![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Okay, I've been watching the transition to glass cockpits
in GA aircraft. Clearly, the cost savings and simplification that comes from integration is neat, and the reliability of an all-electrical system is (probably) going to mean more safety for all of us. But one thing bugs me -- the tapes. I can't for the life of me figure out what all the manufacturers have opted to provide flight information in these electronic tape formats. Has this been proven to be more effective, more ergonomic, easier to interpret, etc? Many man-centuries of effort has been expended in the research of flight instrument presentation, and I won't pretend to be an expert in all of it, but I do have some knowledge and experience in the area. No its not conclusively better, but does has some advantages and disadvantages. Your instrument scan is smaller with tapes, but its harder to see trend movement. My impression is that it is just the opposite, and I thought that there was some research out there to back me up -- that seeing the position of a needle, or in the case of a straight- and-level flight or any stabilized maneuver, noticing movement of a needle seems a lot easier to me than reading a tape, understanding the number it displays, and thinking about whether that number is the same as the last time you looked at it, etc. Yes, but years of flying with tapes in business jet, regional, and air transport should tell you something too. It's an acceptable way to present the information, and the pilot can be trained to effectively use it. I don't think it's a huge problem of course; it's totally reasonable that a pilot will remember his altitude from one moment to the next, but I do think there is some delta there. I've noticed also, that the AI is drawn like an AI, mostly, and that HSIs are drawn like HSIs -- an analog representation if there ever was one. Engine instruments mostly are presented as analog dials, with digits underneath them. It's really only the airspeed, altitude, and vsi that suffer this fate. Why don't they just draw pictures of the round dials? Or at least give the pilot the option? Certification cost, development effort, desire to minimize menu selection and install options. I suspect that back when these displays were new, there wasn't room for round dials. But with 10+ inch hi-res displays, there sure is now. Actually that's not true. The reason they are tapes is because attitude is the most important instrument and its presentation needs to be the most emphasized. There is simply not room to have the big attitude indicator and round dial pitot static instruments. Minimizing display clutter is important too, and some vendors have chosen to minimize the impact of the ASI and altimeter on the attitude indicator by using tapes. Even the tapes themselves can be translucent so you see right through them to the attitude indicator colors. To make up for the deficiencies of tapes, there are features like trend indicators, colors, prominent V speed markings, and others. Compare Avidyne's and Garmin's to some that do have round dials like this one http://www.rogersonkratos.com/mfd.html or the Collins MFD-268 and see how either attitude indicator shape is affected or has to be smaller. GA pilots generally don't like tapes as much at first, but can and do get used to them. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Fox Hound
wrote: Many man-centuries of effort has been expended in the research of flight instrument presentation Indeed. Your instrument scan is smaller with tapes, but its harder to see trend movement. That's true, although that issue can be somewhat overcome. For instance, the B744 PFD displays a speed tape, but also has a green trending arrow to show both magnitude and direction for a prediction of the speed in 10 seconds from now based on current rate of change. Obviously, it's not always perfect -- will always be some situations where you have a sudden large displacement that isn't indicative of where you will be in 10 seconds from now. But as a whole, it's generally very accurate. In use, it seems to be pretty effective for dampening some of the PIO issues, though I'm sure that more experienced flight crew members won't even need to see the trending information to anticipate appropriate flight control response for any given situation. It won't ever replace the VSI, but it'll give a reasonable off-the-cuff quick and visual look at trending data without having to spend much time mentally number-crunching things. Very useful in high workload situations. If I recall correctly, Airbus EFIS displays takes Human Factors (HF) design to the next level and presents the data very darned well. Makes even greater use of colo[u]rs but to good User Interface (UI) effect. I'm more familiar with the Boeing EFIS design, so I had to pay more attention to various seemingly subtle (but really important) features of the Airbus EFIS displays. Anyway, I can certainly see the pros and cons for both style of gauges. Just saying that the issues with tapes can be overcome effectively. -Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
C & D NiMH Best Deal | Larry | Home Built | 6 | October 1st 04 01:41 PM |
AA NiMH Best Deal | Jim Weir | Home Built | 27 | September 29th 04 08:39 PM |
oh tax man, how do I deal with you | Del Rawlins | Home Built | 5 | August 9th 04 10:23 PM |
Looking for deal on Microair 760 | JJ Masters | Home Built | 3 | August 30th 03 11:41 PM |
Windsocks, good deal ! | GASSITT | Home Built | 0 | August 26th 03 06:11 PM |