Glass Cockpits and Regionals
 

Hey everybody, as a new poster on this forum who will most likely be moving on to the regionals in a year or two, i have a question about glass cockpits. I am going to school at Western Michigan University and really enjoying it. However, the primary aircraft that we use for training are Cirrus SR-20/22's with full glass cockpits. Western says that "advanced aircraft" training will make us more marketable??? Is this true? How many regionals and 135 operators actually operate aircraft with glass?? Not dishing on Western, i like the program, just looking for answers from people in the industry. Safe skies everybody.

A good old fashioned Cessna 152 is all you need.

I'm a CFI at WMU, and I agree with PMeyer. The rates we charge you guys on the Cirrus are ridiculous.

I got my private in a 152, so i know the drill when it comes to steam gauges. I was just wondering how beneficial the glass will be when interview time comes.

Most of them, in fact.

The main benefit of training and operating EFIS equipped aircraft is knowing how the displays function, how to select their functions, and know their failure modes. Beyond that, all they are doing is indicating the same information that was displayed by analog instruments, back in the Pleistocene Epoch.

definately skip the glass cockpit thing. Get your training in the absolute CHEAPEST airplane you can possibly find and save the money, you will definately need it. If you so desire after your ratings have someone with a G1000 sim or avidyne sim just show you a few things at the most and you really dont even need that.

The plane I fly is all glass and id say over 80% of my class had no glass experience and up to now none of them had a problem with the transition. The whole "glass" training thing is a myth. It does not take you 200 hours in glass during training to be able to handle the transition. Id equate it to to jumping from a 152 to a 172 and no more difficult than that.

Get your ratings in the cheapest thing possible, then when your get your CFI and CFII you can instruct in a glass cockpit Cirrus at your current school =)

Your attitude at the interview is more important than anything. Get your ratings done cheap and save the money.

I'd say it's easier to transition from ol' fashioned to EFIS gauges, but not so easy the other way around, if you happen to get into a situation where you have to use steam gauges, you'll have that experience.

Why not? It's expensive and they babysit you.

I'm going to agree with most of the guys on this thread...train with cost in mind and don't worry about glass. Train in a 152...better yet, a Cub. The Cub will make you a better pilot than any glass will.

And this relates to glass vs. steam how????? The last thing we need is another College vs. F.B.O. thread.

Rates
 

What is the rental rate on a cirrus anyway?

Skyhigh

Yesterday
 

Yesterday I flew my Cessna 150 for half an hour. It cost me $8.72 in gas.

SkyHigh

Success in initial training for regional aircraft with advanced cockpits is mostly a function of attitude and the ability to learn new material in a compressed training environment. Prior experience in 'glass' is beneficial but not necessary.

Want to know what one of the most common problem areas is...and one that has led to failures in IOE?

A visual approach. As another poster said, there's something to be said for Cub time!!

But one thing on that...when coming to a high performance jet, leave the idea that 'pitch controls speed/power controls altitude' behind to the Cub world.

The Cirrus rates are much more than steam gauge rates. I guess I didn't need the other interjection, but I already said it.

When I was talking to a few regionals I told them that I had some glass experiance, and they in not is so many words said they really don't care. Get the Total and Multi time that is what they are looking for. However when ASA offered me a Interview they asked if I had any time in Glass.

I wouldn't pay extra for glass training, but if you get hired into a glass airplane you might want to play with a glass cockpit in MS FS. That way you'd know where things are and get used to some of the display presentations (like AS trend lines and sky pointers).

The first time i flew a glass cockpit was on Sim Lesson #1 at RAH. It's a non-issue. If you can fly steam gauges, glass is a joke.

But you waste the first session learning the glass...and you only get 7-8 before the checkride. An inexperienced pilot might need that extra session.

you mean someone that's so inexperienced that they probably shouldn't even be in training for an airline.

my first exposure to a glass cockpit was at TSA. it took me all of the first takeoff to figure out how to read and "interpret" the panel (read=follow the FD)

now, you might want to spend 5 or 6hrs in a cirrus right before you head off to initial training to refresh your memory, but spending 200hrs and a few extra thousand dollars to fly a glass cockpit? i'd pass.

I agree. My original suggestion was MS Flight Sim, not flight training in a real glass airplane.

"Western says that "advanced aircraft" training will make us more marketable???"

It might make you more marketable to be an RJ F/O at 300 hours. That, and the RJ course.

If you were looking at a typical 135 freight job, I'd say you'll have serious problems transitioning to old skool. Just keep that in mind, and plan for it. Get some time in a six pack 172 after you fly a six pack sim.

"Western says that "advanced aircraft" training will make us more marketable???"

Be wary of big academy marketing statements. It's often hogwash.

Thanks for the advice. Yes, the rates for the cirrus are much higher than that of your typical 152, but i like the standardization at the college. Also, we have a CRJ transition course in the curriculum so that will also be an option. It seems to have worked out for most of the CFI's I have talked to here.

I'll echo what others have said: Don't worry about the glass cockpit. It an extremely easy transition, it should take you a couple of hours at the most. Do your training in the cheapest plane you can that is safe, you will need the money later.

I don't think it matters other than the cost. If you're worried about it go to Skywest. The Brasilia has EFIS but it is so basic there is essentially no difference. In fact, we go between EFIS and non EFIS aircraft on a daily basis. The same may be true for the Saab. Never flown it though.

The biggest place where I figure a little training may come in handy during a speedy initial ground school is programming the box (CDU) or Flight Management Computer (FMC). Boeing, Airbus, Canadair etc. are all different but the philosophy is the same. However, if you're good with computers and can pick up new systems quickly I wouldn't worry about it.

With all that being said. C152. Or a 150 aerobat like I did. A G-meter for private training is a thing of beauty.

This is TRUTH!

For CFI's (rental, not proficiency), it's $140/hour, plus a current fuel surcharge of $11.12/hour. Student pay about $10/hour more.

I'll agree that the standardization we have is one of WMU's high points, but they do babysit students. One of the reasons I decided to go fly divers for a summer, so I could get a feeling for making my own PIC decisions.

Our JET course is very good, however.

[QUOTE=shackone;279449]Success in initial training for regional aircraft with advanced cockpits is mostly a function of attitude and the ability to learn new material in a compressed training environment.
QUOTE]

And what if you dont have this ability? Then wouldnt be a good idea to get a heads up by getting exposed to it before you go into an environment where you are being evaluated on it?

So is the jet course at an airline, and YOU don't have to pay for that.

Don't pay for what your employer or future employer should be paying for.

This definitely could be an issue if you ever are in a position where you want to go to a Part 135 operator using older pistons, turboprops, or jets. It's very different. I heard that Northwest was trying to hire directly into the Airbus instead of the DC9 because regional guys "don't know how to fly steam gauges"!

After several thousand hours behind old fashion gauges, I just got a type rating in a jet that's all glass without too much sweat. (OK, a little sweat but I'm old.) If you get the opportunity, I think some experience in both would serve you well.

[QUOTE=N6724G;279794]The average pilot can do this...are you saying you're below average and can't handle it?

If you're part of the Xbox/PS2 generation you shouldn't have a hard time going from dials to glass. It's usually the older folk that have to struggle to figure it out.

I agree, however taking the JET course reduces your chances of washing out of initial training at a regional. As much as I've paid to get my licenses, and as hard as I worked to build experience (I'm not a 300 hour wonder), I'm not going to risk washing out of training and ruining my career because I wasn't prepared for the intensity of airline training.

Not saying I can't pass without it, but why not help yourself out? I shelled out over 10K for my multi-commercial, I can shell out 1500 for a jet course.

Amen. I totally agree

As do I...some of these guys are too macho to admit that a bit of homework can make all the difference in the world LoL

Yeah, don't know how I (or almost all of my peers)ever made it from PPL to a major. Must have been all those(pick your jet) Cessna, Beech, CRJ, 737, 757, and 767 prep courses out there. :rolleyes:

If you are worried about failing ground school before you even start you're not ready. Where is the lack of confidence coming from?

I have to say that im with slice on this one. Passing airline training is not that difficult and any pilot of average skill can pass providing they put in the effort while at training.

Just tell yourself...look at all of those 300 hour pilots hired at these airlines with barely 20 multi and no rj course and they make it. Are you saying that they can do it and you cant? I know personally of people who have taken an RJ course and still failed training. In no way would I really even say that it is an advantage. In a ratio of cost to benefit gained id say that one is a lose lose situation. An example of a good investment is the turbine engine manual book (forgot the actual name) it will cost a few bucks on amazon and work wonders.

passing airline training isn't rocket science, but it's hard work. If you don't feel as if you're being pushed as you go through training, then you're probably not studying hard enough.

No macho-ism but there's a reason airline training is typically fast paced, and in the "old" world, unforgiving. It's because while you're qualified to be there, not everyone is cut out to be there. They will pile as much information on you as you can take, then pile on a little more, they'll tell you the date on which you'll take your oral, assign you an instructor, tell you when your checkride is going to be and with whom, and it doesn't matter if you've got a little quezy feeling in your stomach about your comfort in the sim, when your day comes up you gotta play ball. It's a tough way of doing business, but, it keeps the guys out who may not have what it takes when the alternate is hard IFR, and the destination is worse, your engine is on fire and the captain is dead.

Personally I wouldn't take a Jet course...I got through TSA training w/500 hrs when half the rest of my class did not. Yes folks, a 50% washout rate :(

But to ridicule somebody a nervous CFI? It's wrong. Obviously most of didn't need it, but hey - you've got to admit it wouldn't have hurt...