Pilots often find themselves with varying preferences when it comes to multifunction display (MFD) orientation. It’s a truly enlightening experience when pilots share their techniques and learn from each other, whether on a routine visual flight rules (VFR) cross-country flight during daylight or a tactical night vision goggle (NVG) operation. The question of the “best” MFD orientation is frequently debated. My recent flight experience might offer valuable insights into this discussion.
As the pilot in command for a flight training exercise, I was scheduled for a day instrument flight rules (IFR) currency flight, followed by NVG time-on-target training for the return leg. My flight background was primarily civilian, supplemented by flight school and an Army deployment. My pilot in the other seat, a fellow pilot in command (PC), possessed exclusively Army aviation experience. This presented a perfect opportunity to exchange operational techniques.
The beauty of military aviation planning lies in its standardized procedures. Army Regulation 95-1, Department of Defense Flight Information Publications (DOD FLIP), local standing operating procedures (SOPs), and checklists minimize the influence of personal preferences. It wasn’t until the run-up checks that a point of discussion arose. While proceeding through the checklist, I announced, “Set up MFDs, flight director, and Flight Management System (FMS) for the mission.” I observed that both my pilot and I had set our MFDs to the same map scale. However, a difference was apparent: my display was oriented north up, while his was heading up. Finally, a topic for discussion! I inquired about his preference for heading-up orientation. His straightforward reply was, “That’s just how I’ve always done it.” He then posed the same question to me, and I responded, “I guess north up is just what I’m used to.”
Neither of us had a robust justification for our chosen MFD orientation. The remainder of the run-up, taxi, and takeoff proceeded smoothly, without further technical discussions. It was during the en route phase that the rationale behind my north-up preference started to surface.
During a lull in workload in flight, I decided to initiate a discussion about the navigation chart we were utilizing. I began with basic airspace awareness questions, such as, “What type of airspace are we currently in?” and “What VOR (VHF Omnidirectional Range) are we flying towards?” Then, I asked, “What frequency would we use to contact the nearest flight service station?” A pause ensued, followed by a gradual, descending left turn. I was oblivious to the altitude loss until air traffic control (ATC) queried, “Army 12345, say altitude?” I immediately took control, initiated a climb back to our assigned altitude, and responded to ATC.
Looking at my co-pilot, who seemed visibly embarrassed, I asked, “What happened there?” He apologized, admitting he hadn’t realized what he was doing. My initial thought was spatial disorientation. Maintaining control, I repeated the question: “What frequency for flight service station?”
From the corner of my eye, I saw my co-pilot tilting his head dramatically to read the frequency on the chart, which was positioned on his lap. It became clear that he had inadvertently manipulated the flight controls while craning his neck to read the chart. This was the perfect moment to advocate for my technique: north-up MFD orientation for easier chart reading. He concurred, and we continued the flight uneventfully.
Optimized Alt Text: Pilot in cockpit demonstrating north-up orientation on multifunction display (MFD) for improved navigation and situational awareness during flight operations.
After refueling at our destination airfield, we commenced the return leg, which included NVG time-on-target training. We had pre-programmed our route with precise timing points and “dog houses” (visual cues on the MFD for timing) to practice our time-on-target maneuvers. This time, I was at the controls, and both MFDs were set to north up.
Initially, everything progressed smoothly as we flew north towards our training area. My co-pilot called out times to the upcoming air control points (ACPs). Then, we executed a turn to the west to avoid a restricted area. As I glanced down at the MFD to check the time to the next ACP using the dog house, my co-pilot suddenly announced, “Why are you climbing to the right?” Unknowingly, I had initiated a climbing right turn while turning my head sideways to interpret the dog house on the north-up oriented MFD. The realization struck us simultaneously: the dog houses, designed for a heading-up display, were misaligned and confusing in north-up orientation for this specific tactical mode of flight. We promptly switched our MFD orientation to heading up. He then seized the opportunity to emphasize the importance of correctly interpreting displayed information for the chosen orientation.
Ultimately, neither incident led to catastrophic consequences, but in the absence of effective crew coordination, both situations could have escalated into serious safety concerns. We concluded the flight successfully, each gaining a valuable lesson. The adage “it’s what I’ve always done” is not a substitute for critical evaluation and adaptation. I now consciously adjust my MFD orientation based on the flight mode to ensure mission safety and effectiveness. This experience underscored that the optimal What Education Program Is Car-mfd-edu for pilots is continuous learning and adaptation to various operational contexts, particularly regarding cockpit technology and display interpretation.
