The trend vector lines, markers, colouring and ability to set bugs / reference speeds in the Garmin actually provide a mass of visual information (more than dials) without having to read the numbers at all, but it does take a little while to instinctively be able to gain this info from your scan. I found a couple of ipad apps that were nice cheap little simulators to practice at home.
Ps: a lot of it has its roots in military fast jet HUD symbology which is very similar and has been around for years successfully
As an example, you can see bugged alt of 2300 with the marker (which will flash to alert approaching), purple trend line (use it to align with bug to judge level off) and rate of climb has a good visual marker as well. Some discipline is needed to bug altitudes but this instills a much better discipline with clearances as well. I’m a real fan having converted.
There’s no doubt that glass cockpit avionics present more “clever” cues for what is happening (trends etc) but against this – in private flying – you have a training system which delivers a finite package. It is not a jet type rating.
The PPL package goes mostly back to WW1 i.e. very basics, there is very little margin for add-ons, and this presents a problem for a school which has upgraded its fleet to G1000 stuff.
Another thing is that the PPL training intake isn’t like the military where you can screen out (chuck out) nearly all applicants. I looked at the RAF when I was 16 (they rejected me because they thought I was a KGB mole) and recall from back then that only about 2% made it to fast jet pilots. Today the figure may be higher (the knowledge that you may actually go to a war puts a lot of people off 
) but the private scene doesn’t have a screening option – other than the sheer cost and frustration of a 100+hr PPL will cause most of those to drop out. So if you are a bit “behind the curve” but have the money and determination, you will get there. And the airlines have loads of “slower pilots” – any airline pilot will tell you this.
The situation Tom described in IMHO just a reflection of PPL-level reality i.e. a certain % of PPL holders end up in glass cockpit planes without having had proper training. Somebody showed them where to read the speed, altitude, set the TXP code, etc. I have lost count of the number of people who told me they fly a rented G1000 plane mainly on the backup instruments! The SR22 that was based at Shoreham was thus flown by some pilots – they needed only legal differences training i.e. complex aircraft… no glass cockpit at all.
Like with most things in aviation it simply depends on the pilot to learn these things. The methods and tools are all there. There’s incredible simulators and training software for all of these glass cockpits.
If you do the typical Cirrus transition training you will learn all you need in ten hours.
For beginners in IFR Flying the glass cockpit is easier than flying steam dials. The graphical depiction of the flight path, the wind vector in the PFD… the speed tape labeled with Vy, Vz, Vg … all much less abstract than it used to be, right in front of you.
There’s no choice anyway. All certified a/c are offered with glass as the standard. I think most don’t even offer dials as an option.
Which is a huge factor in schools wanting to keep the old planes.
They have to teach the syllabus, which includes many hours spent on stuff like the circular slide rule, and much flying is done on map stopwatch and compass. They don’t have any leeway for teaching extras.
The only way to deal with this without making the PPL inaccessible for many is to drop a lot of stuff out, but you can do that only if you can be reasonably sure it won’t be tested on the skills test.
Knowing what the skills test actually involves has been a holy grail in e.g. IR training; in the UK you could never be sure you won’t get an NDB hold+approach, so say 20hrs had to be sunk into that, but in say Spain or Greece you could be sure, so you could concentrate on VOR ILS & GPS. This enabled a 15hr FAA IR to JAA IR conversion to be done in 1 week, in Spain, and I know some who did it.
But the PPL skills test is standardised (in the UK) and there is currently no way around this.
So a lot of people will come out with a PPL, rent a G1000 plane, and not know how to use it effectively.
Of course the other side is that most “modern” people, upon walking into a typical school and seeing the wreckage, tend to walk straight out again. So there is no way back. The industry and the regulators will just have to find a solution.
In the school I didn’t really learn much anyway. Don’t we all learn that the PPL is only a licence to learn?
I didn’t even learn how to switch on the Autopilot – in the IFR course.
Of course, many, of the described schools still exist. But there’s other examples and clubs too, who only have modern equipment and teach the contemporary technology. But I bet the same 152s will be flying my circuit at home on my last day of Flying …
So a lot of people will come out with a PPL, rent a G1000 plane, and not know how to use it effectively.
So what. Do i care about that? I certainly don’t. Most people can’t use anything effectively. I stopped worrying about that (but will my kids not let fly with most PPLs)
Don’t we all learn that the PPL is only a licence to learn?
Yes but that is just a totally useless phrase – one of many many one hears e.g. “better to be down wishing you were up than…”. All good nonsense for propping up the airport bar (while, where I was based at least and from what I hear at other places too, hoping to shag the pretty girl student 
) but of no use for getting somebody to fly confidently and safely from A to B.
So what. Do i care about that? I certainly don’t. Most people can’t use anything effectively. I stopped worrying about that (but will my kids not let fly with most PPLs)
Well, yes, but that’s exactly what this thread is about i.e. you can get a PPL and climb into a G1000 plane (you can buy a new loaded SR22 (e.g.) and fly it away provided you can sort out the insurance) and not be able to use it effectively, whereas you are more likely to be able to use an old-panel aircraft OK.
Yes but that is just a totally useless phrase
No, it’s the reality, everywhere. In Germany, and in England too, and in most US schools aswell. And if you want to invest € 30.000 into your PPL like a friend of mine did, you can, of course.You cannot have the PPL for 7000 Euros and expect they make you a professional pilot. It’s also ok. The school teaches you the basics – and then you have to fly by yourself and learn. And then ones who are too lazy for that, or lack the patience, will quit. So what?
you can get a PPL and climb into a G1000 plane (you can buy a new loaded SR22 (e.g.) and fly it away provided you can sort out the insurance)
But first of alll you will not get insurance for an SR22 without the training, and if you fly a G1000 Cessna without the differences training, then that is illegal, and stupid. Also I have NEVER heard about anybody flying an SR22 without the necessary training. Why would anybody want to do that? What is true is that some pilots should have had more training before they flew it solo.
PS:
All good nonsense for propping up the airport bar
You spend too much time at airport bars? ;-)
Peter wrote:
Well, yes, but that’s exactly what this thread is about i.e. you can get a PPL and climb into a G1000 plane (you can buy a new loaded SR22 (e.g.) and fly it away provided you can sort out the insurance) and not be able to use it effectively, whereas you are more likely to be able to use an old-panel aircraft OK
I am not sure where you are pointing with the comment, Peter. I have understood you are inferring that the basic PPL syllabus will not cover people for more advanced cockpits (please correct if I am wrong). Surely it is our responsibility of pilots to ensure that we have trained ourselves on the equipment that we use/install in our aircraft. I am not advocating that we need a rigid training structure, with established courses and signatures at the end… I really hate that – BUT I do firmly believe that we should be happy with the equipment and know how to use it irrespective of paperwork – after all we are at the sharp ends of the aircraft.
I see no issue with a vanilla PPL getting into a G1000 cockpit and flying VFR in class E/F/G and outside a TMZ; ‘cos you don’t need a XPDR or talk to anyone. All you need for VFR is Airspeed, Altitude and RPM/MP. On a G1000 those are pretty obvious, but if you start playing with the avionics, and therefore not looking out of the window, then it is asking for trouble.
+1 for Flyer59’s posts! Fully agree.
It is perfectly possible to teach a PPL on EFIS with no extra hours at all, it is primary flight instrumentation after all and remember the student is not converting from any previous experience. I recently test flew the Tecnam P2008JC with Garmin EFIS and I think it would actually reduce the training hours. The issue is that urban myth and total guff persists through the training industry (and pilots out of training) and people haven’t evolved their training methods and delivery to integrate the new technology. It is the same total disinformation that persists about use of GPS and whizz wheels during PPL training that some schools perpetuate because they can’t be a**ed to evolve!
