Your thoughts on Garmin?

[Staiduk]

Yo folks. I recently had the opportunity to climb into a nice shiny new C-206 and compare notes with the ship's pilot. (OK, ok, I know - it's a jeep. I like it anyway. So there. )

I was more than a little surprised - and not a bit disappointed - to see the beast's large instrument panel almost empty - with a Garmin 1000 system in place of the old analog.

Ick.

OK, I know many of the arguments for glass cockpits - ease of use, instrument weight, etc. I just don't like them. At all. I find the G-1000 bewildering, not intuitive at all, unneccesarily complex. Admittedly, I've never taken the opportunity to learn the system - I just prefer analog systems.

Perhaps the thing that really drives me nuts about the G-1000 though is how the whole aviation world seems to be jumping on the Garmin bandwagon. You can't open a single magazine or flyer without seeing G-1000 ads all over the place. Flight schools proudly blare 'G-1000 equipped!'. Every airgraft reviewed in Flying, Plane & Pilot, Canadian Aviation etc. are G-1000 equipped. You can't get away from the bloody thing.

I dunno - I know it's a superb system with many good qualities, but I can't help having an itchy feeling about the G-1000. It's nothing I can really put my finger on; perhaps it's just my own preference for the 6-pack. But well... You know the current discussion going on in the Flight School forum about high-wing vs. low-wing trainers? (I'm high-wing taildragger partial myself )  OK then - what is going to be the concequences of a new generation of pilots who take their initial training in glass cockpits? I am certain of one thing - tranferring from an analog aircraft to a glass one would be far easier than going the other way. I also have an unshaking feeling that adding yet another labour-saving device - the G-1000 - into a new pilot's initial training will make it easier for them to learn to fly. A good thing, right? No way - learning should be hard, IMO. A student should have to work to learn the skills and material - effort determines value, in my opinion.

Sorry this is rambling - too much coffee again. I'd like to hear your thoughts. To sum up mine; I think the G-1000's fine for experienced commercial/privare flying; for pilots who have good analog skills. I think it should NOT be used by inexperienced pilots and especially by students and for me personally, I just don't like looking at the G-1000 display. Your thoughts?

Cheers!

[DaveSims]

I think the big thing about the glass cockpits is taking the time to learn the system.  Best thing to do is sit down with someone proficient in the system and slowly learn it, before trying to fly.  I believe when used as they are designed to, these systems can be an excellent resource.  The one issue I have with it are students who learn to fly instruments in a glass cockpit aircraft.  I honestly think they should not be allowed to fly instruments on analog gauges without additional instruciton.

[specter177]

Personally, I'm a huge Garmin fan. The 496 I have is the best hand held GPS I've ever seen. I am also a analog, high-wing, tail dragger kind of guy, but that is what I learned on. If I learned the 1000, I would probably love it.

[DaveSims]

Personally, I'm a huge Garmin fan. The 496 I have is the est hand held GPS I've ever seen. I am also a analog, high-wing, tail dragger kind of guy, but that is what I learned on. If I learned the 1000, I would probably love it.

The 396/496 series Garmins with the XM weather should be required equipment in my opinion.  Once you fly with it, you can't live without it.  I have many friends that won't leave the traffic pattern without one.  I know many corporate guys who claim to have saved enough on fuel alone to pay for the GPS because of the winds aloft information available on the Garmin.  It is way more accurate than the FSS has.

[Brett_Henderson]

My take is...  If you fly VFR, it's over-kill.. and if you fly IFR, it's too many eggs in one basket, for small GA aircraft.

I don't like the G1000.

[olderndirt]

The whole idea of LEARNING to FLY is just that - learning to FLY.

[Fozzer]

...I worry when the Fuse blows, and all the lights go out, on the Garmin 1000, (Glass Cockpits).... ...!

I love little, round, Altimeters, Air Speed Indicators, etc...etc...

...especially when all the Fuses Blow!... ...!

Paul...I like the "6-Pack" idea!... ... ...!

[-Crossfire-]

Flight schools should not have G1000-equipped planes.  Learn to fly with anologues is what I say.  Having a G1000 in a sim would be good, do some sim time and learn how a fully integrated glass cockpit works.  I did my multi-IFR with a 530W, and it was awesome, but we only used it half the time.

[justalilrandom]

I've just learned to fly on Cessna 172S aircraft with the G1000 cockpit, I've flown a series of analogue aircraft before and I agree that students should learn to use analogue but using glass cockpits as well isn't bad.

We do some work with analogue sims but unlike most of my classmates, I fly as part of school, only myself and another student have any real experience on gauges. The thing is basic flying is done outside of the cockpit so glass cockpits aren't that much of a problem really... If you do get too dependent on the instruments the instructors turn the screens off and you can reference off the back up gauges...

More and more aircraft are becoming glass cockpit models and seeing as the school I use trains QANTAS pilots and other airline pilots it makes sense that they use glass cockpits so they can lead straight on to whatever they are flying.

The flight school is Oxford Aviation Academy, I fly at the Australian school, so they have some idea of what they are doing. Before the school was bought by OAA it was quite a successful school, hence Oxford deciding to buy it, and used the G 1000 aircraft before the buy out. The original school has been around since the 1960s so they really know what they are doing and have decided that it isn't detrimental to have glass cockpits, you don't win QANTAS and other airline contracts for nothing...

[BSW727]

I really think you're on to something there.

Flight schools are upgrading or buying new aircraft with glass to attract a larger percentage of prospective future airline candidates.

The new pilots or students are all thinking of the 'wow' factor and the schools are reeling them in like fish from a barrel. Granted, maintenance costs and recurring certification will probably cost much less over the long run, but what happens when the lights go out in IMC?

Never been too impressed with it myself having leaned with round steam guages and HSI's. That's why I fly a 727 in the sim.

[beaky]

Some things that should be done, for at least brief periods, on every training flight:

VFR flight, no GPS: the instruments-all of them- should be covered.And all the distracting blinky things, switches and dials on the panel. In VMC, all the info you need about your position in space, speed and attitude is outside the airplane.
Best thing any of my CFIs ever did for me was to just unfold a sectional and completely cover the panel. Did wonders for my flying.

[DaveSims]

The problem I've seen with doing basic training in a glass cockpit environment, too much of the required time is taken up learning to push the buttons and not learning basic airmanship.  If you are around airports enough (as I am), you will see the results of this.  You will see pilots make mistakes that even a solo pilot should know better (eg. taking off with a 15 kt quartering tailwind!)  I would be willing to bet that is part of the reason behind Cirrus's higher than normal crash record, people are not learning proper flying techniques, and are getting too dependent on the "screen".

[beaky]

[quote]The problem I've seen with doing basic training in a glass cockpit environment, too much of the required time is taken up learning to push the buttons and not learning basic airmanship.

[SubZer0]

I haven't been up on my first flight yet, but when I do, I hope to God that I won't be learning with a G-1000 system, but with the old-fashioned gauges instead.

I agree with Brett that the G-1000 and similar systems are just too much for good ol' VFR flight.

Flying is flying an aircraft, now following a screen.

[Jersey Flyer]

I have a perfect story to go along with this thread:


So i just started flying this September, (I'm 17) and I'm flying Cessna 172SP's / G1000 equipped and I'm currently working on my private. (I've accumulated only 8hrs.) For my first for lessons, I flew with a certain instructor and I told them that my main goal was to become a commercial airline pilot. After the first few lessons, I seemed comfortable with the G1000, and my instructor had me put on "Foggles"; which made everything blury except the panel infront of me. I must of flew for about 30 minutes with these on (With my instructor navigating and watching out for traffic ofcourse) and I felt that I would have to get used to having these 2 huge panels with all my indicators and bells and whistles. Turns out that I had to change instructors for what ever reason, and I've flown with them twice. The thing is, both times my instructor made it very clear that I wasn't focusing enough on my outside surroundings because I was too focused on the G1000. As I tried to become more aware of my surroundings, I found it rather difficult to NOT look at the G1000 as its prescense is hard to not notice. My instructor specifically told me from now on, we are dimming the brightness of the G1000 so It is dark enough to the point where I cant see it untill I become accostomed to flying using my surroundings. I wonder if I would have this same problem if I were flying in a regular gauge panel rather than glass.