|
Originally Posted by David Puddy
(Post 3145356)
I don’t understand why Delta and JB are passing on the HUDs for the A220. Both SWISS and Air Canada use dual HUDs on their A220s. I realize feelings about using HUDs are mixed by pilots. Sure, the HUDs on the 190s further cramp an already tight cockpit, but the A220 has a wider cockpit and I believe it would further enhance safety.
|
Originally Posted by RedOverWhite
(Post 3145457)
Having flown with the HUD and a corp aircraft with synthetic vision on the PFD, I much prefer the synthetic vision. Not only do you not have something to whack your head on, but it just looks way cooler. I’m sure the 220 can incorporate it on those massive screens but I doubt we’d pay for it. It was $150k on a Phenom. Collins would probably charge us 10x that.
|
Originally Posted by rvr1800
(Post 3145469)
Enhance safety in what ways? The HUD seems like a gimmick when auto land is an option. I’ll be content if I never fly a plane with a HUD again.
HUD is rarely operationally useful, takes up huge space, and frankly causes more problems than it solves while wasting time staying current on useless options. Not to mention the functional loss of skill for those who over use it. |
Somebody close this thread before they change their minds and install HUDs.
|
They got burned by the dual huds. Our SOPs are so built around the huds that our simulators are the only ones usable for training because they are the only ones so equipped. Now when they need the sims for training we have only have 2, thanks to a certain upper manager.
They wanted the huds because we had a fighter pilot in the position to make that decision....and what does it give us? 300 RVR takeoff capability on some runways that we don’t fly to... When was the last time you took off in actual 500 rvr? Been on the plane 8 years and I’ve done actual 500 twice and never done lower (I’d rather not) other than the sim. The 190 is capable of cat 3 autoland but the hud gives it both the lower TO min and cat 3 (hand flown). They didn’t want to pay for both so they got the huds...now they have the training roadblock |
Originally Posted by avi8orco
(Post 3145935)
They got burned by the dual huds. Our SOPs are so built around the huds that our simulators are the only ones usable for training because they are the only ones so equipped. Now when they need the sims for training we have only have 2, thanks to a certain upper manager.
They wanted the huds because we had a fighter pilot in the position to make that decision....and what does it give us? 300 RVR takeoff capability on some runways that we don’t fly to... When was the last time you took off in actual 500 rvr? Been on the plane 8 years and I’ve done actual 500 twice and never done lower (I’d rather not) other than the sim. The 190 is capable of cat 3 autoland but the hud gives it both the lower TO min and cat 3 (hand flown). They didn’t want to pay for both so they got the huds...now they have the training roadblock |
Originally Posted by feltf4
(Post 3145955)
Cmon on. It’s fun hand flying down to 50’ at a million knots in the sim once a year hoping you don’t ball up the last 30’ where you’re trying to decided whether you actually see the lights in that low definition pixilated blob of gray graphic-ie mess. Mean while hoping I haven’t died durning the last 30’ feet so the FO doesn’t have to finish the job.
GUARD MY THROTTLES! |
Originally Posted by CaptCoolHand
(Post 3145960)
I like to make sure my fo is engaged and attentive during the couples approach. Light touching of the hand and whispers of “just let it happen”...
GUARD MY THROTTLES! |
Originally Posted by CaptCoolHand
(Post 3145960)
I like to make sure my fo is engaged and attentive during the couples approach. Light touching of the hand and whispers of “just let it happen”...
GUARD MY THROTTLES! |
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:55 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands