Is Newer Better?

During my time in flight training, I had this rather unique opportunity. OAA currently have a mix of new and old aircraft in their fleet as they make a transition over the space of several months to completely replace their aging Warriors and Senecas. So me and my fellow classmates were in a rather unique and somewhat interesting position; we all started on a Piper Archer TX which for those that don’t know, is completely glass cockpit, and doesn’t even have standby instruments! And after completing our required single engine hours in the Archer TX, we had the option to move onto either a Seneca II, or a new Piper Seminole (glass cockpit) for our CPL Skills Test. Since I knew that I would definitely be flying the rather aged Seneca IIs back in the UK for my Advanced Flight Training, the Seneca II was a no brainer. It was a rather shaky start to begin with, and to be honest, I didn't really perfect my instrument scan until I got back to the UK.

With the Garmin G1000 system, you have everything you need directly in front of you, with this magical purple diamond, which shows your magnetic track, and therefore no drift correction is required. On the right screen you have the MFD which can show an array of parameters such as:

• Up to date Jeppesen Navigation data
• Traffic Alert
• Terrain data
• Engine indications

All the information you need as a pilot is only ever a glance away. The positive of having this set up is of course the ease of use, the workload is severely reduced, and although we weren't supposed to, that purple diamond we had on the PFD was always used to indicate immediately whether we were drifting off a planned track. Also, learning in a glass cockpit closely matches the environment that we will/may step into once we land our first job in an airline.

There are cons to this approach though, for instance the over-reliance on the instruments, particularly when using the track diamond on the PFD and the traffic alerting system on the MFD. When I used to fly around in the practice area, it was very easy to reduce the amount of traffic reports on frequency and just assume that you are safe by seeing where the traffic was on this lovely nice display. This problem became much more pronounced for me when I made the transition from the shiny new Archer TX, to the prehistoric Seneca II. For those that don’t know, the Seneca II has been in production since 1971, so as you can imagine, it did smell, and there were quite a few INOP placards stuck around the flight deck. A lot more needs to be thought about, especially since all of the dials are now completely different with their own source to show the necessary information. Then you have the fact that there are absolutely no indications of air traffic, your eyes are the traffic alerting system.

I found it more difficult to go from glass to steam gauges because your eyes pretty much go from being used to staring in a small area, to suddenly needing to look all over the place. 

Piper Seneca V - The New

Piper Seneca II - The Old

Eventually all the large FTOs (Flight Training Organisations) around the world will clear out their aging aircraft to make way for a fleet of newer ones, which will be easier to fly. I do however feel to some extent that this eventual transition paints a pretty sad picture, in that the art of aviation is slowly beginning to disappear. Take the Diamond DA42 – Twinstar, it is one of the most advanced training aircraft in the world, which is not only glass cockpit, but also has a FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) system which alleviates any need to prime, do engine run, prop cycle etc.

Whilst having a glass cockpit and FADEC system is all good for saving time and thus money, and even preparing us a bit more for the airliner roles, I do believe that it runs the risk of taking away certain skills that our aviating ancestors were so incredible at. When I prime an engine, cycle propellers and check the mags, it reinforces what I learned in ground school. The same applies in the air; I know that when I get to cruising speed, I take the props from 2400RPM to 2200RPM because it makes the propellers more efficient at that speed. Even when making the mixture more lean or rich when climbing or descending to adjust for air density. And going back to the instruments, I know that if my planned drift doesn't work on a route or in a hold, then I have to do a bit of mental dead reckoning. Even having to sync the RPMs together manually by ear was a satisfying feeling on it's own. All of this comes together to make flying a true art form.

I seem a little sentimental, I guess you could compare it to the same way I hate how many cars are being released now with electronic handbrakes. Yes the crusty Seneca II smelt funny, and yes some of the instruments were slightly inaccurate, but that's the magic of it, sometimes it became about feeling the aircraft as you flew it. 

The newer tools will be great for future cadets, and I do want to make it clear that I don't want to slate the large FTOs since it is in their interest to keep up with their competitors. However for the reasons already stated, I do really hope that the large FTOs around the world continue to create pilots with the same airmanship, and for newer cadets to take responsibility so that they do not become over-reliant on these newer toys. I do feel though that the newer generation will miss out on something.