Narrative:

This is being written in order to express my serious concern re: our new eis primary engine and secondary engine/hydraulic display panels. These are, west/O qualification, the most difficult to read gauges I have ever come across in an airliner. They lack proper color contrast and definition, the analog pointers are extremely difficult to acquire peripherally (even awkward under direct scan),, and under certain ambient light conditions are rendered almost completely unreadable. This would appear to be another example of the predilection among some engineering disciplines to fix things that aren't broken, ie, progress for the sake of itself. I have profound misgivings about the efficacy of this instrumentation while operating under stress, or worse, a full-blown emergency--witness air carrier medium large transport. The british civil aviation authorities certainly seem concerned enough about possible confusion over instrument interpretation, in as much as they are focusing an investigation upon the eis (see attached). The prime problems, as I see them, delineated as briefly as possible, are: 1) small instrument size. 2) extremely small (both in length and diameter) led pointers which move in digital jerks. 3) lack of good color contrast over the entire display, in general. 4) led's are sometimes nearly impossible to read in direct sunlight. 5) oil qty and hydraulic qty gauges which are difficult to see and though located properly have nothing to define them except the title, and are thus a bit difficult to identify. All of the foregoing tend to negate the manner in which all aviators worthy of the title process instrument readings: by peripheral use of analog information to give a sense of both scale and direction, followed by closer perusal where deemed necessary at any given moment. In succinct summation: these instruments are hard to read!!!!!!! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter feels that the design of the engine indicating system is completely inadequate. He states the society of automotive engineers, sae, committee is also studying the problem and will probably publish findings but not for such a long period of time that their findings will not aid in a timely solution. He feels that the air carrier's involved would like to solve the problem, but do not have the available resources at this time. The reporter is very experienced in this type of aircraft and feels that this situation must be rectified immediately or serious consequences will occur.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: REPORTER STATES THAT DUE TO DESIGN THE ENGINE INDICATING SYSTEM IS AT BEST DIFFICULT TO READ AND UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS COMPLETELY UNREADABLE.

Narrative: THIS IS BEING WRITTEN IN ORDER TO EXPRESS MY SERIOUS CONCERN RE: OUR NEW EIS PRIMARY ENG AND SECONDARY ENG/HYD DISPLAY PANELS. THESE ARE, W/O QUALIFICATION, THE MOST DIFFICULT TO READ GAUGES I HAVE EVER COME ACROSS IN AN AIRLINER. THEY LACK PROPER COLOR CONTRAST AND DEFINITION, THE ANALOG POINTERS ARE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO ACQUIRE PERIPHERALLY (EVEN AWKWARD UNDER DIRECT SCAN),, AND UNDER CERTAIN AMBIENT LIGHT CONDITIONS ARE RENDERED ALMOST COMPLETELY UNREADABLE. THIS WOULD APPEAR TO BE ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE PREDILECTION AMONG SOME ENGINEERING DISCIPLINES TO FIX THINGS THAT AREN'T BROKEN, IE, PROGRESS FOR THE SAKE OF ITSELF. I HAVE PROFOUND MISGIVINGS ABOUT THE EFFICACY OF THIS INSTRUMENTATION WHILE OPERATING UNDER STRESS, OR WORSE, A FULL-BLOWN EMER--WITNESS ACR MLG. THE BRITISH CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITIES CERTAINLY SEEM CONCERNED ENOUGH ABOUT POSSIBLE CONFUSION OVER INSTRUMENT INTERP, IN AS MUCH AS THEY ARE FOCUSING AN INVESTIGATION UPON THE EIS (SEE ATTACHED). THE PRIME PROBS, AS I SEE THEM, DELINEATED AS BRIEFLY AS POSSIBLE, ARE: 1) SMALL INSTRUMENT SIZE. 2) EXTREMELY SMALL (BOTH IN LENGTH AND DIAMETER) LED POINTERS WHICH MOVE IN DIGITAL JERKS. 3) LACK OF GOOD COLOR CONTRAST OVER THE ENTIRE DISPLAY, IN GENERAL. 4) LED'S ARE SOMETIMES NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO READ IN DIRECT SUNLIGHT. 5) OIL QTY AND HYD QTY GAUGES WHICH ARE DIFFICULT TO SEE AND THOUGH LOCATED PROPERLY HAVE NOTHING TO DEFINE THEM EXCEPT THE TITLE, AND ARE THUS A BIT DIFFICULT TO IDENT. ALL OF THE FOREGOING TEND TO NEGATE THE MANNER IN WHICH ALL AVIATORS WORTHY OF THE TITLE PROCESS INSTRUMENT READINGS: BY PERIPHERAL USE OF ANALOG INFO TO GIVE A SENSE OF BOTH SCALE AND DIRECTION, FOLLOWED BY CLOSER PERUSAL WHERE DEEMED NECESSARY AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT. IN SUCCINCT SUMMATION: THESE INSTRUMENTS ARE HARD TO READ!!!!!!! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR FEELS THAT THE DESIGN OF THE ENG INDICATING SYS IS COMPLETELY INADEQUATE. HE STATES THE SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, SAE, COMMITTEE IS ALSO STUDYING THE PROB AND WILL PROBABLY PUBLISH FINDINGS BUT NOT FOR SUCH A LONG PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEIR FINDINGS WILL NOT AID IN A TIMELY SOLUTION. HE FEELS THAT THE ACR'S INVOLVED WOULD LIKE TO SOLVE THE PROB, BUT DO NOT HAVE THE AVAILABLE RESOURCES AT THIS TIME. THE RPTR IS VERY EXPERIENCED IN THIS TYPE OF ACFT AND FEELS THAT THIS SITUATION MUST BE RECTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OR SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES WILL OCCUR.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.