Guys,

Long story, but it's been over twenty years since I was in the general aviation end of things.

Which cockpit instruments would be considered safer/more reliable for a light aircraft, dials or glass?

Twenty views and no replies?!

Because you can't answer a generic question like that with any sort of accuracy.


What manufacturer?

New, or Modded?

Who did the Mods?  

Did they do a good job?

What are you going to be using it for?     VFR only, or Hard IFR?

I would certainly lean towards Glass, but I also am highly of aftermarket mods.     There is no generalized right answer.  


The Proline 21 system used on Corporate Jets works real good, lasts long time.   Except when it doesn't.    Then it costs more than you can afford.

Rr

Ok, fair enough.

I may buy a light sport aircraft next year. It's been twenty years since I flew round dials and I don't know what's what.

If you buy new Garmin or Advanced glass, would you trust it to do night single engine IFR? If not, which glass would you trust?

If you buy the above brands, are they considered more or less reliable than the old dials?

Sorry, I don't have any recent experience with recips.    jets and TP's have glass where the displays can be flipped around to make up for the loss of any of them.  Also, a fully independant standby AI which can be used to shoot an ILS.  Gives you options.   I have seen several assorted system failures, but only a couple during flight.

Make sure you have a good quality standby attitude indicator if you are going to fly night IMC.   Also, hard core training and recency of experience.     Pay whatever it costs.

Thanks.

The aircaft I fly at work have the steam powered back ups too.

What I was concerned with is that if the Advanced screen quits, it takes everything with it. Whereas, if you lose any one of your round dials, you just fly partial panel.

Even with a full panel of glass, you're still required to have a backup AI, DG and turn coordinator so you have a partial panel when and if the glass breaks.

Look at the L3 Trilogy back-up unit; it works the same as the primary glass panel and has its own internal battery.

I mostly fly turbine glass also but I have a VFR homebuilt with a Dynon D-180 which puts EVERYTHING (even engine data) on one screen. It has been flawless for for four years and 500 hours. I think that the reliability of even the non-certified boxes is near that of the steam guages and if you're flying one of the certified units such as the Garmin then it may be more reliable than the steams but at a price.

There is so much more data in one spot that is more logically presented with these things that there is really no going back to round dials except for someone seeking some nostalgia.

The key is always redundancy. If you're in the clouds make certain you have two screens in operation...:)

I've got a great deal of time on both in GA and will tell you they are both reliable. However, when things go bad in glass they can go really bad. I've had pitot & static lines switched on a G1000 diamond, everything read normal until we rotated. Charlton have scrapped out and avadines have lost all data input. But, in the grand scheme of things I've had just as much go wrong on steam gauges.

The long and the short is you should get what you want and train for the worst possible scenario. If you're going light sport you won't be going IFR anyway.

Interesting.

Thanks.

I'm not sure that, on the average, either is more or less reliable than the other. And as others have said, even in glass cockpits you're required to have an independent backup display. The avionics I fly/have the most experience with is the Proline 21 system (already mentioned by another poster), and I love it. Really good displays, and I've only ever had minor issues that were fixable while airborne. Others in my unit have had more serious issues, but we have a lot of additional stuff on the plane and fly them harder than they were ever meant to be flown, so it's expected. In all cases, through reversionary displays and the backup display, we've recovered just fine. It is very expensive, though.

Where there IS a very noticeable safety difference is the overall SA provided. For this reason, I'd argue that glass is safer simply because it's able to provide a lot of very good information simultaneously, in very easy to interpret formats. Most of it depends on what you pay for, but you can have moving maps, terrain readouts, real time weather, and other traffic all up at the same time, in addition to your basic altitude/airspeed/course etc. If you have the right package/subscriptions, you can pull up legal instrument approach plates and see your aircraft position transposed on top of them real time, giving you great SA/orientation with the field in the weather. Same with airfield diagrams on the ground. Overall, you're just capable of displaying a LOT more information. Though, again, it's going to reflect in your bank account.


And of course, like others have said, it's going to ultimately come down to training on whatever you go with and getting very comfortable with your displays.

as others have said, glass is really nice until it breaks.  But its awfully darn nice when it works right

I don't think this is correct - I can't find a FAR that says a backup AI/DG/TC is required.    I've seen IFR capable (E)SLAs that lacked these, as well - not sure I'd be crazy about it, but there you go.   Finally, my RV-6A has Dynon glass but no backup AI or DG and it is IFR capable (and I've flown it as such many times - but I do have a TC and an airspeed indicator).

you can have glass backup, just needs to be independent.  Not sure how SLA's come in to play, but certified panels should have a backup (I think?)



for your reading pleasure



http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/1019680



 

I've experienced failures in both. I've experienced two vacuum pump failures and I've had a G1000 lock up completely. I also had a Dynon D1 start dancing on me. As far as night IFR is concerned, I'd say instrument failure is the least of my concerns. In order for me to fly any airplane at night or in IFR (granted, I'm only flying piston singles), I'm going to have plenty of day VFR time in it first to gain confidence in it. You'd want to make sure that the LSA is compliant with 91.205 in regards to equipment and given the light handling characteristics of many, if not all, airplanes in the light sport category, I'd think that an autopilot would be a necessity.

 

As is a lot of dial stuff.

 

 

Steam gauges for the win!    Televisions for gps.

I know they work and are the most wonderful thing in the world,  until they go dark.
I have seen them go black in both Cirrus and Cessnas.  Im not talking about one of them.  Everything went dark.

21,300 and something hours there is  not much I have not seen. Couple of engine failures, one twin one single.  Single in a hay field and twin to the airport.  Electrical failure, hydraulic failure,  landing gear taking a nap.    Ever been tooling along map in the back and look up and notice that the GPS sats are gone?

I have had Horizons go bad, this instrument or that instrument.  Point is, If one dies, you have others to continue on.  Every try and shoot an approach with only primary instruments?

I have dual instruments,  like vacuum horizon and electric horizon, giving two seperate power sources.  etc etc.  Do not ever think that you cant lose both televisions at the same time.  You can.

Cost.  Not purchase cost, but it broke cost.   Garmin systems from a Cirrus cost a ton of money just to set it on the bench.  Then another ton of cash to fix it.