Glass cockpits or gauges?

I prefer a blend of traditional gauges and screens, or multiple screens that reduce the possible common modes of failure. I also prefer software that is simple and extensively tested, rather than software that is bloated with features and relatively untested. So I don't feel comfortable in a Garmin glass cockpit, but an instrument panel filled with steam gauges isn't much better. A panel with traditional and a few glass gauges is nice, or a panel that has multiple independent displays plus some traditional gauges, as one sees on large airliners.

Systems like the G1000 are not tested well enough for my tastes. They cannot be, since exhaustive testing is computationally infeasible at the price points and with the time-to-market objectives of the manufacturer. But they are sexy and thus popular with aviators, especially the younger ones who have spent their lives in front of computer screens and are lulled into a sense of security by a panel that looks like a mere video game (instead of a matter of life or death).

For a modern cross country "going places" machine, a glass cockpit makes more sense. For an "around the patch" fun flying airplane (the kind I like to fly), I vastly prefer old fashioned steam gauges.

That modern panel in the Waco biplane that the other poster gave just seems _wrong_.

I think glass is great, up until you get that Blue Screen saying, "the system has encountered an error and needs to reboot" then refuses to do anything except reboot over and over and over.

I'm just glad that Microsoft doesn't supply the operating systems for them!

Call me old fashioned but having been in computers since the early 1800's (lol) I have a large respect for the ability of a computer to totally corrupt a human brain. The brain that becomes so trustful of them that it refuses to take over can be an issue here.

I think pilots should all learn to fly with basic instruments then add on the glass. I also believe everyone should learn to drive standard shift vehicles as well as they learn a lot in that process but then I am OLD. :)

ps - now where did I put that phone number for ASPEN Avionics!

Glass is taking over for one reason, MONEY. It's cheaper, both to buy and maintain. Whether we like it or not, it's here and will be... till the next wave of innovation pushes it aside.

Glass is wonderful for the highly proficient pilot (Airline, Military, Corporate) but represents a safety hazard for the recreational or week-end pilot due to the fact that it is non-standardized and has a steep learning curve associated with it.

Take a look at the Cirrus safety record. High income professionals buy them, then run into problems because they haven't had enough training to properly use all the information and automation... a generalization of course, but true in too many cases.

For primary training I think they are a very bad idea. I also think that even a full IFR cockpit with analog instruments is overkill. My philosophy is that most civilian pilots should learn to fly with old-fashioned basic instruments first. It is stick-and rudder skills that are the foundation of flying. We have too many "magenta line cripples" flying already who couldn't find their way out of a dark closet without help from an EFIS system. A Stradivarius does not make the violinist, it is the violinist who makes the Stradivarius. Same with airplanes.

Glass cockpits by far. They are able to present you with a lot more information that a typical '6 pack' can. They can also condense the information more closely together so it's easier to scan everything.

I have met pilots that hate glass cockpits. They are typically the same pilots who hate doing things like using headsets or radios.

I haven't been flying for a while, and my instrument scan is best at round dials.

Glass definitely gives you more information, and I like if for that reason, however I do think we're raising a generation of pilots who can't function without GPS... I think that's disappointing and kind of scary in some ways. (If you're riding with a glass dependent pilot who suddenly needs to use backup instruments only... will he be able to find his way?)

I prefer both for 'back-up' instruments. The only difference anyways is the presentation of the instruments.

I like the combination of traditional gauges and technology...a simple GPS radio works fine for me:)...but since your talking serious hardware I like the setup that Waco Classic has available where the traditional gauges are the focus, but they have several glass features....

link: http://ext.dynamiteinc.com/waco/waco1.html

I have never flown one so I'm not sure how useful it is, but I like the aesthetics of it, and it seems like my ideal setup....

I have never flown a G1000.

I bet it's nice though!