Ain't New Technogy Great, No It Ain't

[Bill Greenwood]

Our new airplanes follow the lead of cell phone makers, computer maker and tv makers as well as almost any other gadget you can think of. And in some cases it really seems like a step forward,though in reality it may be a step sideways or backward. For example there are gadgets that allow you to instantly check your stock account. Seems like something to excite most any techno nerd but in fact does it do any good, does it change anything? If you have some China related stock it is likely to be down, and if you have Tesla you got a recent boost. And there may be many people who can work any tech gadget, but it ain't me.
My young up to date lawyer of a Son finally talked me into getting a wider screen tv. Its about like the tech version of those little flys at the beach called no see ums. a constant pain in the rear. So the local cable company doesn't have any more remotes but gives me a whole new control box, It sat on the shelf 2 months and I finally installed it. Doesn't work, no light at all. I spend hours messing with it on a ladder and finally call the office for service today. Turns out that sense I didn't intall it right away the system may have shut the new box down. I just love tech.
Best airplane I have ever flown or ridden in has no computers, no tech crap, just what was state of the art in 1936 and still the best. Just costs a lot but it works.
I was recently in Turkey, the new airport in Istanbul, largest in the world. Its been open 4 months and the computer system still doesn't work full time, lots of knots of 6 people standing around looking dumb founded at a blank or frozen screen.

[Auburntsts]

Meh. I like the tech in my plane (EFIS, GPS, etc) and my tablet EFB. So yeah I do think it's great. YMMV...

[Bill Greenwood]

All my planes are good planes without needed technology by todays standards. They have the wing they need and the engine they need, the tech stuff would be an extra. Kind of like cars today, a new Chevy is likely not much different than one 10 years ago but now has a top stereo system and gps etc. Even it the car is better, faster for instance, you cant really use that performance on the street. So its less pure car and more gadgets now.
My friend has a new Cirrus, got synthetic vision and all sorts of gadgets and tv screens. But it sometimes seems too much, when we get to the next airport he has to ask me for the tower radio frequency and for ATIS, which I get from the old fashioned sectional in my lap.
Wish they could make the techno stuff work and do it simply and logically.

[rwanttaja]

And stay off my lawn!

Ron "Twenty-three skiddoo" Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

My friend has a new Cirrus, got synthetic vision and all sorts of gadgets and tv screens. But it sometimes seems too much, when we get to the next airport he has to ask me for the tower radio frequency and for ATIS, which I get from the old fashioned sectional in my lap.

I've got a cheap, simple Icom handheld in my panel. Yet once or twice every year, I have to haul out the manual to do some little additional thing...and there's times in flight where I've had to push buttons semi-randomly to do some simple function like switch to manual frequency selection or adjust the squelch.


Wish they could make the techno stuff work and do it simply and logically.
Well, they, do, but:

Sometimes the "simply and logically" is for THEM, not the consumer. Take your problem with the cable box. Very likely, having it "expire" was probably an anti-theft/anti-piracy function. If it wasn't immediately activated, the cable company would presume it was somewhere it wasn't supposed to be.

Not very convenient for YOU, of course. There was probably some punk-*** kid at a meeting who said something like "Well, they can just call the help number, can't they?"

Technology evolves, and one of the big aspects of the evolution is improved user interface. One might complain about the EAA Forum user interface, of course, but step into the WAYBAC machine and try to log on in the days of MS-DOS! User interfaces are improving; I think with the voice recognition technology, we are rapidly approaching the era where we just say, "Roscoe, set Comm 1 to Sea-Tac Approach" and it'll do that.

But there'll be some dead ends and some complaints on the road there.

I'm sure pilots screamed when VOR stations started to replace the old A-N networks. And that's all a pilot in 1936 had, once the clouds moved in. Brrrr.

For my kind of operation, I, too, would be satisfied with 1936 technology. Yet most everyone else wants more. Even I throw a GPS in my airplane occasionally. Jet engine reliability is phenomenal compared to the big radials back then, and a lot of times failure resulted in a massive fire. Our radios have hundreds of frequencies vs. two, we're not dependent on low-frequency navigation signals or searchlight beacons, and with ADB-B, you've got inflight weather information as well as traffic alerts. And if you do a forced landing somewhere, you just pluck the phone from your pocket and dial for help.

Ron "Glad I don't have to listen to Modem tones anymore" Wanttaja

[Sam Buchanan]

My friend has a new Cirrus, got synthetic vision and all sorts of gadgets and tv screens. But it sometimes seems too much, when we get to the next airport he has to ask me for the tower radio frequency and for ATIS, which I get from the old fashioned sectional in my lap.
Wish they could make the techno stuff work and do it simply and logically.

Your friend needs transition training to his new Cirrus. That fancy panel will automatically tune the radios to the airports in the flight plan if you know how to enter the flight plan........don't know about the Cirrus but many fancy panels will also display a sectional.......my $400 iFly GPS will (along with IFR charts, terminal charts, approaches, taxi diagrams, etc).

Man....if only I had one of those (or an iPad!) when I was chasing VOR and ADF needles during IFR training twenty-five years ago....... :)

[robert l]

Airport technology can be especially aggravating. My wife flew out of CLT Saturday morning for DEN, only one suitcase arrived, supposedly, all bags were loaded on the same plane but no one could tell her where her bag was. And most of the people she talked to on the phone, had a strong India accent. They finally delivered the bag at 1:30 AM this morning.
Bob, "I only take carry on"

[Bill Greenwood]

Sam, I have no doubt that the great new technology will work perfectly for some people in some circumstances. And you would think the radio freqs would be right there on the screen as you come to an airport. But we flew into 2 and both times he had to ask me this info. I'm just the passenger, and haven't found my suggestions such as carry a sectional to be warmly received. He does get a lot of moving map stuff on the screen and weather stuff on his I pad.
Years ago the DEW line early waring system had new computers and sensors installed. lots of big $$$$$$ and hi tech to beat all. They were so proud of it for a week till one night the alarms started going off. Fortunately they didn't launch any atomic missiles, and figured out the boffins had forgot to allow for the rising of the full moon, looked like it was coming from Russia.
Also recall watching the new hi tech automatic overhead baggage system at DIA opening day on eve tv news as it shredded the bags and dumped the clothes on the floor.

[Auburntsts]

I ditched paper charts back in 2012 and haven't looked back. No way I'd switch back to paper now. Yes there's a learning curve moving from analog to digital for both avionics and EFBs, but it's pretty simple once you understand it. Does it make the plane fly any better or worse --nope. What it does do for me flying IFR X/Cs is give me capabilities and options that makes flights more comfortable and easier to manage which for me translates into a safer operation. I don't need all avionics for local VFR flights but having a tablet with all of the charts and supplements for the entre country in one place that's always up to date is priceless.

[Sam Buchanan]

Sam, I have no doubt that the great new technology will work perfectly for some people in some circumstances. And you would think the radio freqs would be right there on the screen as you come to an airport. But we flew into 2 and both times he had to ask me this info. I'm just the passenger, and haven't found my suggestions such as carry a sectional to be warmly received. He does get a lot of moving map stuff on the screen and weather stuff on his I pad.
Years ago the DEW line early waring system had new computers and sensors installed. lots of big $$$$$$ and hi tech to beat all. They were so proud of it for a week till one night the alarms started going off. Fortunately they didn't launch any atomic missiles, and figured out the boffins had forgot to allow for the rising of the full moon, looked like it was coming from Russia.
Also recall watching the new hi tech automatic overhead baggage system at DIA opening day on eve tv news as it shredded the bags and dumped the clothes on the floor.

Let's say this again......it really sounds like your friend needs some training on how to use his airplane. :)

The other situations you cited have nothing to do with technology in our aircraft that is now over a decade old and proven by hundreds of thousands of flight hours. The major airlines were hesitant to eliminate paper in the cockpit but even they are now paperless. This stuff works.

Having said that, the Fokker D.VII wannabe can be flown in the local area without any instruments. But if I venture off to another airport my phone has the nifty Avare aviation moving map app running on it.....trying to use a sectional would most likely end up with the chart wrapped around the horizontal stab!

[Mayhemxpc]

The reality is that we don't have AN Radio legs, NDBs in the lower 48 are almost unheard of and VORs are not being replaced as they need repair. HIWAS is also gone. If your aircraft is just flying for fun away from congested airspace and not too far from home, than none of that matters to you. For anyone else, however, some degree of modern avionics is all but essential -- when such devices are not required. This includes people like me whose airplanes reside in the DC SFRA. If I am just flying in the local flying area, I can mostly just make sure the transponders and radios are on, and use them as required. Most everything else is on, but not a part of my flying. The exceptions are traffic information (in the DC area, "see and avoid" is not enough for safe flight!) and a good moving map display (one or two) to ensure there is no inadvertent penetration of the SFRA or other restricted areas that are prevalent in my area. Could I remain clear by referring to paper charts and ground reference? Certainly. Do I want to be my certificate on it? Certainly not.

As Sam brings out, training and recurrence on installed systems are essential.

[Bill Greenwood]

Chris Mayer there are now restricted areas around DC more than in years past. Therefore all the techno stuff you have must be essential. It was some years ago but when I flew at Pax River Md Naval Air Station, I didn't have all those gadgets. In fact I had some intercom installation done at Manasas Virginia avionics shop. I had charts, same as when I flew down the Hudson and around the Statue of Liberty. Maybe I was just lucky.
And I never wrote that my friend should not have or use all that $100k of screens in his Cirrus, just that maybe he could also carry the free sectional that I offered him. You might be amazed, that right there on every sectional that I have ever seen next to the airport is the critical info. elevation, runway length, and radio frequencies. Of course it is probably in your technolgy in your panel also.
I know people who would go out without there shoes on before leaving their cell phone or ipad. It is just essential, isn't it? What did they do the year before the cell phone was invented?
And of course I never go anywhere, I only fly right here locally in the county. Except for 35 years of going to Oshkosh and flying in Hawaii, Canada and England and Bahamas and Puerto Rico among others.
I had a friend Linda Finch who flew around the world on the Amelia Earhart route. The two brand new old design radial engines Pratt and Whitey build for her worked flawlessly, then new radios and avionics gave trouble in places.

[Airmutt]

Well it’s basically tough for us to assimilate new technologies. We are creatures of habit and want to insert our past experiences and expectations. The law of primacy states that which is learned first is best learned. It doesn’t help that the various HW and SW vendors have their own approaches. It’s all about the training.
Your friend probably paid a lot of money for his Cirrus and is obviously not getting his money worth’s. He either got short changed on his systems training or he slept thru it.

[Auburntsts]

I don’t think there’s any argument that flights can be conducted without the latest electronics or computers as we all know they can. I got my ticket in 1986 so been there done that. I think the question is why are you seemly so against the tech? You seem to be advocating that reverting back to a simpler way is somehow superior. I fly an IFR cruiser similar in capability to your friends Cirrus and I believe that the tech enhances that mission. I also want to build a Pietenpol which as you know is on the other end of the spectrum—about as basic as it gets. There’s no right or wrong with either approach, it’s mainly a matter of pilot preference although I’d argue that tech can be a double edge sword in that it can provide fantastic capabilities but also create problems if the user isn’t versed in its operation.

[BJC]

I imagine that, when the slip/skid ball indicator first was introduced, some pilots were heard to say, “If you can’t feel it in the seat of your pants, you shouldn’t be flying.” Technology will continue to provide new options. Usage is up to each individual.


BJC

[rwanttaja]

I imagine that, when the slip/skid ball indicator first was introduced, some pilots were heard to say, “If you can’t feel it in the seat of your pants, you shouldn’t be flying.” Technology will continue to provide new options. Usage is up to each individual.

There was resistance to closed cabins for exactly that reason. Many of the early transport aircraft had a cabin for passengers, but still put the pilots in the open because it was felt they needed to feel the wind.

Mind you, they were right....:-)

https://www.century-of-flight.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/one-of-the-first-air-mail-trial-flights-conducted-in-1925.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Armstrong_Whitworth_A_W_154_Argosy_Mk_I_%281926%29 .jpg

Also, the first Stout-designed prototype of the Ford Trimotor had the pilots in the open.

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Greenwood]

Todd, never underestimate technology, and the newer and more unneeded and unproven the cooler. In that vein I have got a deal for you. Its a new ap to count votes in a state election. Does it do anything not done by actual people for 70 years? Does it work? Is it proven?
Hey, it's not cool to ask those questions, just ask the emperor where he got those spiffy new clothes?
Just send me, say $2 million and you too can have the latest ap. And I'll throw in my phone number in case you can't find atc radio frequencies and need to call me.

[Auburntsts]

Bill, I never said tech is a panacea and I typically heed sage advice like never adopt the beta version of anything. Failed caucus apps aside, if the tech is proven, like my EFB or my IFR GPS navigator, I see no issue with adopting tech if it adds value. For me lots of tech in the cockpit, for my mission, definitely does. You are free to use tech if you want to or not, but I just don't share your seemingly luddite views on the subject.

[WLIU]

You know, I do not miss trying to refold a sectional chart while the Pitts attempts to roll inverted with my hand off the stick. The moving map software in the tablet strapped to my knee makes life much easier. And in any open cockpit aircraft, keeping paper charts under control is an activity not missed. That said, I have a Garmin portable as backup in case the tablet has a momentary issue.

Having flown coast-to-coast in little airplanes with a pencil line on a paper chart, I enthusiastically embrace modern navigational technology. If you can run a smart-phone, you're smart enough to learn to run a glass-cockpit. Its another excuse to get in the airplane and fly. Which is what this is all about right? Just don't forget to enjoy the view out the window.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Airmutt]

I don’t know Wes paper has its benefits....
Paper is neither an EMI source or victim.
It folds up nicely to shield the sun.
Keeps the peanut butter & jelly or mustard from dripping on my lap.
Doesn't require batteries an overpriced mount or an A&P to install.
Don’t have to get an expensive piece of glass replaced when it falls from the mount or gets dropped.
It’s sunlight readable.
Don't have to clean someone’s grubby fingerprints from the glass.

But boy glass sure makes life easier and more time to enjoy the view.

[saber25]

Having many hours at altitude while navigating my 727 from here to there with a high altitude chart, I still like the feel and looks of a WAC chart in my lap while flying the RV4. I did install an Apollo GPS in '91 since the sectional folding and unfolding was unwieldy in such a fast plane so I switched to WAC's, some of which I still have with my course lines in black. Much later I sprang for the Garmin Aera 500 which was a considerable improvement plus I could move it from RV to Pitts to Laser when the need arose but I still have my now well taped WAC charts.

When I stop at the FBO's along the way due to my two hour bladder I always check for paper in the john before sitting down. It makes me confident of the outcome.

Many cheers

[Floatsflyer]

If you can run a smart-phone, you're smart enough to learn to run a glass-cockpit.

Best of luck,

Wes

If only that were true! The learning curve to competently and confidently operate an original Garmin G1000 is a hundred times greater than operating an Apple iPhone. The latter is far more intuitive than the former.

The G1000 user guide and operating manual is 3 inches thick. The Apple phone handbook doesn't really exist, you have to go to a website for info so I can't easily measure that.

[Mayhemxpc]

The learning curve to competently and confidently operate an original Garmin G1000 is a hundred times greater than operating an Apple iPhone. The latter is far more intuitive than the former.



100% agree. And once gained, G1000 competency is a fast deteriorating skill!

[Bill Greenwood]

I haven't had much exposure to glass cockpit stuff. Im signed off in a Diamond, but really I just flew the plane didn't know what some of that hocus pocus was. I did use an early Garmin GPS, 250xl I think, to fly solo across Canada, and I was beginning to get the hang of it.
I wish someone who had a plane with that stuff would sit down and teach me how it works, but my limited time mostly was with them punching things and little or no teaching.

I was at the AOPA fly in at Santa Fe this summer and talking to the really nice guy at the Garmin booth. One thing he said was don't go jump in a new plane with a G1000 and set off into real imc weather and think it s a cinch. He said it may take 6 weeks to get pretty much competent.

By the way, I have an Apple 8 and don't understand much of it either.

[Floatsflyer]

100% agree. And once gained, G1000 competency is a fast deteriorating skill!

Thanks for bringing this up, I forgot that part. Too many sequences, too many functions, too many places on the panels to know what you want when you want them and oh ya, you gotta fly the airplane at the same time. Like an IFR rating, you've got to keep current with this stuff. And it's too easy to forget to look outside to see and be seen.

[rwanttaja]

And in any open cockpit aircraft, keeping paper charts under control is an activity not missed.
Four words on how I handle it: "The One-Cheek Sneak."

Ron "Works on the ground, too" Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

Thanks for bringing this up, I forgot that part. Too many sequences, too many functions, too many places on the panels to know what you want when you want them and oh ya, you gotta fly the airplane at the same time. Like an IFR rating, you've got to keep current with this stuff. And it's too easy to forget to look outside to see and be seen.
I think many of the companies don't understand how necessary it is for a separate user interface test group. After you've been working six months to develop a new device, what you understand as a "simple, logical, flow" for the user interface is tainted by your in-depth knowledge.

Apple and the Android folks know that half their customers are going to be of below-average intelligence, and seem to work to simplify things as much as possible. I wonder if the avionics manufacturers are taking too much for granted.

A while back, we built a run of satellites and put some into cold storage. It was assumed that, at some point in the future, the government would want to launch a replacement. It was ALSO assumed that all the experienced people would be on other programs or retired when that happened.

I wrote the "wake up" procedures to what I thought was the "lowest level of understanding." Then we brought in another engineer with zero experience on the program, gave him the procedures, and told him to go ahead. Ended up doing a lot of revisions on that manual....

Ron "The eight-pin plug goes into the EIGHT-pin jack" Wanttaja

[Mayhemxpc]

The Garmin 1000 suite does a lot of great stuff and is real value added for the Civil Air Patrol 182s and 206s. Our 172s, however, I think should be kept round dial as a training platform. Teach the cadets how to fly first, and then to manage on board computer systems.

A couple of years ago, I was undergoing my annual re-evaluation as a CAP check pilot. After completing the ride, the evaluator asked why I never used the reversion mode (showing the primary flight display on the screen closer to me.) I pointed at the back up round dials and said, "What makes you think I ever looked at the PFD at all?"