map GPS, along with new comm, xpdr, ics and engine instrumentation. Essentially, I had a new panel, backed up by all my old steam gauges.

Transitioning to this new EFIS-based cockpit was easy for me as I've spent a lot of time working in avionics development programs and have experience in a broad range of EFIS-equipped transport aircraft.

BUT I also found myself spending far too much time looking at all the pretty glass, and not enough time looking out the window. The imagery inside the cockpit is seductive, especially since many of us are perfectionists who want to fly the airplane with as much precision as our navigation systems will allow. It's very important if we're flying VFR to keep our eyes outside the cockpit, and despite the fancy glass installed below the glareshield, fly the airplane like a basic VFR airplane.

Sorry if I've gone on too long on this topic, but it scared the devil out of me to be THAT close to a DA40 that didn't even know I was there. I wouldn't want anybody else to get this same kind of heart-stopping side effect of glass cockpits.

 

[Louise Hose]

My first solo long x-c with TAA

Planning a cross-country flight when one has serious time constraints requires a lot of flexibility to stay safe, but that's what I faced this week. I needed to be in Oak Ridge, TN, for a meeting tomorrow morning. I had three options: 1. Commercial; 2. Driving about nine hours; 3 Flying the RV for 2-2.5 hours. Seemed like a no-brainer to me! But, the weather forecast was "iffy" all week so I banked hours at work and went to bed last night with essentially three plans. If weather looked good, I'd go into work for most the day and fly down in the late afternoon. If weather looked like it did last night, I'd head out early and try to beat it to Knoxville. If I didn't make Knoxville, I would set down at Johnson City, rent a car, and drive the last bit. If weather looked worse, I'd pack up the 4-Runner and start the long drive.

At 4:15, I woke up and wondered about the weather. A review of Weathermeister and the maps here at VAF showed that the unsettled weather had moved a little faster than expected last night. If I got to Knoxville in mid-morning, I had an excellent shot of getting in. Mid-day, and the odds went progressively down. I headed out in the car at 5:30 am for the long slough south, out of the D.C. area. A last minute check of Weathermeister and a phone message left for Paul, I lifted off at 7:00 am.

Paul and others wrote extensively a month ago comparing the GRT and Dynon units. Like Paul, I recognize that you get more with the more expensive GRTs and some folks find value there. But, I have only a fraction of Paul's (and many other contributors to these forums) flight hours and skills. I'm really pleased with the system I choose and can't see anything more that I would want! This flight was my first significant cross-country in the plane, at least solo, and I felt entirely comfortable with all the new instrumentation. I'm just amazed how the two Dynons, the Garmin 396, and the ADI Pilot II talk to each other. Here are the things I most appreciated about the new panel on this flight:

The fuel flow allows me to tweak things far more precise than I was doing before. I'm saving a lot of fuel. That's good and pays for some of the equipment costs!

I found using the autopilot for the entire trip rather boring. I had well over 500 hours of x-c hand-flying before getting it and, frankly, enjoy hand-flying more. But, the weather situation made efficiency a compelling need and I'm sure that using the autopilot saved me time and fuel (and money!).

I'm not having any problem moving to the glass and only occasionally scanning the analog gauges. But, since I've had several failures with the electrical instruments in my panel in the past (before the recent upgrade), I find comfort in knowing that I have an IFR competent plane for an emergency if both EFISs, the ADI, and the 396 all failed. (I'm not yet flying the plane IFR, however.)

I've had it a year, but this trip again reinforced the immense value of having XM weather (lite, in my case) in the cockpit. I monitored the weather for the entire flight down. There was a line of light to moderate precipitation (with predictions of T-storms) only about 15 miles west of my destination when I took off. With the 396/XM, I was able to watch the storm line the entire flight. I was able to check the METARS ahead as well as watch the animated weather. And, I have to admit, using the autopilot allowed me to watch the weather, review my options, and strategize my alternatives in a much more relaxed manner than my earlier flying. This flight, which would have been highly nerve-wracking to me in two years ago, was relaxed and pleasant.

I LOVE MY NEW PANEL!!!

So, now I'm sitting in the Knoxville Downtown Island airport, waiting to hear whether Paul will find his way through the weather to join me this weekend. He has the GRTs and is prepared to go IFR. But, even those advantages don't necessarily mean he will be able to get over here. In the end, the weather will win. If the weather to the west doesn't want him to make it over here, I'm secure in knowing that he will recognize it and not push through.

 

[Ironflight]

I made it too!

I was very glad that Louise was flying with the advantages of XM weather and an autopilot this morning, as she really was racing the weather a bit to make it to her destination. I really didn't think I was going to make it myself, but with careful timing and a little weather luck, I slid in to Knoxville late in the afternoon. Advanced tools such as XM weather, GPS, and terrain mapping (that I have on the GRT) definitely give you the information that you need to make better, safer decisions - including the decision to quit and turn around.

The safe pilot will always realize that no matter how advanced the cockpit equipment, nothing can substitute for good judgment, constant vigilance, and the courage to say "nope, I'm not going to get there today!" when you have to.

Paul