Glass or steam?
- Thread starter nj-pilot
- Start date
From a piloting perspective: Our Club Archer is headed down to Saint Aviation @ X35 next week for a Dynon HDX install. At the push of a button you can go from a modern "glass" cockpit to a traditional 6 pack view. With 10 of us in the club that allows each pilot to pick which view they want. https://dynonavionics.com/latest-skyview-features.php
For me personally. I have little glass experience, a couple flights during my IFR training in a G1000 or Aspen 172 and quite a few flights in mixed bag 182s with G275 / G5 panels that retained the steam gauges as well. IMO pick one or another. I'm going to fly it with modern glass selected.
From a maintenance / reliability perspective - Move to glass. Yes, they can fail but they have multiple backups and IF they fail the odds of failure, at least in the flying I do, isn't likely going to happen at a time in a way that leaves me in the weather in a dark cockpit with no radio (we're retaining a garmin 255 2nd radio in our install to augment the Avodyne 450)
Getting rid of vacuum pumps (and backup vacuum pumps) and all the associated plumbing is great and reduces the failure points.
Last edited:
Flocker
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- May 24, 2013
- Messages
- 711
- Location
- Peachtree City GA (KFFC)
- Display Name
Display name:
Flocker
What maintenance costs are you referring to?
nj-pilot
Pre-takeoff checklist
Thinking of:
- Hardware issues (e.g., screen damage, ambient light sensor errors, engine sensor faults, etc.)
- Software issues (e.g., OS crash, AHRS errors, NAV/COMM issues, etc.)
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 6,166
- Location
- Atlanta / Marietta
- Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
Two thoughts:
1) Any glass that I put in today is going to become “old” quicker than a steam gauge. Think computers in the 80’s and 90’s. 275, 375, 475, pentium, etc. I’ll accept that in order to have the best that works for me. I’ll also be biased to buying the newer version to get as much longevity as possible given the relative quickness that glass changes.
2) I would want any glass upgradable. When I do buy my plane I’m avoiding any models that has a specific glass (like a G1000) as part of the mandatory equipment list. G1000 non wass can’t be upgraded easily today - I think- nor can it be taken out and replaced with a different glass.
1) Any glass that I put in today is going to become “old” quicker than a steam gauge. Think computers in the 80’s and 90’s. 275, 375, 475, pentium, etc. I’ll accept that in order to have the best that works for me. I’ll also be biased to buying the newer version to get as much longevity as possible given the relative quickness that glass changes.
2) I would want any glass upgradable. When I do buy my plane I’m avoiding any models that has a specific glass (like a G1000) as part of the mandatory equipment list. G1000 non wass can’t be upgraded easily today - I think- nor can it be taken out and replaced with a different glass.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
That’s obviously going to vary from person to person, but regardless of what the primary/backup combination is, it’s the pilot’s responsibility to ensure proficiency with both primary and backup instrumentation.
Rgbeard
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2017
- Messages
- 4,343
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ and Ensenada, Mexico
- Display Name
Display name:
rgbeard
Sure buy the latest in smart but at least in the certified world the archaic FAA process works in our favor. Look at the G1000. It was introduced in 2004 and while I wouldn't rush out to buy one for the very reason that it's tied too tightly to the airframe, they do have a few years of service left and I can't think of anything else in our electronic world where 20+ years is considered normal life-span
Wagondriver
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 661
- Display Name
Display name:
375Taylor
I have a friend that had an EI screen for primary instrumentation. It went black twice, each time requiring a new unit. Sure, it was warrantied, but plane could not be flown in the mean time.
I don't think there is any likelihood that steam gauges are going away anytime soon. Lots of good serviceable steam gauges for sale used for cheap. For VFR only, I would have the minimum steam gauges and a radio if I was going to fly near populated areas.
In my one plane, I have only the required engine instruments, a compass, vsi, and airspeed. Its got an electrical system, but no transponder, no radio, no lights. It is flying at its most basic, no stall warning either.
I don't think there is any likelihood that steam gauges are going away anytime soon. Lots of good serviceable steam gauges for sale used for cheap. For VFR only, I would have the minimum steam gauges and a radio if I was going to fly near populated areas.
In my one plane, I have only the required engine instruments, a compass, vsi, and airspeed. Its got an electrical system, but no transponder, no radio, no lights. It is flying at its most basic, no stall warning either.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 9,486
- Display Name
Display name:
Pilawt
Cars, too. My four-year-old Audi has built-in navigation, Google Map imagery, traffic, road alerts, weather, wi-fi connectivity, etc., etc., all through the cellular network. Except now that 3G cellular is going away, none of this will work any more.
The iPhone does it all, and better and cheaper.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
To me, this argues in favor of a modular approach to glass, rather than an integrated glass panel with one device to rule them all. Eg a pair of G5's for flight instruments, a separate MFD for nav, and a separate EMS. If one of your G5's croaks, it will be trivial to replace or upgrade.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
Car Manufacturers are notoriously clueless when it comes to info tech. That is one of the reasons why Tesla is running circles around them. Everyone thought Musk was crazy when he started a car company in Silicon Valley. Now he is the richest man in the world.
chemgeek
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 3,103
- Display Name
Display name:
chemgeek
I have been wondering over the past few days how quickly a pilot loses his ability to effectively scan and fly on backup analog instruments if he/she is exclusively flying something like dual G5's. Just throwing that out.
As far as preference, I prefer analog since that is what is in our airplane.
Partial panel skills are pretty much the same as they ever were with or without electronic instruments (say dual G5s) or PFDs. You still have to be current on partial panel skills. On the other hand, the electronic instruments probably have a much lower failure rate than vacuum instruments, so that's a safety plus. With dual G5s, the chances of losing both at the same time is extremely remote. If the HSI fails, it can revert to an AI. (And the AI mode can still provide heading and CDI information in a slightly different format.)
Flocker
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- May 24, 2013
- Messages
- 711
- Location
- Peachtree City GA (KFFC)
- Display Name
Display name:
Flocker
I see your sample size of one and match it with one who has experienced a G5 loss of attitude in turbulence.
The Dynon HDX is a amazing unit. After Saint Aviation completes the install please take it to a avionics savvy A&P for a check of the installation. I had to spend a substantial amount of money bringing their install up to accepted standards. I am not alone in that.
I learned to fly in 2015 behind steam gauges. Luckily before my training ended the flight school bought a G1000 172 to train in. I flew it quit a bit with a well seasoned long time CFII before my checkride. Then I rented it after getting my PPL. I like it a lot, the G1000, but it was out my price range when I was shopping for a 172.
I bought a low time 172 will all original 1980 panel including the crappy ARC radios with non functioning navs.
This is what I had installed, I had it done in 3 stages. Should have had it done all at once it would have been cheaper. The panel cost almost twice what I paid for the plane. Was it worth it....YES! I call it my mini G1000.
I have earned my instrument rating in it and flown it over 800 hours with the new panel. I think it is perfect mix of old and new with good back up. I hope to always be able to fly with some glass in my panel, it would be a bummer to go back to all steam.
The GTX 345 provides ads-b in to my I pad, it in it's self is great back up.
I bought a low time 172 will all original 1980 panel including the crappy ARC radios with non functioning navs.
This is what I had installed, I had it done in 3 stages. Should have had it done all at once it would have been cheaper. The panel cost almost twice what I paid for the plane. Was it worth it....YES! I call it my mini G1000.
I have earned my instrument rating in it and flown it over 800 hours with the new panel. I think it is perfect mix of old and new with good back up. I hope to always be able to fly with some glass in my panel, it would be a bummer to go back to all steam.
The GTX 345 provides ads-b in to my I pad, it in it's self is great back up.
Last edited:
MonkeyClaw
Pre-takeoff checklist
STC glass is the best option. Don't leave it up to the plane manufacturer to control your avionics! Cessna has stopped supporting older avionics and many (including myself) are stuck with ancient versions of software that can't be upgraded along with disappearing hardware that can't be replaced because Cessna won't certify newer versions. I don't know about others like Piper, Mooney, or Cirrus, but you're best off letting the avionics manufacturer have control.
N747JB
Final Approach
I have been looking at adding glass to my new to me 414, but I’m torn about spending $15K on a refurbished Aspen C-3 unit or 2 units for $22K or just using what’s there now. I’m not sure the resale value will be good with the Aspen units vs the G-600, but whatever I do, I’ve still got a basic S-tec 60-2 autopilot.
I learned to fly in 2015 behind steam gauges. Luckily before my training ended the flight school bought a G1000 172 to train in. I flew it quit a bit with a well seasoned long time CFII before my checkride. Then I rented the G1000 after getting my PPL. I like it a lot, the G1000, but it was out my price range when I was shopping for a 172.
I bought a low time 172 will all original 1980 panel including the crappy ARC radios with non functioning navs.
This is what I had installed, I had it done in 3 stages. Should have had it done all at once it would have been cheaper. The panel cost almost twice what I paid for the plane. Was it worth it....YES! I call it my mini G1000.
I have earned my instrument rating in it and flown it over 800 hours with the new panel. I think it is perfect mix of old and new with good back up. I hope to always be able to fly with some glass in my panel, it would be a bummer to go back to all steam.
The GTX 345 provides ads-b in to my I pad, it in it's self is great back up.
I think you were very smart in choosing your panel setup, Gary. A lot of capability there!
Thank you.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 6,166
- Location
- Atlanta / Marietta
- Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
Gary - ditto on your panel set up. A few questions:
1) Your steam CDI - is it switchable, or always connected to your second nav/com?
2) Your G5 HSI - assume you use that for approaches; does the vertical guidance pop up automatically when you load/activate an approach?
3) Do you control your autopilot from the G5 Attitude Indicator?
1) Your steam CDI - is it switchable, or always connected to your second nav/com?
2) Your G5 HSI - assume you use that for approaches; does the vertical guidance pop up automatically when you load/activate an approach?
3) Do you control your autopilot from the G5 Attitude Indicator?
s35pilot
Pre-Flight
You’d have to pry my Aspen PFD and GPS moving map from my cold dead hands, but for the rest of it I’m fine with “steam gauges”.
Stewartb
Final Approach
I have two planes. One has round instruments with digital engine gauges. The other has nothing but a G3X Touch. Remote comm, txp, and AP run through the G3X. I can testify that the information display on the G3X is better and more intuitive than with round instruments. It’s easier to go from my round instrument plane to the G3X than from G3X to round instruments.
Stewartb
Final Approach
Pass. The tapes have become second nature. Like I said, better than round instruments. No reason to spend the money on new stuff to imitate old.