Glass big learning curve?

[[email protected]]

Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
cockpit.
In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
$200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
sat
in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
because
my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
that I could fly behind that panel today.

Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
-Sammy J.

[Jose]

> Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.

The hardest part, at least with the Garmins and the glass I've flown, is
undoing an error. Mostly, you can't back up. You end up in an
unfamiliar place, and have to re-dial everything in again.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Vaughn Simon]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?

Not directly, but the place I fly has several glass rentals and those
planes seem to stay busy. All of their new planes for the last two or three
years have been glass, and they wouldn't be adding them to the flight line if
folks weren't renting them. For insurance and hourly cost reasons I don't fly
them, but I believe the transition involves an evening or two of "glass" ground
school and a couple hours in the air with an instructor. Perhaps a bit more
instruction would be in order if you were planning some hard IFR.

I just don't understand why folks fly away in $250,000 rentals when you
can't generally buy over $100,000 renter's insurance. I fly cheap planes, and
they don't have glass except for the round bits over the steam guages.

Vaughn

[C J Campbell]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:39:37 -0800, wrote
(in article om>):


> my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
> display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
> before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
> time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
> Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
> based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
> wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?

Of course you could have flown it that day. The whole point of a glass panel
is to make flying easier, not harder.

I flew some of the first Cessnas with the G1000 panel. It was cool.

The thing is, the 10 hours of training are not to teach you how to use it.
The ten hours of training is to teach you to become so familiar with it that
you stop hunting around for settings and menus and whatnot. Really, the CFI
is there to show you the basic operation, answer questions, set up possible
scenarios, teach emergency procedures, and keep a lookout for other traffic
while you get to experiment. The idea is to get you past the point where the
new avionics are a barrier to what you want to do to where they are actually
helpful.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[BT]

it does not take 15 or even 10 hours in the air.
Do the ground School first, get the Garmin $6 CD that you can put on your
computer.
Get Max Trescott's book (and I see now he has a training CD based on his
book).

Do the ground school. Learn the pages, Learn what is where.
If you are familiar with a Garmin 430/530 you are half way there.

Learn the failure and back up modes, know this from the computer before you
even step to the airplane.

Most FBOs are able to run the G1000 package with ground power back up and
not running the engine at a much reduced rate, with two pilots in the seats
and the CFI standing in the door.

BT

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
> cockpit.
> In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
> meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
> close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
> transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
> $200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
> sat
> in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
> could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
> things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
> problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
> because
> my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
> display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
> before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
> time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
> Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
> based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
> wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
> -Sammy J.
>

[Doug[_1_]]

Using the altimeter in the glass cockpit is a new skill for holding
altitude in IMC or under the hood. The rest of the guages seemed to go
quickly, but they all took some getting used to.

To really KNOW that complicated panel (I mean every function and all
the idiosyncracies) would take several hundred hours. To just fly it
VFR all you need to learn new is how to tune the radios.

[GeorgeC[_2_]]

Gramin has a Simulator for the G1000. The cost is about $10.00 for a DVD.
Warning, be sure to check the hardware requirement before you buy. Some of the
pilots could not get it to work on they old computers.
http://www.garmin.com/products/g1000/

Abacus had a Civil Air Patrol add-on for FS2004 and FSX. It has a Cessna 182
(steam gages or G1000) and Maule MT-260. It also Features "A Custom Mission
Builder" which you can make your own SAR. You can fly as either as a mission
pilot or as a scanner. The add-on cost about $30.00 plus SH. If you are a CAP
member you get a discount.
http:/abacuspub.com/catalog/s644.htm

I had a problem with the C182. There is no manifold pressure gage in FDX. In
FS2004 there is a manifold pressure gage.

On 15 Feb 2007 15:39:37 -0800, wrote:

>Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
>cockpit.
>In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
>meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
>close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
>transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
>$200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
>sat
>in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
>could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
>things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
>problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
>because
>my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
>display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
>before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
>time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
>Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
>based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
>wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
>that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
>Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
>-Sammy J.

GeorgeC

[Peter Dohm]

> Using the altimeter in the glass cockpit is a new skill for holding
> altitude in IMC or under the hood. The rest of the guages seemed to go
> quickly, but they all took some getting used to.
>
> To really KNOW that complicated panel (I mean every function and all
> the idiosyncracies) would take several hundred hours. To just fly it
> VFR all you need to learn new is how to tune the radios.
>
I don't currently fly, haven't in a long time, and was a student when I did;
so I had started to wonder whether it was just me, or whether others also
found the altimeters in the some of the glass panels to be non-intuitive.

I really thought that the airspeed indicators were non-intuitive as well,
but that seemed far less problematic--at least for VMC.

At the moment, I can't quite decide whether the fact that it is not-just-me
is better or worse. However, I can't quite get used to the idea that the
numbers move, instead of the needles, and that the result seems to require
the user/pilot to interpret the data a digital instead of analog.

Peter
Just my $0.02

[Hamish Reid]

In article om>,
wrote:

> Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
> cockpit.
> In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
> meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
> close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
> transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
> $200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
> sat
> in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
> could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
> things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
> problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
> because
> my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
> display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
> before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
> time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
> Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
> based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
> wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
> -Sammy J.
>

I'm a relatively old geezer and I had no trouble at all with getting
signed off at our club for the G1000 C172 after about an hour's flying
for VFR (ok, the bloody fam sheet / test thing paperwork that had to be
filled out before signoff took forever, but that's just looking things
up in the POH and trying not to die of boredom while doing so...).

IFR was a bit longer, but only because you really want to be damn sure
you know at least the basics of how to reset the GPS and start again
(urgh! don't get me started...), and because, well, it's IFR and you
want to be familliar with at least the basics (partial panel is
interesting on a G1000 172). As others have commented the vertical tape
airspeed and altimeter displays can be a little unfamiliar at first, but
really, 10 hours seems an awful long time to transition even for IFR
and a 182, especially if you already have Garmin GPS 430 or 530
experience.

Hamish

[Jose]

> I don't currently fly, haven't in a long time, and was a student when I did;
> so I had started to wonder whether it was just me, or whether others also
> found the altimeters in the some of the glass panels to be non-intuitive.
>
> I really thought that the airspeed indicators were non-intuitive as well,
> but that seemed far less problematic--at least for VMC.

I've flown glass once, and I found the gauges to be non-intuitive and
hard to use. For one thing, they are of different sizes, so one can't
at a glance see what fraction of "full" you are at, like you can with a
round airspeed gauge. I much prefer a round gauge.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Thomas Borchert]

> (not the same PDF/MFD but
> close).
>

Well, not really, according to what most people write. They say the
Avidyne is easier since the 430 is extra. The G1000 is much more
integrated and thus more complex.

That said, IMHO two points are worth considering:

1. As you noted, there's a vast difference between flying VFR and hard
IFR with these things.
2. IMHO there is a big difference in how prepared pilots arrive for
learning a new aircraft or system. FBOs would probably adapt their
requirements to the lowest end of the spectrum.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Robert M. Gary]

On Feb 15, 3:39 pm, wrote:
> Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
> cockpit.
> In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
> meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
> close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
> transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
> $200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
> sat
> in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
> could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
> things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
> problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
> because
> my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
> display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
> before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
> time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
> Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
> based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
> wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
> -Sammy J.

I'm a CAP TAA Check Pilot. The G1000 is not that hard for some, for
others its more difficult. Your instructor will take you through the
FITS training program that CAP requires. It can be done in as little
as 3 hours if you are already 182 current. You will get a new form 5.
The first hour is VFR, second is IFR, third is emergency (partial
panel approaches, etc).
So far, most pilots are not able to complete the IFR piece to F5
standards, so we've been signing a lot of IFR pilots off as "VFR only"
on their Form 5's. However, most are able to come back and get the IFR
later after some time in the aircraft.
The C17 rate for our G1000 182 is $50/hr dry.

-Robert, CFII

[Robert M. Gary]

On Feb 15, 3:39 pm, wrote:
> Our CAP unit is going to be receiving a new C-182 with a glass
> cockpit.
> In order to give us a taste of it a Cirrus owner came to our CAP
> meeting and showed us his wonderful aircraft (not the same PDF/MFD but
> close). I've heard from many sources that it takes about 10 hours to
> transition. In fact a local FBO has a brand new C-182 (rents for about
> $200/hr) and requires 15 hours. Although I didn't fly the Cirrus, I
> sat
> in the aircraft while the owner spoke with someone else. He said we
> could push any buttons we wanted to. So, I tried to think of all the
> things I could normally do on an IFR flight. Amazingly, I had no
> problems with any of the operations. The display is easy for me
> because
> my generation grew up flying flight simulators that use the exact same
> display. The only hard part is figuring out the 430s (which I've done
> before). So, I'm wondering if all this talk about a long transition
> time is mostly for the generation that didn't grow up with computers.
> Just thinking about the time it takes some people (not necessarily
> based on age) to get familiar with their computer vs. others, I'm
> wondering if its the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naive but I felt
> that I could fly behind that panel today.
>
> Has anyone on this list had experience with such a transition?
> -Sammy J.

BTW: The G1000 is much nicer than the Avidine system the Cirrus uses.
The G1000 is a fully integrated system, the Avidine has no nav, so you
still have a couple 430's in the panel. The CAP G1000 is slightly
unique in that it uses two audio panels so that all 3 crew members can
transmit on different freq (com#1, com#2, mission radio).
We found a bug in ours in that every so often the system powers up in
the pilot-iso mode so your pax can't hear you. We think it may be
related to our unique dual-audio panel set up.

-Robert, CFII

[boB[_2_]]

Hamish Reid wrote:

>
> I'm a relatively old geezer and I had no trouble at all with getting
> signed off at our club for the G1000 C172 after about an hour's flying
> for VFR (ok, the bloody fam sheet / test thing paperwork that had to be
> filled out before signoff took forever, but that's just looking things
> up in the POH and trying not to die of boredom while doing so...).
>
> IFR was a bit longer, but only because you really want to be damn sure
> you know at least the basics of how to reset the GPS and start again
> (urgh! don't get me started...), and because, well, it's IFR and you
> want to be familliar with at least the basics (partial panel is
> interesting on a G1000 172). As others have commented the vertical tape
> airspeed and altimeter displays can be a little unfamiliar at first, but
> really, 10 hours seems an awful long time to transition even for IFR
> and a 182, especially if you already have Garmin GPS 430 or 530
> experience.
>
> Hamish


A suggestion.... Flight Simulator X has aircraft with glass panels. You
don't have to buy anything. Download the Demo 2 FSX file and fire up
the Baron. I'm fairly sure the Baron is in the demo. But if not, no
problem,go to avsim.com and search for "g1000 and download the FSX
aircraft that show up. Picture below

Hamish, it would be great if you were to look at it. You would know
right away if it's worth fooling with. There's a few others here that
I'm sure can do the same, I just don't have their names handy.

Her are the panels
http://xs412.xs.to/xs412/07070/glass-g1000.jpg

--

boB
copter.six


U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
Central Texas
5NM West of Gray Army/Killeen Regional (KGRK)

[Hamish Reid]

In article >,
boB > wrote:

> Hamish Reid wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm a relatively old geezer and I had no trouble at all with getting
> > signed off at our club for the G1000 C172 after about an hour's flying
> > for VFR (ok, the bloody fam sheet / test thing paperwork that had to be
> > filled out before signoff took forever, but that's just looking things
> > up in the POH and trying not to die of boredom while doing so...).
> >
> > IFR was a bit longer, but only because you really want to be damn sure
> > you know at least the basics of how to reset the GPS and start again
> > (urgh! don't get me started...), and because, well, it's IFR and you
> > want to be familliar with at least the basics (partial panel is
> > interesting on a G1000 172). As others have commented the vertical tape
> > airspeed and altimeter displays can be a little unfamiliar at first, but
> > really, 10 hours seems an awful long time to transition even for IFR
> > and a 182, especially if you already have Garmin GPS 430 or 530
> > experience.
> >
> > Hamish
>
>
> A suggestion.... Flight Simulator X has aircraft with glass panels. You
> don't have to buy anything. Download the Demo 2 FSX file and fire up
> the Baron. I'm fairly sure the Baron is in the demo. But if not, no
> problem,go to avsim.com and search for "g1000 and download the FSX
> aircraft that show up. Picture below
>
> Hamish, it would be great if you were to look at it. You would know
> right away if it's worth fooling with. There's a few others here that
> I'm sure can do the same, I just don't have their names handy.
>
> Her are the panels
> http://xs412.xs.to/xs412/07070/glass-g1000.jpg

Looks good from here... I'll probably give it a (metaphorical) spin
sometime this week when I get the time (I'm on the verge of getting FSX
for real anyway). Looks like ASA's On Top 9 now has a G1000-like (not
sure what thay means...) simulation for the 182 too.

I sometimes find Garmin's own G1000 simulator to be pretty good for
reminding me what all the various soft keys and associated modes do, but
I didn't actually use it when getting checked out, and it's not a real
sim, of course...

Hamish