[cameldrv]

I find the glass cockpit airspeed/altitude tapes to be significantly worse overall than analog dials. Not only is it easier to see rate of descent, but it's very easy to see whether the absolute number is where you want it to be. Normally if you're cruising, you will be at an even thousand or 500 foot increment. The big hand should either be pointing straight up or straight down. You can even see out of the corner of your eye if you're a little too high or low. On the tape you have to read a 4-5 digit number. Similar thing with airspeed. Once you are familiar with a plane, you know what angle the airspeed needle should be pointing for a particular phase of flight. It's much quicker cognitively to see the angle of a pointer than reading a number.

[psunavy03]

Overall, though, having flown both, I'd have to argue modern glass cockpits have significantly better UI than the old steam gauges. So many old aircraft didn't even give lip service to helping the aviator with a good instrument scan and just stuffed things willy-nilly.

[custard42]

I recall reading that Thrust II (running at 1000mph but somewhat closer to the ground) used analog meters so that a glance could get an approximate value and rate of change quickly and in a situation of heavy pilot vibration. I couldn't find the original article, but I found this breathless page from the manufacturer which alludes to this. https://masterhorologer.com/2014/05/03/rolex-unveils-two-bes...