Story ID: 
AIN Bizav Blog: Combating Avionics Complexity
By: Matt Thurber
Caption: Avionics designers continue adding features while improving the pilot-machine interface, and this has safety and efficiency benefits.
Word Count: 702
There is an encouraging trend working its way into modern aircraft cockpits, a move to design the human-aircraft interface for better pilot understanding and situational awareness. Any business jet is a complex machine, and manufacturers keep adding more capabilities, which necessarily add to pilots' workloads. But this trend also requires that attention be paid to how pilots can take advantage of the new capabilities efficiently and safely.
Two airplanes that I've flown recently—the Cirrus SR20 and Gulfstream G550—are examples of super-capable yet complicated machines. The Cirrus SR20 is a sophisticated single-engine, piston-powered airplane with a Garmin G1000-based avionics suite almost exactly the same as found in Embraer's Phenom 100E and fairly recent versions of the Phenom 300. The Cirrus doesn't require a type rating under FAA regulations, although EASA rules do require type-specific training for most aircraft types, and perhaps the FAA should take a cue from its European counterpart.
Learning how to manage the SR20's Perspective flight deck is no small matter. It is much more than figuring out how to change frequencies or even plug in a flight plan; there are vertical modes and lateral modes, and pilots must understand when and how to use them. The G550, of course, is no longer a new design, but it was arguably one of the first new business jets with sufficient avionics capability that Gulfstream and Honeywell have been able to keep its cockpit relatively current with state-of-the art avionics design. Of course there are other similar examples in the business jet world.
I learned far more about what pilots need to understand when flying with a modern integrated flight deck during my recent initial G550 type rating course at FlightSafety International's Long Beach, Calif. Learning Center. Pilots who fly these airplanes regularly understand this already, but not having spent a lot of time programming an FMS and flying long trips in modern airplanes, I found this to be a bit of an eye-opener. Garmin, Honeywell, Rockwell Collins, Thales and other integrated cockpit designs require much more “programming the box” from pilots, and although one can fly raw-data approaches, that isn’t the best way to use these systems. Fortunately, pilots learning to fly in modern airplanes are learning how to manage the box from early stages in training, so it isn’t as unfamiliar to them as it is to someone who grew up on Narco Mk-12s and King KX170Bs. 
Luckily for me and many other pilots, integrated cockpits are getting easier to manage. Avionics manufacturers and their airframer partners continue to seek ways to help pilots fly more safely and efficiently. Gulfstream’s newest designs, the G500 and G600, are a good example. The entire flight deck—dubbed Symmetry—has been redesigned, but in a way that will be comfortable for pilots transitioning from the G450, G550 and even G650. 
The G500/G600 touchscreens—there are 11 in the cockpit if you include the security system panel—eliminate a lot of switchlights, buttons and knobs, and the display controller that has been a Gulfstream staple is gone, although its functionality remains. This is a key characteristic of the new flight deck. Even though touchscreens replace a lot of familiar hardware, Honeywell and Gulfstream have retained many interface features that pilots will recognize. Programming the FMS is simpler, for example, but pilots will see parallels between the new and old. System tests still check the same systems, but much more automatically. The result is the same or a higher level of safety, and many fewer preflight steps, cutting in half the time needed to get from a dark cockpit to ready to fly.
Obviously Honeywell and Gulfstream aren’t the only companies working on this, and AIN will explore this subject further in an upcoming special report on “combating avionics complexity.” We welcome any input on this subject, from pilots, avionics providers and others. Please feel free to contact me with suggestions, questions or pet peeves at mthurber@ainonline.com.