Glass Cockpits At Aviation Universities. What Do Schools Use Them For?

Bandit_Driver

Gold Member
WMU has beer canned the 747 and got a 727 from FedEx now.

they are mostly all glass except for the Arrow and a the twins I believe. All the ASEL stuff is GLASS..
 

Adler

Low-Level Individual
WMU has beer canned the 747 and got a 727 from FedEx now.

they are mostly all glass except for the Arrow and a the twins I believe. All the ASEL stuff is GLASS..
Does WMU have any steam gauges for training? or all glass? Just wondering.

As far as I know, the only steam gauge airplane kids really fly is the arrow - and only if they do their commercial initial in the single. The Pa44's were converted to glass. They also have the floatplane and a decathalon, but those don't really count.
 

z987k

Well-Known Member
Resurrecting an old discussion here - but wanted to give an update on our training program of putting all private pilot training in back-to-basics tailwheel airplanes - the Citabria. We have been blown away with how well our flight students are now learning basic flight skills, how to land the airplane consistently and correctly, and how well they have done in the transition to glass for Instrument (into our Skyhawks). We started the all-tailwheel private pilot training about 1 year ago, and we have been extremely pleased with the results.
If you are considering a school because of its commitment to all glass trainers and high end airplanes throughout the fleet - we would invite you to come visit LeTourneau University and have a flight in one of our Citabrias with an instructor here.
That's awesome.
 

Zapphod Beblebrox

Well-Known Member
I am showing my age but long before Delta retired it's last DC-9's I got to see the cockpits. They had the most antiquated arrangement I had ever seen. They did not have a conventional HSI with CDI. Below the primary attitude indicator there was an RMI as the primary navigation instrument.

There was a separate ILS type indicator for ILS approaches. So imagine flying airways on VOR airways without even an HSI, only relying on an RMI for course guidance. It can be done and Delta used to do it with the DC-9 fleet. I had an old instructor that said the RMI is your best friend in the cockpit. If you can comfortably navigate with the RMI you can go anywhere.

Go figure
 

killbilly

Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
One of the things I really like about the FBO I use is that despite having multiple glass aircraft, they STRONGLY advise learning 6-pack first.

They just need more tailwheels. :)

EDIT: I flew a glass C172 once with an instructor and I hated it. Kept getting distracted and wasn't focusing on the flying. This was before I got my PPL.

Never went back to it. Doing my IR now and will be concentrating on the six pack.
 

drunkenbeagle

Gang Member
One of the things I really like about the FBO I use is that despite having multiple glass aircraft, they STRONGLY advise learning 6-pack first.

They just need more tailwheels. :)

EDIT: I flew a glass C172 once with an instructor and I hated it. Kept getting distracted and wasn't focusing on the flying. This was before I got my PPL.

Never went back to it. Doing my IR now and will be concentrating on the six pack.
Would suggest doing both. Reason being, this is like a vi vs. emacs, mac vs. PC type of religious thing with pilots. The reality is that you will end up flying both, so might as well get used to that up front. Glass is great for SA. Old school is great too when you want to fly someplace, and that is what there is.

For what it is worth, I did my IR checkride in a glass 172, and almost all of the instruction in a dinosaur P28R.
 

killbilly

Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Would suggest doing both. Reason being, this is like a vi vs. emacs, mac vs. PC type of religious thing with pilots. The reality is that you will end up flying both, so might as well get used to that up front. Glass is great for SA. Old school is great too when you want to fly someplace, and that is what there is.

For what it is worth, I did my IR checkride in a glass 172, and almost all of the instruction in a dinosaur P28R.
I may do exactly this. I figure I can get a rental checkout done at the same time as some glass-transition stuff in the FBOs 182.

At this point, though, I gotta save a bit of dosh. This NJC-IR flight thing may still be feasible depending on a few customer deals I'm working. Commission checks fund flyinng. :)
 

based

Well-Known Member
I did all my PPL and IFR training in a glass cockpit Archer. Someone flying the Archer had a prop strike the week before I was going to take my checkride. The plane went into mx for months. So instead of waiting indefinitely and forgetting everything, I jumped into a 6 pack 172. The transition was definitely a challenge. Tracking VORs and the localizer using the CDI (when I had only done it before on an HSI) made it look like I was on my first lesson again. My scan was too slow for the 6 pack, made giant "S" patterns across the localizer, busted altitudes, went full scale deflection a few times etc... It took around 6-7 hours of extra training on the 6 pack before I had the technique down and could fly to the PTS. It felt like huge hassle at the time, but it all ended up being worth it in the end.
 

ThreeHoler

Well-Known Member
I did my private and instrument training (and tailwheel) at LeTourneau a few years ago. Got my IR in 2012 and haven't flown much since, but I'm looking to finish my flight training and finally break into a career of commercial flying. I'll most likely go to a flight school with six pack airplanes, and the thought of redoing my instrument training and doing an IPC in a non-G1000 airplane is daunting to say the least. It will be like starting over from scratch. But I know it needs to be done. In many ways, I feel cheated having done all of my instrument flying in LeTourneau's G1000 Skyhawks. It was way too easy. In comparison, doing it all sans glass/GPS seems incredibly difficult. I feel like I was done a disservice by LETU. Thankfully, I was at least smart enough to not go for the aero science degree, and instead got a B.S. in business administration; the flight training was on the side. I agree with everyone in this thread who has said that instrument training should initially be done on six pack instrumentation. A pilot should first "earn their stripes" the old school way, so to speak, and once they prove they can do it on steam gauges, only then should they be given the privilege of G1000 instrument flying. My old man is a retired airline pilot, and even he didn't steer me on the correct path in this regard.
 

z987k

Well-Known Member
Well the tailwheel training is something not many people get, and very valuable IMO.

It takes a competent 6 pack pilot about an hour in a G1000 airplane to be comfortable. I'm not sure what it is the other way around with no 6 pack experience.
 

ahw01

Well-Known Member
Glad I trained all steam gauge. There aren't many left at the places I trained. DVT/PMP.

When I was working on CFI, people kept asking me why I was writing, making notes.

They all had iPads and wondered why FOI wasn't sinking into their brains easily.
 

gotWXdagain

Highly Visible Member
The Seminoles flying around at "Harvard of the Skies" now come equipped with a G1000 cockpit. The standby instrument is now a little Aspen EADI/EHSI combo. Kids these days.
 

jim511

Well-Known Member
The perfect riddle kid will learn in a glass cockpit. Teach for riddle till 1000hrs. (All glass) then go to skywest. (More glass). This is why riddle And Many schools are going full glass. Sure there are companies that still fly /A. But the majority of kids are going to full glass cockpits.
 

SlumTodd_Millionaire

Socialist Pig Member
The problem is that while many of them will go straight to glass, others won't. Many will go to part 135 cargo outfits, or part 91 corporate gigs, and lots of round dials still abound there.

I'm the the JetCareers version of Flying's Phil Goyer: I'm all about the automation and technology. But all of that automation and technology is there is to reduce workload and enhance safety, not to be used as a crutch. If you don't have the basic fundamentals down first, then you've got a problem. What are you going to do when that technology takes a crap and you're left flying with that little Aspen standby horizon and a standby airspeed indicator? I'm not one of those Luddites who thinks you need to practice that hand flying and raw data crap on a regular basis, but you do need to have the experience to start with in order to keep yourself out of trouble later on.
 

esa17

Well-Known Member
I've never understood why Garmin didn't include a display mode feature that allows them to be a classic six-pack or the new whiz bang glass EFIS.

United (I think) had their 737-700 sims setup to do just that so I know it could be done.
 
I did my private and instrument training (and tailwheel) at LeTourneau a few years ago. Got my IR in 2012 and haven't flown much since, but I'm looking to finish my flight training and finally break into a career of commercial flying. I'll most likely go to a flight school with six pack airplanes, and the thought of redoing my instrument training and doing an IPC in a non-G1000 airplane is daunting to say the least. It will be like starting over from scratch. But I know it needs to be done. In many ways, I feel cheated having done all of my instrument flying in LeTourneau's G1000 Skyhawks. It was way too easy. In comparison, doing it all sans glass/GPS seems incredibly difficult. I feel like I was done a disservice by LETU. Thankfully, I was at least smart enough to not go for the aero science degree, and instead got a B.S. in business administration; the flight training was on the side. I agree with everyone in this thread who has said that instrument training should initially be done on six pack instrumentation. A pilot should first "earn their stripes" the old school way, so to speak, and once they prove they can do it on steam gauges, only then should they be given the privilege of G1000 instrument flying. My old man is a retired airline pilot, and even he didn't steer me on the correct path in this regard.
I've had zero problems going from G1000 back to (mostly) steam, did my IR at Letu as well. To me steam gauges are easier in many ways because there is much less button pushing. In the commercial world it seems like everyone typically has at least a G430 so being familiar with Garmin has been helpful there too.
 
Last edited:
Top