A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Glider EFIS anyone?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 16th 13, 07:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Roel Baardman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC.
Current studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend
with an analog needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits.

Can you name or link some studies please?
  #22  
Old January 16th 13, 10:28 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kirk.stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:15:40 AM UTC+1, Craig R. wrote:
If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the brain to interpret and understand data quickly using either an analog or digital readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the main emphasis of the study. The study showed that the brain interprets the analog display quicker and with greater accuracy. Besides the issue of running out of power, it appears that the analog display is superior to digital for information gathering and execution. Something to consider in going to an all glass panel. Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could elaborate?


Without specifying the type of data, range, units, etc. you really can't just say analog is better that digital.

In aviation, the trend is for direct digital readout for performance values (airspeed, altitude, and for gliders, average climb rates) while using some form of analog indication for trend (rate of climb or descent) or percentage (thrust) values.

My preference, if I could get a display built to my specifications, would have a dedicated display (say the size of the new Butterfly vario) for airspeed with a large digital IAS readout, smaller TAS and GS readouts, a big up/down trend arrow showing instantaneous airspeed trend (nice in the pattern to catch a wind shear), and an analog indication of current airspeed (bug) vs various Vspeeds. Being an AOA fan, a digital AOA readout would be included, but the primary AOA would be on the glareshield (and have an aural tone for on-speed with the gear down!).

Main display in the panel would be large moving map, with altitude/navigation/final glide across top in big digital format, and all the tactical/navigation info available in navboxes as required, with all needed controls on the stick or a remote. No touchscreens.

Obviously, there would be a separate vario display with all magic that is in the new LXNAV and Butterfly displays.

And finally, a combined radio/transponder/ADS-B/FLARM/PCAS/Spot/Elt control head to manage all the electronics in one place.

It's taking time, but we are getting there...

Kirk
66


  #23  
Old January 16th 13, 10:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kirk.stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 5:47:44 AM UTC+1, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 1/15/2013 7:48 PM, Bill D wrote:

On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:


If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the


brain to interpret and understand data quickly using either an


analog or digital readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the


main emphasis of the study. The study showed that the brain


interprets the analog display quicker and with greater accuracy.


Besides the issue of running out of power, it appears that the


analog display is superior to digital for information gathering and


execution. Something to consider in going to an all glass panel.


Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could elaborate?




That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC.


Current studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend


with an analog needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits.


Few would use an altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a


numeric display which is why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand


altimeters anymore - in fact they're pretty much relegated to gliders


which means they're probably going to disappear. Not many "little old


Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these days.




After a year or so of getting my 302, the first instrument I had with a

digital altimeter display, I noticed I used it instead of the 3-hand

"clock". No effort was made to learn or do that - it just happened.



The analog airspeed still seems to be better than a numeric one, but I

don't have a numeric ASI to see if that's true. The airspeed is quite a

different quantity than altitude, and maybe that's why digital might not

be a good choice for it: airspeed has the same "right" and "wrong"

positions during the flight, regardless of your location; the "right"

altitude varies constantly during the flight.


Erik, once you have flown with a properly designed digital airspeed indicator, you will hate going back to an analog one. We are trained to think in terms of discrete, specific airspeed values, and while yes you can glance at your airspeed indicator and (if you have flown with it a lot) can get an idea of your speed ("3 o'clock is a safe pattern speed, 2 o'clock is getting slow"), if you are aiming for a specific speed you still have to compare the needle to the scale, interpolate, and decide what speed it is indicating. With a big number, it's just there. If I want 63 knots on final, I look at the panel, see 61, and immediately know that I'm 2 knots slow. Ditto when cruising - my nav computer says optimum Mc speed is 102 knots (yeah, it's a good day out west ;^), I accelerate to what I think is right judging by nose position on the horizon, then a glance see 106 and ease the nose up a bit.

One of the jets I'm working on now (a brand new advanced trainer) has a neat featu a bug next to the flight path vector that shows your airspeed trend based on attitude and thrust setting - if it's above the FPV, you will accelerate. So when you reach the speed you want, you ease the throttles back until the bug is next to the FPV, and your speed will stay the same. Makes instrument flying so easy it's ridiculous! For gliders, you could use the same idea to indicate your airspeed trend in the pattern (based on pitch attidude/AOA and accelleration) so at a glance could see if you are slowing down or speeding up.

Fun stuff

Kirk
  #24  
Old January 16th 13, 06:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

Maybe instrument design has changed, but I recall the counter, drum, pointer
altimeter needing a vibrator (read battery consumption) to keep the pointer
and digits from sticking. Or you could continuously tap the panel to keep
it moving...

"Bill D" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:
If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the brain to
interpret and understand data quickly using either an analog or digital
readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the main emphasis of the
study. The study showed that the brain interprets the analog display
quicker and with greater accuracy. Besides the issue of running out of
power, it appears that the analog display is superior to digital for
information gathering and execution. Something to consider in going to an
all glass panel. Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could
elaborate?


That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC. Current
studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend with an analog
needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits. Few would use an
altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a numeric display which is
why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand altimeters anymore - in fact
they're pretty much relegated to gliders which means they're probably going
to disappear. Not many "little old Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these
days.

  #25  
Old January 16th 13, 06:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

Your 302 has digital indicated airspeed on screen 10.

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
On 1/15/2013 7:48 PM, Bill D wrote:
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:
If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the
brain to interpret and understand data quickly using either an
analog or digital readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the
main emphasis of the study. The study showed that the brain
interprets the analog display quicker and with greater accuracy.
Besides the issue of running out of power, it appears that the
analog display is superior to digital for information gathering and
execution. Something to consider in going to an all glass panel.
Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could elaborate?


That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC.
Current studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend
with an analog needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits.
Few would use an altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a
numeric display which is why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand
altimeters anymore - in fact they're pretty much relegated to gliders
which means they're probably going to disappear. Not many "little old
Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these days.


After a year or so of getting my 302, the first instrument I had with a
digital altimeter display, I noticed I used it instead of the 3-hand
"clock". No effort was made to learn or do that - it just happened.

The analog airspeed still seems to be better than a numeric one, but I
don't have a numeric ASI to see if that's true. The airspeed is quite a
different quantity than altitude, and maybe that's why digital might not
be a good choice for it: airspeed has the same "right" and "wrong"
positions during the flight, regardless of your location; the "right"
altitude varies constantly during the flight.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)


  #26  
Old January 16th 13, 06:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 149
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On Jan 16, 2:45*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 5:47:44 AM UTC+1, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 1/15/2013 7:48 PM, Bill D wrote:


On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:


If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the


brain to interpret and understand data quickly using either an


analog or digital readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the


main emphasis of the study. The study showed that the brain


interprets the analog display quicker and with greater accuracy.


Besides the issue of running out of power, it appears that the


analog display is superior to digital for information gathering and


execution. Something to consider in going to an all glass panel.


Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could elaborate?


That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC.


Current studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend


with an analog needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits.


Few would use an altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a


numeric display which is why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand


altimeters anymore - in fact they're pretty much relegated to gliders


which means they're probably going to disappear. Not many "little old


Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these days.


After a year or so of getting my 302, the first instrument I had with a


digital altimeter display, I noticed I used it instead of the 3-hand


"clock". No effort was made to learn or do that - it just happened.


The analog airspeed still seems to be better than a numeric one, but I


don't have a numeric ASI to see if that's true. The airspeed is quite a


different quantity than altitude, and maybe that's why digital might not


be a good choice for it: airspeed has the same "right" and "wrong"


positions during the flight, regardless of your location; the "right"


altitude varies constantly during the flight.


Erik, once you have flown with a properly designed digital airspeed indicator, you will hate going back to an analog one. *We are trained to think in terms of discrete, specific airspeed values, and while yes you can glance at your airspeed indicator and (if you have flown with it a lot) can get an idea of your speed ("3 o'clock is a safe pattern speed, 2 o'clock is getting slow"), if you are aiming for a specific speed you still have to compare the needle to the scale, interpolate, and decide what speed it is indicating. With a big number, it's just there. *If I want 63 knots on final, I look at the panel, see 61, and immediately know that I'm 2 knots slow. *Ditto when cruising - my nav computer says optimum Mc speed is 102 knots (yeah, it's a good day out west ;^), I accelerate to what I think is right judging by nose position on the horizon, then a glance see 106 and ease the nose up a bit.

One of the jets I'm working on now (a brand new advanced trainer) has a neat featu a bug next to the flight path vector that shows your airspeed trend based on attitude and thrust setting - if it's above the FPV, you will accelerate. *So when you reach the speed you want, you ease the throttles back until the bug is next to the FPV, and your speed will stay the same.. Makes instrument flying so easy it's ridiculous! For gliders, you could use the same idea to indicate your airspeed trend in the pattern (based on pitch attidude/AOA and accelleration) so at a glance could see if you are slowing down or speeding up.

Fun stuff

Kirk


How about this? Been thinking of getting one for fun.

http://www.mglavionics.com/html/infinity_singles.html
  #27  
Old January 16th 13, 07:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On 1/16/2013 1:45 AM, kirk.stant wrote:


Erik, once you have flown with a properly designed digital airspeed
indicator, you will hate going back to an analog one. We are trained
to think in terms of discrete, specific airspeed values, and while
yes you can glance at your airspeed indicator and (if you have flown
with it a lot) can get an idea of your speed ("3 o'clock is a safe
pattern speed, 2 o'clock is getting slow"), if you are aiming for a
specific speed you still have to compare the needle to the scale,
interpolate, and decide what speed it is indicating. With a big
number, it's just there. If I want 63 knots on final, I look at the
panel, see 61, and immediately know that I'm 2 knots slow. Ditto
when cruising - my nav computer says optimum Mc speed is 102 knots
(yeah, it's a good day out west ;^), I accelerate to what I think is
right judging by nose position on the horizon, then a glance see 106
and ease the nose up a bit.


The only time I use numbers when I'm thinking of or using airspeed is in
the pattern: I consider the wind and turbulence, then choose an amount
to add to my zero wind pattern speed. Once I have that, I fly to
maintain the needle at that position on the ASI - no more numbers.

All the flight before landing is done without numbers: follow the speed
director for speed to fly; thermal with the nose on the horizon; keep
the needle in the green (mostly); set flaps to the position indicated by
the needle.

Maybe if I had a digital readout for the ASI, I'd like it, but I don't
see how the actual number is useful for most of the flight. Next year,
I'll have glider with a glass panel, and then I'll have some experience
to better judge these choices.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
  #28  
Old January 16th 13, 07:17 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bill D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 746
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 10:31:14 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
Maybe instrument design has changed, but I recall the counter, drum, pointer

altimeter needing a vibrator (read battery consumption) to keep the pointer

and digits from sticking. Or you could continuously tap the panel to keep

it moving...



"Bill D" wrote in message

...

On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:

If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the brain to


interpret and understand data quickly using either an analog or digital


readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the main emphasis of the


study. The study showed that the brain interprets the analog display


quicker and with greater accuracy. Besides the issue of running out of


power, it appears that the analog display is superior to digital for


information gathering and execution. Something to consider in going to an


all glass panel. Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could


elaborate?




That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC. Current

studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend with an analog

needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits. Few would use an

altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a numeric display which is

why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand altimeters anymore - in fact

they're pretty much relegated to gliders which means they're probably going

to disappear. Not many "little old Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these

days.


Mine worked just fine without a vibrator.
  #29  
Old January 16th 13, 08:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 463
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 12:17:21 PM UTC-6, Bill D wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 10:31:14 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:

Maybe instrument design has changed, but I recall the counter, drum, pointer




altimeter needing a vibrator (read battery consumption) to keep the pointer




and digits from sticking. Or you could continuously tap the panel to keep




it moving...








"Bill D" wrote in message




...




On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:15:40 PM UTC-7, Craig R. wrote:




If I remember correctly, studies were done on the ability of the brain to




interpret and understand data quickly using either an analog or digital




readout. Time and speedometer readouts were the main emphasis of the




study. The study showed that the brain interprets the analog display




quicker and with greater accuracy. Besides the issue of running out of




power, it appears that the analog display is superior to digital for




information gathering and execution. Something to consider in going to an




all glass panel. Perhaps someone that is up on this subject could




elaborate?








That study was done very early in the digital age - 1960's IIRC. Current




studies show that while it remains easier to detect a trend with an analog




needle, a discrete value is easier to read in digits. Few would use an




altimeter to detect a trend so it works best as a numeric display which is




why few high performance aircraft use 3-hand altimeters anymore - in fact




they're pretty much relegated to gliders which means they're probably going




to disappear. Not many "little old Swiss watchmakers" left to fix them these




days.




Mine worked just fine without a vibrator.


Here is a glass panel (EFIS) made by Dittel Avionik
http://www.dittel-avionik.de/files/gca/GCA_Mounting.pdf

That's what I was looking for when asking the original question. It seems to have not really set the world afire, so far. Plus, radio and transponder are not yet integrated. Flarm can be connected, however. They seem to be able to load a number of open-source software packages. Altitude and airspeed are indicated in boxes right below the map.
Herb
  #30  
Old January 16th 13, 09:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sam Discusflyer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Glider EFIS anyone?

One suggestion for the digital airspeed display is to add color.
Either as a color digit display or a color background display.

I know this might not work for color blindness. So options to add
color based on speed threshholds. The pilot could decide to use
maneuvering speed or flap speeds or ????

The oudie uses this for the green or orange box around airport/land
out waypoints.

Steve



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EFIS Wars.... Andy Home Built 10 August 19th 06 04:18 AM
EFIS [email protected] Soaring 6 November 15th 05 12:00 PM
EFIS faadpe Soaring 2 November 15th 05 06:28 AM
EFIS one for sale nametab Aviation Marketplace 0 March 4th 04 12:31 AM
EFIS One for sale nametab Home Built 0 March 4th 04 12:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.