Julian and I arrived back in Boston this evening in our new Cirrus SR20, N707WT. The trip back was a good illustration of the pluses and minuses of small airplane travel. Although I was fairly tired after 10 hours of flight training all day Friday and Saturday morning we departed Duluth Saturday afternoon in order to stay ahead of a line of thunderstorms. After gazing down at the interesting colors in Lake Superior and the top portion of Lake Michigan we stopped in Pellston, Michigan near where Lakes Michigan and Huron meet and then departed for an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight around the top of Lake Huron and over Toronto into Buffalo, New York. The lake and the city lights were quite beautiful from 7000′ above sea level. We did an uneventful instrument landing system (ILS) approach through some rain into Buffalo. It was dark by then so it was nice to have the centerline and touchdown-zone lighting. The FBO at Buffalo found us a $52/night hotel and we collapsed until 9:00 am this morning.
From Buffalo to Boston is only about 2.5 hours but one must cross the Berkshires (3000′ high) and the forecast was for moderately low clouds, ice in those clouds, rain, and a really low freezing level due to the cold temps on the surface (only about 48 degrees in Albany today). It wasn’t safe to go under the clouds given the numerous obstructions from towers, hills, and mountains. The Cirrus doesn’t have a turbocharger so it wouldn’t have been able to climb over the top of the clouds, forecast to 20,000′. We waited on the ground in Buffalo until 3:00 pm for some of the rain to dissipate on the RADAR and for some of the temperatures aloft to warm up. We decided to fly to Albany at 7000′ and if we picked up any ice we’d go to the minimum enroute altitude (5000′) and see if that was above freezing. If it wasn’t we’d continue to descend and land in Albany where we knew that the temperature would be above freezing. We would not continue across the Berkshires where it would be impossible to descend as far or as quickly due to the mountains.
We entered the clouds about 2500′ above the runway at Buffalo and broke out about 6000′ above sea level. This was a great illustration of the advantages of an instrument rating. Instead of bumping around near the ground we were above the clouds in smooth air. Gradually, however, we approach a wall of higher clouds. This was the rain system we’d seen on the RADAR and that we could also see in our airplane, which has a receiver to get weather information from the XM radio satellites (this instrument runs from the Avidyne multi-function display, which had failed during a training flight and restarted automatically but then crashed and got stuck on our trip into Buffalo, so we didn’t have much confidence in this). At 7000′ the main outside air temperature (OAT) gauge showed +4 degrees C. This is the one associated with the engine-monitoring system and in most Cirrus airplanes is the only one enabled. We had met a mechanic on Saturday, however, who knew how to reenable the OAT gauge on the primary flight display (PFD), which has its probe farther out on the wing. This read -2 degrees C. We asked Air Traffic Control to ask some of the airliners for temperature reports at 7000′ and we learned that it was probably much closer to -2 than to +4.
Heading towards Albany we picked up a little frost on part of the wing as the temperature dropped to -4 degrees C (or +2 if we believed the standard instrument). We asked for 5000′ and the temperature rose and the frost came off. We asked for a routing closer to Hartford, Connecticut to stay over lower terrain and into warmer air. ATC gave us the new routing over Westover Air Force Base in Western, MA. The rest of the flight was uneventful though almost solidly in the clouds the whole time. My landing wasn’t quite as smooth as the ones that I had done in training though by no means was it hard. The primary flight display (PFD) did not like the little bump, however, and drew red X’s across its electronic attitude indicator and gyro compass, telling us not to trust them and to refer to the backup “steam gauges”.
Our total flight time from Duluth to Boston was about 7 hours despite slight headwinds almost the entire way (this is unusual when going west to east; it is supposed to be a tailwind). The Cirrus is a fast little plane that is economical to operate and reasonably priced. But we couldn’t fly on our schedule and we never knew whether we were going to make it through Albany or not. The minimum airplane that is practical for transportation as opposed to recreation is something like a Piper Malibu with a turbocharger to climb above the clouds and de-icing equipment sufficient to earn FAA certification for “flight into known icing”. The Malibu would have climbed over the top of all that weather and then come down into Boston. We never would have had to turn on the de-icing gear.
“Although I was fairly tired after 10 hours of flight training all day Friday and Saturday morning we departed Duluth Saturday afternoon in order to stay ahead of a line of thunderstorms.”
Isn’t this breaking one of the Golden Rules of private air travel: you shouldn’t hurry stuff if conditions aren’t right? Presumably flying tired is as hazardous as flying off into bad conditions.
When / if the glass panel malf’s get diagnosed, please share the resolution.
“The primary flight display (PFD) did not like the little bump, however, and drew red X’s across its electronic attitude indicator and gyro compass, telling us not to trust them and to refer to the backup “steam gauges” and “failed during a training flight and restarted automatically but then crashed and got stuck on our trip into Buffalo” is pretty worrysome behavior. Cirrus should make this right.
Michael: Flying tired is a bad idea but so is spending an extra week in Duluth. The trip to Buffalo was 100% visual meteorological conditions (though we were IFR on the last leg due to not wanting to figure out how to get across Canada legally VFR). There were no mountains to cross. There was no turbulence to be expected. I had a copilot (admittedly one with only 65 hours) and an autopilot. We were going to 6000′ and 8000′ runways in a plane that I had been landing in 1500′.
Mike: We ran into a Canadian at the Buffalo airport who has an SR22 and his PFD flaked out the same way in moderate turbulence while airborne. It might be a limitation of the Avidyne. They do have the backup A.I. The instrument that totally failed in flight for us was the Avidyne MFD, which is nice to have but not necessary.
Congratulations on your new plane! I’ll look for 7WT at BED. You can reset the breakers and reboot the MFD in flight if necessary, as you likely learned in your training. With a 6 degree difference between the two temperature probes, I suggest you get them both recalibrated. I believe there was an AIRMET for icing along your route yesterday. Even with TKS in -22, I probably would not have done that flight, especially in a new relatively unfamilar plane. Glad everything worked out ok. The PFD going to Red X is unusual and has not happened to me yet. Did it reset itself when restarted? You’ll likely have a few squawks with a new airplane. Enjoy!
David: the 6-degree C temp diff between MFD and PFD is what the UND instructors told us to expect. So apparently it is normal for a Cirrus coming off the line these days. I had gotten the Airmet for icing “above the freezing level” which is why we were trying to make sure that we were below the freezing level in the clouds and that we could always descend into VFR conditions in warm air. I’m glad that I came back when we did because the conditions are a lot worse all this week!
My goodness! Are PFD failures of this kind common in the Cirrus fleet?
Does your autopilot continue to operate with a PFD failure?
I certainly hope that a clear reason for this failure is discovered and fixed.
No, they aren’t common. I have been in moderate and even severe turbulence in Avidyne Entegra-equipped SR20s and SR22s and never see the PFD or MFD fail.
If someone at UND (was this a CSIP?) told you this was common, you might want to consult a higher source. The FAA would not have approved the installation if this were the case.
As for the suggestion to pull the PFD breaker and reset the box, that would only partially work. Once you push the breaker back in, the system would reboot only up to a certain point, asking you to “bring the aircraft to a complete stop as soon as possible” for final AHRS alignment. It cannot complete the final alignment when the aircraft is in flight, even if the air is completely smooth. –Ron
Jim: The autopilot can still function in a reduced capacity without the PFD. The autopilot is rate-based and gets its information about whether the airplane is turning left or right from a hidden conventional turn coordinator gyro buried behind the panel. If you lose the PFD you can’t fly in Heading mode anymore and you can’t fly an ILS because you’ve lost your only indicator of deviation from the glide slope. You can still use the autopilot to fly GPS steering..
Ron: All of the UND instructors are CSIPs! They are the ones who create new CSIPs. If you read my comment more carefully you’ll see that they didn’t say PFD failure was common. They said that a 6-degree discrepancy between the two OAT probes was common.
The STEC in my Cardinal behaves in a similar way, I lose heading mode if I lose vacuum to the DG. I have turn knob on the not hidden turn coordinator, and since I have an old fashioned CDI the autopilot will still track off of that.
All this new technology being put in small planes worries me. Much of it is still in its infantcy and budgets/weight issues prevent redundant installations. My worry is that the plane has enough performance to get you into a corner where when you lose some of the instrumentation you are used to, you’re out of your safety envelope. I know this can be said of instrument flight (especially in a single engine plane) but in the case of the Cirrus where this is a known issue it really gets my attention. That the reference unit cannot be fully reset during flight seems unacceptable – I would want an override which allows at least partial operation. I would suggest you do regular practice with the PFD/MFD disabled, under simulated instrument conditions in moderate turbulence, to keep sharp.
The Cirrus has a lot more redundancy than a C182/G1000. In the much touted reversionary mode of the G1000, you lose all engine instrumentations. If this happens, to me it is an immediate emergency and cause for diversion to the nearest appropriate airport. In the Cirrus there are backup analog airspeed, attitude, altitude and engine instruments. Typically with two 430’s, there is backup moving map, GPS, radios, VORs. The C182 also has only one alternator, which is amazing for me with a plane so dependent upon electricity. You are correct about the need for regular practice using the backup instrumentation whatever form of backup exists. Avidyne has not had the best reliability record so far – we all hope it will improve.