I have never (yet) flown in a GA airplane with a flat panel PFD/MFD.
I'll bet many in this forum have not either - but we all will very soon,
because the proliferation of such systems has far outpaced even the most
optimistic anticipations of only a short time ago. It has also outpaced the
tradition accrual of collective experience, with the gradual adoption of newer
technology. While the overall improvement in situational awareness with such
systems appears incontestable, I wonder if anyone is concerned about a risk of
degraded scan technique while staring at a single flat panel for most of our
information. Isn't there a risk of a "glassy-eyed" stare - particularly when
we're a bit tired - slowing or degrading the learned uptake and processing of
information?

G Faris

> I have never (yet) flown in a GA airplane with a flat panel PFD/MFD.
> I'll bet many in this forum have not either - but we all will very soon,
> because the proliferation of such systems has far outpaced even the most
> optimistic anticipations of only a short time ago. It has also outpaced
the
> tradition accrual of collective experience, with the gradual adoption of
newer
> technology. While the overall improvement in situational awareness with
such
> systems appears incontestable, I wonder if anyone is concerned about a
risk of
> degraded scan technique while staring at a single flat panel for most of
our
> information. Isn't there a risk of a "glassy-eyed" stare - particularly
when
> we're a bit tired - slowing or degrading the learned uptake and processing
of
> information?

No, not at all. You still have to move your eyes around, and you'll want to
look at your MFD too.

"G Farris" > wrote in message
...

> I have never (yet) flown in a GA airplane with a flat panel PFD/MFD.
> I'll bet many in this forum have not either - but we all will very soon,
> because the proliferation of such systems has far outpaced even the most
> optimistic anticipations of only a short time ago.

LOL... I wish! I'd kill to just be able to afford an HSI or autopilot for my
C-172.

What I really want to know is how long it will take some kid at Embry-Riddle
in ten years who does ab-initio in a glass-panel plane to get comfortable
flying a 1965 Bonanza with a steam gauge panel.

Until someone starts STCing a glas-panel retrofit for existing airplanes,
we'll be seeing plenty of round dials for years and years to come. And given
how much that would likely cost, it may very well never happen except at the
very high money-no-object end of the market.

Here's a fun little troll... assuming you've already got a GNS-530, GPSS
autopilot, etc., how much benefit does a PFD really add? It is better, I'm
not arguing that, but the cost of entry is $100,000 or more since you
basically need to buy a new plane to get one, versus an equally-capable used
plane without one.

Best,
-cwk.

Just had a discussion with an instructor in the flying club I belong to
about this. He has a pilot he is working with that picked up a C182T in
August. The problem he is seeing is the lack of outside scan in VFR
flight. The pilot's head is down and locked inside the cockpit, focused
on the displays.

G Farris wrote:
> I have never (yet) flown in a GA airplane with a flat panel PFD/MFD.
> I'll bet many in this forum have not either - but we all will very soon,
> because the proliferation of such systems has far outpaced even the most
> optimistic anticipations of only a short time ago. It has also outpaced the
> tradition accrual of collective experience, with the gradual adoption of newer
> technology. While the overall improvement in situational awareness with such
> systems appears incontestable, I wonder if anyone is concerned about a risk of
> degraded scan technique while staring at a single flat panel for most of our
> information. Isn't there a risk of a "glassy-eyed" stare - particularly when
> we're a bit tired - slowing or degrading the learned uptake and processing of
> information?

G,

> slowing or degrading the learned uptake and processing of
> information?
>

Keep in mind how much more cryptic the presentation of information is
on a traditional panel as compared to a PFD.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> G,
>
> > slowing or degrading the learned uptake and processing of
> > information?
> >
>
> Keep in mind how much more cryptic the presentation of information is
> on a traditional panel as compared to a PFD.
>
Cryptic? I'd say it's more focused on a PFD and requires less vertical and
horizontal scanning, but cryptic?

john smith ) wrote:

> The problem he is seeing is the lack of outside scan in VFR
> flight. The pilot's head is down and locked inside the cockpit, focused
> on the displays.

There is some pretty interesting information presented there, I'll
admit, but I suppose it won't be any good after a mid-air accident.

--
Peter