How well do your instruments talk to you?

[old man emu]

The various instruments we have in our aircraft are talking to us from the time we do the pre-flight until we do the post-flight inspections. Some have simple messages to tell us, and some more complicated. THe more complicated the message, the more effort is put into the communication design of the instrument to make its message clearer. Here is a story that illustrates that at times, poor communication design can kill. It was the Day the Music Died.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Not sure if this link will work but check this out for experimental or RAA use. This one the Lidar head is only a small one but he has a Lidar head that will do 500ft

 

https://www.facebook.com/j.cox.92372/videos/10221775648973824

[Jase T]

Love Flywire he has some great videos... I am a bit of a luddite and prefer old fashioned gauges because thats what I am used to. I never had to work out what mode the ball AH was in or what menu page the HSI was on. I have even flown in IMC at night single pilot in a helicopter with only a an ADF for navigation. I prefer needles on an RMI for SA in relation to a VOR. That said there is much to be said for the SA enhancements afforded by modern equipment but in a VFR see and be seen world there is also a lot to be said for setting an attitude using the huge AI out the front.

[antonts]

the very idea of modern instruments is to remove this "trying to talk" at all. They do not try, they do talk. They show synthetic picture and full 2D (or even 3D) situation, live map and filtered by criticalness engine data, they do not simplify the message just to be able to say it with couple of needles and drums. It significantly reduces perception errors which can be up to turn to the wrong side with classic DI or compensate nonexisting bank with cuckoo clock-style AH.

 

Of course it requires to grow with this idea, which appeared only 30 years ago with personal computer progress. It requires absolutely different approach to man-machine interactions, and can not be taught in one week. You must live for long in this virtual world, not just try to augment your senses with instruments like it was before - humans can not filter such a huge information flow, so you have to use it in full, as main source, or you obligatory miss something and as usual it will be the most vital part.

 

[facthunter]

You "INTERPRET instruments" Doing it wrong has been the cause of many accidents. The 3 needle altimeter is a case in point.  It's an instrument just made to be misread and mismanaged. The GPWS talks to you but may be a source of irritation and distraction if you are already responding to it . A stickshaker is very tactile and hard to ignore, but imagine one going off in error. I've had that happen. Basic instruments can confirm the plane's flying OK and safely when something like that happens. There's 3 altimeters in most  "Heavy" cockpits and duplication of autopilots when  used for Autoland.  

    In planning and managing an aeroplane NEVER trust everything on one thing as was done in the Mt Erebus accident. Nev

[kasper]

On 05/12/2020 at 4:59 PM, Kyle Communications said:

Not sure if this link will work but check this out for experimental or RAA use. This one the Lidar head is only a small one but he has a Lidar head that will do 500ft

 

https://www.facebook.com/j.cox.92372/videos/10221775648973824

Nice to see small touchscreen colour instruments ... and the issue is that enough engine/flight instruments to be useful is around US$1,600 - basically double that in AU$ landed and tax paid.

 

Not bad BUT if these guys thought about integrating them into a single box and touch screen instrument and put that out at anywhere near US$2,000 they would have a much better chance of ultralight sales.

 

Personally I'd love to see someone like this guy update an integrated system like the Amptronic GX2 to colour touch screen ... the GX1 and GX2 instruments were the bees knees in a trike 15 years ago ... colour touch screen would revolutionise it.

 

From what this guy has already done on individual instruments it would be more a design of board issue to integrate all the circuits he's already created onto 1 or 2 boards and integrate that into a proper touch screen around the 6-7" size in a dash mount.

[Kyle Communications]

About US$250 he says for that Lidar unit....I think it would all be better integrated as well but thats a lot larger job than most think. The software is major to get it all to work together at once. Its much easier to make single instruments but not practical for instal. But one or 2 special little ones dotted on the dash somewhere would be handy..like that Lidar one

 

[antonts]

5 hours ago, facthunter said:

 

    In planning and managing an aeroplane NEVER trust everything on one thing as was done in the Mt Erebus accident. Nev

never go to sea with two chronometers. Only with 3 or with 1.

 

Mt Erebus case was typical stoneage computer-human interface problem. Big computer somewhere in office gave big list on numbers - humans, take it and obey! No one ever can check it, it is absolutely out of anybody possibilities, even with detailed map and plenty of time. So in reality pilots rely on company experience - "we did it 10 times by these numbers, nothing changed since, so lets fly 11th time the same way!" - not on computers, maps and other instruments.

 

Lucky in 40 years passed we can get not just numbers and abbreviated names but full, detailed and live moving map with plotted flightplan. In seconds. Beforehand and on the spot, on cockpit display and wrist watch, and without any interpreting errors at all. Planning errors are still possible, but at least they can be visually detected.

 

[facthunter]

STILL Never just take ONE source of information without some possibility of it's verification.

...3  instruments sources and rejecting the one with the biggest drift is used with older inertial. The man/machine interface must be as CLEAR and unambiguous as can be designed.  HUD and virtual  view ?. and get rid of numbers. Numbers can have nearly no meaning whereas a rising strip gives rate and direction of change and a quantum  at a glance. That's one issue but there's still the  SOURCE of the information. Sensors etc and the risk of a failure of the system logic.. Nev

[graham brown]

I have an instrument in a glider that says “drink” every 1/2 hour. I say yes please a beer will do but it doesn’t deliver! I’ll have to get it fixed.

[danny_galaga]

Because I'm flying an ultralight (which is for fun) I prefer simple steam gauges. Yes there is more wiring, and the modern LCD screen thingies look very handy and easily interpreted, but I want simplicity first and foremost. 

 

The  exception being a navigation device I suppose but I haven't actually done my navs yet so I still enjoy just pootling around the local area 😄

Edited December 31, 2020 by danny_galaga
Stupid predictive text

[facthunter]

In theory, you COULD fly a digital circuit, but I think you are better off flying your circuit with near total reference to the RUNWAY (or landing path in the paddock) you intend to  use. At your "usual" aerodrome you will find and use reference points on the ground that are useful , but you won't have them at an unfamiliar aerodrome when you go to one.  You can of course use Googe earth and NOTE a few features for your orientation before you do the actual flight. Nev