No Safety Advantage on Glass Cockpit

[John Pleisse]

Quote: Cruiser

maybe, .......

I interpret the problem to be poor piloting skills that these pilots have not mastered. In other words, the accident has nothing to do with the glass panel and everything to do with the pilot.

[Hank]

Quote: Hank

The difference is smallest among the low-power models, and the reason for it remains unclear. One possibility is that analog gauges can be more easily interpreted during rapid changes in airspeed and altitude.

[John Pleisse]

Quote: Hank

Nice of everyone to ignore this. It's exactly what I don't like about most glass panels. And no, I don't know anybody whose head is inside the plane during takeoff or go-rounds. I do peek at the ASI rolling down the runway, though, a move that takes several times as long with a moving tape.

Rolling down the runway and initial climb are periods of rapid change in both airspeed and altitude. Displays that are time-consuming to interpret are poor choices, and AOPA thinks this may contribute to the higher accident rate by glass-panel planes during takeoff and go-round. I agree. Are heads down in the cockpit at this time? If so, is it caused by trying to read the ASI and Alt?

Other flight regimes apparently have similar accident rates, no advantage either way. My moving map is on the GPS, which also gives me a second CDI for the same course. How much information can you cram into a single display and still make it out quickly on the go?

[PTK]

We are lucky in a way because the Mooney has built in redundancy with vacuum AI and electric HSI. Our main concern is a vacuum failure which can easily be mitigated without settling for a PFD. There are better options. What I'd love to see is a solid state digital analogue presentation primary AI that will replace the KI256 with all its ap fd functions. I prefer my existing asi, altimeter, tc and vsi. Having said that I'm sure they can bring to market a such product and give us options. AI only or AI +EHSI or AI+EHSI+ASI etc etc. Make it modular like that so we can choose to add. I hope somebody's listening!

[Parker_Woodruff]

Quote: allsmiles

What I'd love to see is a solid state digital analogue presentation primary AI that will replace the KI256 with all its ap fd functions.

[Vref]

Quote: allsmiles

We are lucky in a way because the Mooney has built in redundancy with vacuum AI and electric HSI. Our main concern is a vacuum failure which can easily be mitigated without settling for a PFD. There are better options. What I'd love to see is a solid state digital analogue presentation primary AI that will replace the KI256 with all its ap fd functions. I prefer my existing asi, altimeter, tc and vsi. Having said that I'm sure they can bring to market a such product and give us options. AI only or AI +EHSI or AI+EHSI+ASI etc etc. Make it modular like that so we can choose to add. I hope somebody's listening!

[PTK]

Quote: Parker_Woodruff

 Maybe I'm not understanding correctly, but aren't you describling the Aspen Unit with the EA 100 or G-500 unit with their autopilot converter?

[Vref]

Quote: allsmiles

 Maybe I'm not understanding correctly, but aren't you describling the Aspen Unit with the EA 100 or G-500 unit with their autopilot converter?

[PTK]

Luc, are you possibly referring to the SN4550? Is it cerified for installation in a Mooney? Sounds interesting.

[Vref]

Sorry your correct yes the SA4550 was build for the bigger turbo-props, jets with ADI's. The gyro info is coming from external in this case. I never understood why sandel doesn't put a AHRS in its smaller SN3500 to make KI256 replacement.

http://www.sandel.com/Sandel_SA4550_EADI_datasheet_1006.pdf

I am sure they already can generate all synoptics etc....They do this in reversionary mode the problem is they will never get it certified as primary as long there is not another (second gyro or AHRS) available....Look at the ASPEN's with two screens and two AHRS.....

I am convinced they are thinking on this right now..but hesitating if the market is there..;-))))

[Hank]

Lots more glass panel vs. steam discussion here:

http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?p=1499650#post1499650

 

[PTK]

Quote: Vref

Sorry your correct yes the SA4550 was build for the bigger turbo-props, jets with ADI's. The gyro info is coming from external in this case. I never understood why sandel doesn't put a AHRS in its smaller SN3500 to make KI256 replacement.

http://www.sandel.com/Sandel_SA4550_EADI_datasheet_1006.pdf

I am sure they already can generate all synoptics etc....They do this in reversionary mode the problem is they will never get it certified as primary as long there is not another (second gyro or AHRS) available....Look at the ASPEN's with two screens and two AHRS.....

I am convinced they are thinking on this right now..but hesitating if the market is there..;-))))

[orangemtl]

The Sandel units really seem to be a nice balance between classic round gauge technology and glass panels, without breaking the bank. I can see shifting to the 4500/4550 if I were updating a panel but didn't want to rip out the whole thing, with the attendant costs.

What's the Aspen system cost in round figures? Just curious.

[PTK]

Quote: orangemtl

The Sandel units really seem to be a nice balance between classic round gauge technology and glass panels, without breaking the bank. I can see shifting to the 4500/4550 if I were updating a panel but didn't want to rip out the whole thing, with the attendant costs.

What's the Aspen system cost in round figures? Just curious.

[John Pleisse]

Quote: allsmiles

The Aspen is ~12-14K. It is definitlely less money. But as always you do get what you pay for. It may indicate a cash strapped company with questionable future. Also the product suffers way too many random failures. This is a major sticking point. Aspen says its improper installations. I personally think its lack of quality control in hardware and software. It seems they rush to bring product out without thoroughly developing it. They shift R&D to the consumer by experimenting in the field trying to get it right.

The Sandel, as you indicated, does offer a nice blend of the round gauges in a digital solid state instrument. I have not read any negative review of their product. With the exception of the lamp needing to be changed annually in their earlier product the SN3308. Their new indicator the SN3500 is top notch. They are also selected by air forces worldwide and by NASA. I don't know how these selections are made. But I'm sure quality of the instrument has to be paramount.

[Vref]

Quote: N4352H

The Aspen is ~12-14K. It is definitlely less money. But as always you do get what you pay for. It may indicate a cash strapped company with questionable future. Also the product suffers way too many random failures. This is a major sticking point. Aspen says its improper installations. I personally think its lack of quality control in hardware and software. It seems they rush to bring product out without thoroughly developing it. They shift R&D to the consumer by experimenting in the field trying to get it right.

The Sandel, as you indicated, does offer a nice blend of the round gauges in a digital solid state instrument. I have not read any negative review of their product. With the exception of the lamp needing to be changed annually in their earlier product the SN3308. Their new indicator the SN3500 is top notch. They are also selected by air forces worldwide and by NASA. I don't know how these selections are made. But I'm sure quality of the instrument has to be paramount.

[orangemtl]

Quote: Vref

The Aspen is by far the better unit and is significantly more capable. I have flown both. The Sandel is more relavent if you already have a King compass system istalled, otherwise, you are flying your Mooney back in time. If I had a Lear 35, the Sandel would work well.

I have an Aspen 2000 system. I have flown it 50 hours since last April without a hitch. Every new product has to cut their teeth (sorry for the pun).

[Cris]

In case anyone is interested these guys are offering a special on the Sandel SN 3500 $6950 http://www.sea-avionics.com/documents/promotions/SEA_SN3500.pdf

[David Mazer]

Quote: allsmiles

The Aspen is ~12-14K. It is definitlely less money. But as always you do get what you pay for. It may indicate a cash strapped company with questionable future. Also the product suffers way too many random failures. This is a major sticking point. Aspen says its improper installations. I personally think its lack of quality control in hardware and software. It seems they rush to bring product out without thoroughly developing it. They shift R&D to the consumer by experimenting in the field trying to get it right.

[PTK]

Quote: Mazerbase

Do you have an Aspen unit?  From what information do you make these comments (bold and underlined)?  I have an Aspen 2000, all problems were resolved quickly and the units have been rock solid since then.  I am not aware they are in any financial difficulty, and I haven't really looked, but functionally and service wise, they have been fine for me.  I find my situational awareness is far superior to when I had steam gauges and, according to this recent study, it may not create safety benefits but it does increase my flying enjoyment and comfort level.  I strongly recommend the Aspen to anyone that asks.

[xftrplt]

Ditto Mazerbase.

[David Mazer]

Well thank you, I am too, but I think you are impugning the reputation of Aspen and possibly doing them damage.  If you have cause and information to back it up, I think it should be known and disseminated but, if you don't, just saying this might cause inappropriate damage that can ultimately result in harm to Aspen users.

[PTK]

Quote: Mazerbase

Well thank you, I am too, but I think you are impugning the reputation of Aspen and possibly doing them damage.  If you have cause and information to back it up, I think it should be known and disseminated but, if you don't, just saying this might cause inappropriate damage that can ultimately result in harm to Aspen users.

[Vref]

Anyway it's a customers world, but I would prefer to spend some more money e.g. on a TAS600 (TCAS I) systems seriously reduced in price now then going for a full glass option...but that's just me....

So as Cris pointed out 7K $ I think is a very good price for this product....I hope Aspen will be in for a long time as we all will benefit from more competitors....

 

rgds

Luc

 

[David Mazer]

Quote: allsmiles

I said it MAY indicate these things. I don't know of any other reason that they should have random multiple failures. I sincerely hope they are doing well. I also hope that they'd correct their issues so they can gain consumer confidence. Based on past history consumer confidence is lacking.