Chronicle 002 – August Bonanza Trip
Over the past two decades at AOPA I had little time for general aviation flying without a specific mission, every minute filled, and a detailed busy schedule. So, 18 months into retirement, I asked my wife if she would be up for a 3 week plane trip in our BONANZA A-36 with no schedules, no reservations, and a chance to spend time at some of the favorite spots we never got a chance to enjoy fully when on AOPA travel. We identified some destinations that were favorites. Just to name a few these included the Oregon Coast, Sunriver, OR, San Francisco, Chicago, seeing friends near Minneapolis, and others. Like most pilots, the destinations would be nice, but I would also get in lots of great flying and have a really good chance to use the 3-tube Aspen Evolution system that was installed less than a year ago.
Aspen system in flight
We had agreed to not have any firm appointments or people meeting us at the airports, allowing us to fly in good weather, and go off plan anytime. That commitment the day of departure, when our friends at RARE AIRCRAFT, the restorer of my bi-plane, were planning a barbeque for us at their home in Minnesota. So, looking forward to what the coming weeks would bring we excitedly launched with great weather on our first leg on Sunday morning, August 8. Just as the gear came up, and I was settling into a climb airspeed, I was surprised by the center Aspen Primary Flight Display (PFD) suddenly going dark.
I later learned from the Aspen technicians that this was a known manufacturing problem, and all the units with this problem had been replaced, except mine. In any other situation this would have had us turning back to the airport, landing and delaying our trip for a minimum of at least two days while a new unit was shipped overnight on Monday and, hopefully installed and checked on Tuesday. I am also sure this delay would have diminished my wife’s enthusiasm for the trip, something many of us know is important. Within 2 seconds I depressed the red REV (reversion) switch in the upper right corner of the MFD1000, and the display replaced the PFD information completely.
Aspen system in reversion mode
I contacted ASPEN and they suggested having the replacement shipped and installed at Flightcraft in Portland, Oregon. This is my hometown, and while we were not going to stop there, we were planning on visiting Lincoln City, OR on the Coast, a mere 80 miles away. This was my real-time chance to experience ASPEN technical support, and as promised, the replacement PFD was at Flightcraft when we arrived. Flightcraft’s Dan Rice, their Customer Support Rep, was expecting us. So we wouldn’t miss a beat, we rented a car at the Flightcraft FBO and were eating dinner at one of our favorite spots on the Coast that same evening.
It’s been over 30 years since I have flown a single engine airplane over high terrain, as we experienced over the northern Rockies from Billings, MT to Portland. The backup display with a completely independent AHRS and systems allowed our trip to continue without a hitch. Some of my scarce IMC and an ILS approach into Portland all were done with this unit.
Map of our trip (click for bigger image)
Slightly under three weeks we landed back at our home airport in Cincinnati. As I put the airplane away, I realized how the start of our “adventure” could really have been marred in the days prior to this modern display technology.
Back at home
Hi Phil: Your experience sort of mimics the one Marcia and I experienced on our way to S. Carolina in June. We were eastbound over Meridian, Ms, at 17,000 feet when our alternator failed. This of course had nothing to do with Aspen, and we also did not have a backup alternator. But we had our 3 Aspen units, and their backup batteries all kicked in just as promised and gave us plenty of power to fly on to Birmingham where we hoped to find a alternator on the FBO’s shelf, which indeed happened. In 3 hours we were on our way, after a nice lunch. Had we not had the Aspens, we’d probably circled down into Meridian rather than being able to make it on to Birmingham. Aspen delivered exactly as promised.
Neat trip…. I’m jealous. And interesting to see how the Aspen helped out. I’m still on the fence on glass, but the Aspen seems to be in my future. Keep the comments coming about things that you like or dislike about the Aspen.
One of my big concerns is the failure rate. Perhaps it’s some “infant” mortality but there’s been a very high rate of failures since the unit came out, unlike Garmin that has been rock solid. However, the reports on Aspen’s service to help the issues has been stellar.
Larry …
Glass is often misunderstood – it’s just a more reliable solution to the basic “steam gauges” we have all grown used to … and not subject to vacuum pump failures, etc.
Yes, any new product has “growing pains”, and as you can see I even called attention to one that happened with me. But, you are correct in how ASPEN handles these problems – with immediate attention, shipping new units to the dealer overnight, etc. In many cases it’s been the “growing pains” of the avionic shops themselves, many not used to installing REMOTE SENSORS that are highly subject to magnetic interference, etc. But almost all of that is behind both ASPEN and the shops. You mentioned the BIG “G” — keep in mind the G-1000 (full glass cockpit solution for new airplanes) was not without it’s early problems, often grounding the new airplanes that had these installations.
In a future column I will be depicting how relatively easy the transition to glass can be – it’s nothing more than replacing the common 6-pack with electronic displays, and then looking for the information in the same positions as before the transformation.
Phil-
Thanks for the narrative, and the courage to show us your ASPEN failure. I have had no difficulty transitioning from steam gauges to glass in a Cirrus… but now I want all the glass advantages for my Mitsubishi MU-2. The EVOLUTION product is a perfect price/performance match for the MU-2, an aircraft whose strength, performance, support, and value lead the turboprop world. I had opened my checkbook, only to find that ASPEN had not included the MU-2 in its Class III approved model list (AML). ASPEN reps at Airventure 2010 assure me that I am not the only MITS pilot to voice an objection… please help us to encourage the development work necessary to add the Mitsubishi MU-2 to the ASPEN EVOLUTION AML.
Thanks, and best wishes for your upcoming Bonanza/Evolution adventures!
JSL
As all the MU-2 owners know, the aircraft has an Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) that will require FAA involvement. In terms of timing, Aspen tells me they want to engage the FAA on several similar airplanes in like categories to the MU-2 once they get past STC’s on more global projects – one’s that are critical to more aircraft in the fleet. My impression, very candidly, is this could take some time to complete – realizing you may not want to read this.
There are some factors with the MU-2 that support making this difficult, including:
The flight director and HSI are four inch instruments. The FAA may not accept use of our smaller instrument size, and may have additional requirements. There could be different requirements for the long body and short body airplanes.
There is a different flight director scaling, which will require some R&D and possibly changes to the ACU.
The HSI may contain ancillary displays (DME, radar altitude) that we do not support.
This airplane is well-known to be a high-workload aircraft, and our equipment would be have to be evaluated in that context
A revised and specialized AFMS may be required, which would involve the FAA – never a fast process.
The FAA accepted aircraft checklists likely will need revised and accepted by the Flight Standardization Board (FSB). .
So in summary there is a lot to do to get the MU-2 on Aspen’s short term list.
–Phil
Phil,
I am going to have disagree with you strongly. All of the supposed issues you raised were no problem for Garmin where the G600 was approved for the MU2 with no special effort. Nor were those issues a concern on the other turboprops Aspen already has approved, such as Conquests and King Airs, many which came with 4 inch instruments originally. There’s no SFAR implications at all in this issue, that’s a total red herring. Garmin had no issues with long or short body airplanes, special AFMS, checklists, DME displays, radar altimeter interfaces, none of that stuff you mention.
If Aspen has decided, as a business decision, not to support MU2s, that’s certainly their prerogative. But if so, be honest about that so we can stop waiting for Aspen and do something else instead. Spreading FUD regarding difficulties in putting MU2s on STCs is irresponsible, particularly from someone whose past life was supposed to be spreading the truth about general aviation!
Mike Ciholas
Mike …
Thanks for the compliment about “spreading the truth”, and while you may disagree with the specifics I passed along from ASPEN management and engineering, I was trying to manage your expectations as to “when” we might be available for the MU-2. I could have said “it’s coming soon”, but I wanted to be truthful from my vantage point as an ASPEN BOARD member. ASPEN is not the big “G”, in size, history, resources, engineering support, or long term FAA relationships. I do serve on a company board that recognizes the “scrappy” nature of a new entrant making quality and safety enhancing products for the after-market that can be sold at an affordable price. Certification and STC’s are not so easy for a new company, and we continue to add aircraft and new products to our offerings, but with a limited engineering staff, based on our size. It’s not a matter of IF for the MU-2 fleet, but rather WHEN. And, all I want to do is make sure you don’t think this will be the day after tomorrow … so you can plan you retro-fitting according to the best information.
–Mike