Is it a habit we prefer mechnical instruments?

We used to mechanical instruments when we learnt fly in school. Whether
it is habit we can not accept digital meters. For example quartz
crystal watch, we almost accept it now. There few people using
mechanical watch. I think it is developing direction for digital
meters.
I just wondered which kinds of digital meters, electric analog or
numeric meter, do pilot can accept. Or we can accept an electric analog
meter with digital number in it?

wrote:
We used to mechanical instruments when we learnt fly in school. Whether
it is habit we can not accept digital meters. For example quartz
crystal watch, we almost accept it now. There few people using
mechanical watch. I think it is developing direction for digital
meters.
I just wondered which kinds of digital meters, electric analog or
numeric meter, do pilot can accept. Or we can accept an electric analog
meter with digital number in it?


Personally, I'd go for an analog display digital.

It's a question of how easy it is to read, interpret and understand the
information that the meter is displaying

Raw numbers takes more time and thought.

Can you imagine trying to fly needle, ball, and airspeed with
numeric readouts?


Richard

Same deal with a VOM.... For a static voltage reading a digital VOM is
nice...
But for tuning a circuit, where you are twisting some pot, etc. and
watching the reading change, the moving analog needle is the preferred
meter... The human brain is very good at seeing something move and
predicting where it will be an instant from now... Same skill as your
dog catching a frisbee, or throwing a football ahead of a running
receiver...
Even if the electronics are digital, the display should be some form of
moving 'needle' so the monkey brain behind the yoke can anticipate how
much correction to crank in to make the 'needles' slide back to
center...

denny

Thank you Mr. Richard, Denny.
Please not be sick of my more questions.
From your opinion, you like "needle" meters. I want to know why most of
digital manufacturers made numeric readouts. I think they have
investigated markets, and then they done these kinds of products. Since
I browsed aircraftspure catalogues. I found numeric readout digital
meters stand in front of selling catalogue. I guessed there are a lot
of people buy and use them. Maybe I am wrong.

Luo

On 16 Apr 2006 23:44:47 -0700, wrote:

We used to mechanical instruments when we learnt fly in school. Whether
it is habit we can not accept digital meters. For example quartz
crystal watch, we almost accept it now. There few people using
mechanical watch. I think it is developing direction for digital
meters.
I just wondered which kinds of digital meters, electric analog or
numeric meter, do pilot can accept. Or we can accept an electric analog
meter with digital number in it?

just as a bum pilot I prefer mechanical needle instrument displays
rather than digital numeric displays.

when the value is changing rapidly the numeric display can be
impossible to read while the needle display can always be read.

when the value is not stable the numeric display has the least
significant digit in constant change which can be needlessly
distracting.

the colour arc behind the needle can tell me instantly whether the
value is within an acceptable range.

I'm not against digital displays at all but I prefer the dual analog
and digital displays so that I can quickly glance at a value under all
situations. if it is stable I would probably use the digits. if it is
in motion I would use the analog needle/bar graph display.

remember as well that in real world aviation environments the
instruments get cold enough at altitude to get condensation everywhere
and in our summers will need to keep working in 45 degree celcius
heat. it isnt good enough to just make instruments, you have to make
instruments that will keep on working in all situations or you may
kill people. kill people and your markets will evaporate overnight.

btw it would be really nice to see the chinese focus on quality!!!!
it is really frustrating to see our industries move to china then to
see the inexorable drop in quality in the subsequent products.
it would also be nice to see china contribute to the development of
new technology rather than the continual debasement of well
established levels of quality.
I have used a chinese made 25mm micrometer now for 15 years which is
superbly made and proves that china can produce quality goods.
unfortunetely flip over the myriad number of broken items these days
and you will see "made in china" on the bottom. this has to change!

in aviation, junk that malfunctions is totally unacceptable.

Stealth Pilot
an australian pilot.

wrote:
I just wondered which kinds of digital meters, electric analog or
numeric meter, do pilot can accept. Or we can accept an electric analog
meter with digital number in it?

Several responders have pointed out the superior visual cue that an
analog meter makes over a digital read-out, which I completely agree
with.

However, I do think that glass cockpits are not used enough. As an
electrical/software engineer, I know that it is possible to pack every
function of every glass cockpit ever created into one computer costing
less than $1000US, but no one has done this yes. I think the reason has
more to do with knowledge domain than anything else.

The cost savings of having a commoditized machine control and monitor
your plane would simply be enormous. The reduction in weight alone
from eliminating the mechanical controls would be worth the change.
But of course, there are so many more things that you can do with
software that you simply can't do with mechanical controls. I saw a
show recently where stealth pilots were acknowledging this fact, as if
it were not obvious that computer can do things that a human simply
cannot.

I'm waiting for the day when someone gets rid of all these mechanical
controls and run every thing with disposable, off-the-shelf, sensors
and controls that connect to a (fail-safed) CPU that controls every
thing, with 500GB of songs and videos on board, measurements of all
kinds, 3-D render of atmosphere, maps, climate control, lighting,
auto-pilot, software radios, monitoring systems (to make sure I'm
awake), web cam, whatever...

It's not like the eqipment to do this today does not already exist.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote

As an
electrical/software engineer, I know that it is possible to pack every
function of every glass cockpit ever created into one computer costing
less than $1000US, but no one has done this yes.

If you can do that, you will sell tremendous numbers of them.

Many glass cockpit systems put the readouts in such a way that they are a
tape, or some other means to display the information, without just numbers,
in a visual pointer, or graph. That will be important, to get good
acceptance.

Price is still the key. Make a glass cockpit that people can afford, sell
it to experimental plane owners, the get it certified for the certified
airplanes.
--
Jim in NC

"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
I just wondered which kinds of digital meters, electric analog or
numeric meter, do pilot can accept. Or we can accept an electric analog
meter with digital number in it?

Several responders have pointed out the superior visual cue that an
analog meter makes over a digital read-out, which I completely agree
with.

However, I do think that glass cockpits are not used enough. As an
electrical/software engineer, I know that it is possible to pack every
function of every glass cockpit ever created into one computer costing
less than $1000US, but no one has done this yes. I think the reason has
more to do with knowledge domain than anything else.

The cost savings of having a commoditized machine control and monitor
your plane would simply be enormous. The reduction in weight alone
from eliminating the mechanical controls would be worth the change.
But of course, there are so many more things that you can do with
software that you simply can't do with mechanical controls. I saw a
show recently where stealth pilots were acknowledging this fact, as if
it were not obvious that computer can do things that a human simply
cannot.

I'm waiting for the day when someone gets rid of all these mechanical
controls and run every thing with disposable, off-the-shelf, sensors
and controls that connect to a (fail-safed) CPU that controls every
thing, with 500GB of songs and videos on board, measurements of all
kinds, 3-D render of atmosphere, maps, climate control, lighting,
auto-pilot, software radios, monitoring systems (to make sure I'm
awake), web cam, whatever...

It's not like the eqipment to do this today does not already exist.

-Le Chaud Lapin-


You want to give up the stick and rudder to the CPU too? I think I'd like
to hang on to that. Everything else might be ok except I'd like some analog
redundancy.

jls wrote:
You want to give up the stick and rudder to the CPU too? I think I'd like
to hang on to that. Everything else might be ok except I'd like some analog
redundancy.

Hmm...I've thought about the stick and rudder problem quite a bit, and
the irrational part of me says keep the mechanics, but the rational
part of me says that electronics will do the job. If the system is
designed correctly, it will operate correctly, even when it's broken.

I'd probably design system with so much redundancy that, if you crashed
as result of fault, God probably wanted you to crash anyway.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

In article .com,
"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote:

jls wrote:
You want to give up the stick and rudder to the CPU too? I think I'd like
to hang on to that. Everything else might be ok except I'd like some analog
redundancy.

Hmm...I've thought about the stick and rudder problem quite a bit, and
the irrational part of me says keep the mechanics, but the rational
part of me says that electronics will do the job. If the system is
designed correctly, it will operate correctly, even when it's broken.

I'd probably design system with so much redundancy that, if you crashed
as result of fault, God probably wanted you to crash anyway.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

The first word in the name of this particular newsgroup is
*recreational.* We like to FLY. Flying involves considerably more than
being above the surface of the earth, moving from one place to another,
and looking out the window. Autopilots are for airliners. Go ahead and
give me a glass cockpit with ANALOG displays, but make sure I have to
tap on the simulated faceplates covering the simulated needles once in a
while to keep them moving. And leave the damn stick alone, you pesky
meddling heretic. (Insert emoticon representing friendly warning snarl
here.)