Touch Screen Avionics are frustrating. (Get off my Lawn!)

Lindberg said:
No touch screens in my plane, but when I spent 10 hours in a full Garmin bird, I was taught to put four fingers on the panel and tap with my thumb. Worked fairly well for the limited time I needed it.
Click to expand...

I pinch the bezel lower ledge with my 2 fingers and tap with thumb. Don’t know where you can place 4 fingers without placing them on other avionics and unintentionally pushing other buttons?
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Just experimenting. I haven't flown a pattern in 10 years
Click to expand...
How is that possible? How can you fly ten years and never be in the traffic pattern?

edit:

after consulting with my personal internet sage I have decided you tell jokes better than any straight man in the history of comedy.
 
Last edited:
I know where there’s a nice Tiger for sale with 530W and 430………;)
 
I believe the idea is that it's easier and cheaper for the manufacturer to add new functions and features, within limits, because it just takes a software change. I don't think it better for a pilot from a human factors standpoint. Maybe some sort of stabilizing rest could help in some cases.
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
I pinch the bezel lower ledge with my 2 fingers and tap with thumb. Don’t know where you can place 4 fingers without placing them on other avionics and unintentionally pushing other buttons?
Click to expand...
In that plane the screens weren't surrounded by other avionics.
 
As mentioned a few times, iPad + Flightstream + 530W = the best of both worlds :D
 
SoonerAviator said:
The touch volume controls in my new car (not located on the screen, but still a capacitive touch item) is very inefficient. Luckily, the steering wheel volume controls work well and are more convenient anyway.
Click to expand...

Capacitive touch buttons in a car are basically an automatic deal breaker for me. I'm fine with touch screens. Cars(if the most common things have real buttons) or planes. GTN750 in particular is fine to use for me and is more intuitive than G1000.
 
I managed to go for 35 years before using one of those Garmin things. What a horrible interface... Something about "Direct|Direct."

You wanna see a superior HMID (Human Machine Interface Design), look at Chelton, Dynon and my favorite, Universal Avionics.

Most of the experimental only stuff is excellent, too IMHO.
 
It's awful, too. But notice that's it's specific to the databases. I'm not sure if that means anything, but it isn't exactly the same.
 
IK04 said:
You wanna see a superior HMID (Human Machine Interface Design), look at Chelton, Dynon and my favorite, Universal Avionics.

Most of the experimental only stuff is excellent, too IMHO.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's because they're user-configurable, but I see a trend in experimental glass towards cramming waaaaaay to much information into a small area. That's not my idea of good HMI.

Nauga,
and his keyhole scan
 
nauga said:
Maybe it's because they're user-configurable, but I see a trend in experimental glass towards cramming waaaaaay to much information into a small area. That's not my idea of good HMI.

Nauga,
and his keyhole scan
Click to expand...
John Wanamaker: "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half."

Child of the Magenta: "95% of the info on my glass panel is irrelevant at this moment in flight; the trouble is I don't know which ... [sound of impact]."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top