hope i didn't come off harsh....honestly, if you want glass experience, play flight sim...works great. If you're hired into the ERJ, buy (or find someone with) the ERJ addon, CRJ do the same....it'll get you a great feeling for how the flight guidance controller works, and help you learn how to fly glass........and it'll be a heck of a lot cheaper than ANY transition course, which....isn't needed....you can do it.

Remember, just about everyone on here was once a CFI, at some point all of us were low time, some of us still are. Just flew with a captain who was explaining he was hired at about 500 hours, met another one hired with 400 hours, and all of this was lonnnnnnnng before the current market...it was during the last "hire everyone" airline rush, aka pre-9/11.

Here's the difference though USMC-Sgt. As you and I both come from a sturctured background and understand repetetive training.

Those 300 hour pilots probably flew 5-7 days a week straight.

I have 650 hours. It took me 12 years to get that. I amnot one of these richguys who could afford togo to a aviationprogram. i came up through the ranks one rating at a time as I had the money. I took a year off of flying to go to Bosnia withthe Army to get money for my PPL. I took another 18 months off to go to Iraq to pay for my CFI and II.

There is a thing called muscel memory. If you do something consistantly daily it will become second nature to yu. If you dont do it it wont. I havent flown a twin in 4 months. (no money) so if youstucj me in a twin jet tomorrow, I know I would be behind.

What I did do though was buy FSX and I like it if I can figure out how to make it do what I want.:D

I have the feelthere ERJ sim for flightsim, as well as the CRJ from Wilco. You're talking to someone who could start a 767 from cold and dark since before I solo'd, thanks to studying advanced flightsim add ons. I knew that you need pneumatic bleed air to get the engine started since before I knew what bleed air actually was. I'm the first and only pilot in my family, I never had a Dad with a 182 that I could build unlimited hours with, and who'll write me a letter of recommendation to his friend the CP of Delta. I'm here because I want to be, and I'm willing to put in the work to get where I want to get.

You say glass time is over-rated? I agree. I learned to fly in an old Cherokee. I came to WMU and got my IFR in a 172R. We didn't get the Cirrus until I had finished my commercial, and as someone who teaches primary students in it, I'll be the first to say that I think they should get some 172 time first. You'd be surprised at how often I have the PFD and MFD dimmed down because of student dependence on it. With that said, I stand by the fact that I feel a JET course is useful. 100% necessary? Not by a long shot. A useful tool? You bet.

It's not so much learning to fly the jet, it's learning to drink from the firehose of information getting thrown at you. Being introduced to the study habits required before your job depends on it. That's the advantage of the JET course, folks. Is it going to make you be able to shoot an ILS approach better than that other guy? Probably not.

Are your chances of being the one guy in class with the deer in the headlights look when the Expressjet teacher starts talking about how an "air cycle machine" works, or how to do a "crossbleed start" reduced? You bet.

cross bleed start....i read about it once....in a book. ;)

E170.......according to system logic.... :)

I second that. It worked for me. I was lucky to get on at a place that had a lot of Cirrus flying going on. It was a great intro to glass. It also has a fairly integrated autopilot, so the concept of mashing buttons in the correct sequence will be old hat to you when you get hired. Local approach controllers knew we were fast enough to mix in with 140kt approach traffic, so that experience will benefit you, too.

i just had a meeting with the aviation director at my dads company who fly G-5's. he was kind enough to send me down to Flight Safety in Delaware to fly in a G-5 sim with a new guy he just hired. after an amazing experience, i had a chance to talk with the new hire outside and he explained his background so i could get a little better understanding of what i could do with my career. he flew with XJET and Continental for a few years then turned corporate. he had close to 8,000 hours. all his prior training done in............a Cessna 150. i told him i was flying the Cirrus, he said "so what??" i got the impression from him that glass time doesnt really matter. he didnt fly glass for a long time and now hes making over 200,000 g's.

dont believe what the western is telling you. they are going to tell you that their program is the best and guarantee everything in the world because they want you to fly at the unversity. get ready to spend between 40,000 to 60,000 dollars to do all of your flight training at western. dont believe me??? i just got done and i have spent close to 50,000K. the letter that they send out to you or your parents with all the updated flight fees are BS. those are complete bare minimums and if you just budget for that, then you will be sadley mistaken and wonder why your putting 10K more into your flight account. i liked western, it has great opportunity but if you are just looking at glass time. i think it really doesnt matter.....

Despite all the joking.. that isn't an acceptable answer during the oral ;)

Well, its good to see that the old-school route of flying dials has not disappeared. I am glad that i got my first flying experience in a 152, it taught me a lot and i am glad i did it. However, for those who think the FBO route is always cheaper and better, i have to disagree. I did my pp at the FBO that i worked at and was incredibly disappointed. I had 4 different instructors who taught me a different way every time. I was constantly cancelled on for no real reason and the aircraft were ALWAYS down for mx. It took me over a year and a half and about 12 g's for me to get my license. Im sure this is not always the case and not even the norm, but WMU has been more cost effective for me. As long as you fly all the time and study hard, you can be near the minimums.

Thats true, make sure you know the full story about WMU. I also liked western; having got my PPL at a part 61 school first, you don't have to worry about airplanes not being up, etc at Western. I think we're not as well known to prospective students as we should be, but wherever you decide to go, make sure you get the full story from current students first.

i hate to make this a "WMU" thread but you have to understand that it could very well take you over a year and a half to get any of your other ratings as well. and the way cfi's are being hired at airlines, you could very well have 4+ instructors at western like i did. you have to fly with a new instructor 3 times before they can sign you off for anything. you wanna talk about cost effectiveness??? try getting a new instructor right before your multi ride....

You have a valid point about the instructors leaving, i still think that with the standardization, I will be better off if and when that time comes. And i might just be lucky, but i have gotten through half of my instrument course in less than a month. Anyway, my questions about glass have been answered and i appreciate the advice everybody.

Trust me, with the newly announced benefits we're getting, CFI's will be staying around a lot longer...

new benefits huh??? Must be givin the admin fits when 15 of you guys leave in two months

Yeah, they don't like it much, although they say they want us to get real jobs (since that is supposed to be the goal, after all...)

however, the replies , "PFM, pure freakin magic," and "smoke & mirrors" does ;)

Or in the case of the JungleJet, it is well-known that BM - Brazilian Magic makes the Airplane fly! And btw, "smoke and mirrors" worked just fine on my Oral LoL

what does WMU charge on those cirrus??

$151.12/hour, as of today.

And how much for the Intructor?? That's an easy way to tag on addt'l chunk of cash.

$43/hour for the instructor.

Of which the Instructor can't be seeing directly more than 25%, correct?

Check your PM. G'night.

I just wanted to chip in my $.02 on this one. In my opinion, glass cockpit training/TAA training and experience is extremely valuable when it comes time to begin training on an RJ. Almost all of my dual given was in G1000-equipped airplanes (I did the whole FITS certification for G1000), and have since gone through training at 2 airlines. I found that my foundation of experience with glass, FMS, autopilot/flight flight director, AHRS, ADC, etc. made the transition to the jet very smooth. The number one problem that my classmates had when it came to getting through training was learning to properly use and understand the automation, whereas for me (and my few classmates with TAA experience), automation was second nature. Can you get through training without TAA experience? Absolutely you can... But having some experience with advanced equipment is, in my opinion, invaluable. In summary, I'll say this: If you have an opportunity to fly glass, or better still to instruct in glass, its well worth a few extra bucks. At the very least, even if you don't do all your training in a TAA, you may find it worthwhile to at least log a few hours in one. One thing is certain: the era of the steam gauge is in its twilight.

Andy, I've gotta agree with your post. Very good points. However, I feel that you should start in a conventional panel to get the basics, then transition into glass. How often did you find your primary students relying too much on the glass?

We're in a transition period, so to speak, in that a lot of new students are starting in glass, but all of the instructors teaching in the glass planes learned on steam gauges. I think it's up to us to make sure that we teach the basics, so that when the guys who started in glass become CFI's, they don't teach their own glass dependence.

However I agree that having some glass time can be very beneficial for transitioning to a regional airliner.

The next few years will be very telling indeed, as the first "generation" of pilots who've never seen a steam gauge come up through the ranks. I feel that although advanced avionics offer a great deal more in terms of simplicity, and safety (when properly used and understood), one still has to learn how to read, use and interpret instruments. To use an analogy that I was fond of telling my students when asked this question, Glass is akin to a digital clock, wheras steam gauges are like a convential clock. Both are equally good at telling you the time, its just displayed in a different format. The digital clock is much more accurate, i.e. capable of displaying time to the nearest nanosecond, while the traditional clock provides less resolution and accuracy. Either way however, one still must learn what this information means. You still need to know that there are 60 minutes in an hour, 60 seconds in a minute, and 24 hours in a day to properly understand and interpret what either clock is telling you. Similarly, one still must learn what a localizer and glideslope are, how many degrees wide the course it provides happens to be, and how to bracket, track and correct for wind in order to fly an ILS. Basically, I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not sure the presumption that a student will not learn "the basics" in a TAA is an entirely valid one. One must still learn the basics, they are simply taught and learned differently.

When I say the basics, I am referring more to the private student who constantly wants to hold altitude by looking at the pretty screen, instead of looking where the nose is on the horizon. Funny, we then see IOE captains complaining that new guys can shoot an ILS fine, but can't do a visual approach.

As far as instrument training, I don't feel the glass is a huge hindrance, although the lack of true partial panel practice, and the fact that you don't have to keep as much mental situational awareness with the moving map and hold entries drawn out for you can cause a problem if the student isn't well motivated.

Wow, that was a long sentence...

Fly safe.

I was thinking you meant Instrument basics. I'll admit that there were times when I would turn off the PFD to force a primary student to look outside. I'll also say that I've had the same thing happen with steam gauges. Its fairly common for a student to fixate on whatever instruments there happen to be. Its up to the CFI to ensure that they do not. I think the phenomemnon you're describing is more attributable to lack of experience and proper instruction than the equipment.

I can agree with that.

I'll agree with this too. A related personal story: I was filling in for a sick instructor and flew an IFR cross country with a student. In the middle of the flight I asked, "How do you know you're on course?" The reply, "Cuz I'm on the pink line."

He navigated the rest of the flight single nav with no GPS.

Interestingly enough, now there is a related thread about the DA-42. I was just wondering... From what I understand (correct me if I'm wrong), Cessna no longer offers steam gauges. Can you still buy a new airplane with steam gauges?

IMO, its better to train without glass and truly learn the basics. The reason, it's easier to move up to glass than to go from glass down to round dials. The RJs are 2nd generation EFIS and you will transition to them easy. However, the 737-300/400/500, MD80, 757, 767, DC-8, 727, 747-200/300, DC-10, etc. are either first generation EFIS or no glass cockpit at all. If you don't know how to fly with the old technology you will have a hard time transitioning to that equipment when you leave the RJ. DAL, UAL, NWA, AA, CO, LCC, FDX, UPS, et al fly the old technology airplanes and will for quite some time.

The military starts guys out on 40 year old airplanes with no modern technology. Why? They learn the basics. That never goes out of style.

A very good point...espcially if you go to NWA and get the DC-9. Boy that cockpit looks a mess! Don't forget to tune and identify!:D

I have to disagree. There are plenty of airlines (even ones that are highly desirable for job seekers: UPS, FedEx, SWA etc.) that still use steam and will use it for some time to come. Some, i.e. World, are even adding steam airplanes to their fleet. Also remember that some airplanes that are designated as glass is really first generation EFIS. From a workload perspective compared to today's glass, those might as well be steam.

Another vote for learning with steam. Being given a holding entry under pressure with glass, easy. With steam, not nearly as easy. Glass spoon feeds and provides you with your situational awareness. Steam makes you work for it.