This looks a professionally planned and well risk managed IFR flight. The negative comments are predictable (A Cirrus is involved!) but regrettable nonetheless. One small technical correction to the narrative: Alt 2 provides power to the EBus only, it isn’t the primary power as indicated in the narrative. When Alt 2 fails Alt 1 (which normally powers MBus) will provide all the power necessary for both MBus and EBus. It does not work the other way around (Alt 2 will not power MBus) so in short Alt 2 failure is a minor issue whereas if Alt 1 were to fail you will loose all the MBus items (including flaps for landing) but still leaving you with the main items required for IFR flight and communication but no redundancy… after approx 30 minutes of Bat 1 is used up. I am very sure this pilot knew that and factored it in to his decision to continue to Biggin for an ILS Approach. As for the comments on weather radar versus, yes the Connext system is “not radar” but they had studied and planned in advance for the weather avoidance, and used the Connext to verify their advance planning to stay 50 miles North of the cell! Well done and thanks Jon for posting an interesting video and not being afraid to spark some debate.
I can't help being jealous of all the technology in a modern Cirrus aircraft. Very nice to have your checklists available on the displays. That looked like a great day of flying and some well considered planning for weather and decision making with the alt failure.
Ignoring the Cirrus Envy crowd for a second…incredible video, fantastic scene out the left window and shows why we fly, the safety of the plane, its redundancy and the value of an IR. It’s an incredible plane and piloted by a truly exceptional pilot. I would fly with Robbie any day of the week!
I recently spent three days flying with Robbie from New York to Biggin Hill in a G7 SR22T. He is a professional, experienced and highly capable pilot. His decision making logic was always informed and sensible. I watched this video and, knowing the capabilities and limitations of the aircraft, am in agreement with his choices. They had a working alternator plus remaining battery time and several airfields available if things took a turn for the worse. An alternator potentially failing increases the flight risk profile; I don’t believe it makes ‘land now’ a necessity. Garmin Connext is not to be used to pick a way between cells, but it is sufficiently current to guide the pilot on the areas to avoid. And this is what Robbie and Jon did.
It looks like it has been handled excellently by Robbie.. Although this is the world of GA, these guys hold ATPLs / CPLs for doing this work. The cirrus looks like a fantastic machine for this sort of weather, especially with the level of redundancy for this type of situation.
Excellent video! I didn't need any arm twisting to keep me watching till the end. I was riveted! Thankfully, it all worked out well. My GA flying days are now long behind me but, if I still flew GA and could afford one, I'd definitely own a Cirrus SR22. An amazing GA aircraft!
What a lovely aircraft, and those storm views… wow!! Also so impressed by the European Controllers, so laid back and happy to help. All round a great video
Lovely film Jon, thank you. Really informative and great to look at too. Modern sensors make low-light filming not only possible but really watchable too.
Dear John ! I wish i’d known you would visit EBAW Antwerpen, my hometown airport … because as a spotter and former technical employee there. There are a lot of Cirrus aircraft on the Belgian Civil Register. I saw on Robby’s phone, that he collected information before landing at Ebaw. I gather it was a short stop on your way to Lübeck in Germany. By the way many congrats on your Skymaster video, loved it very much. In the 90’s there were up to 8 C.337 Skymasters on our civil register, non whatsoever now, shame ! All the best to you and your family ! Greetings.
That bring back a memory very early one boxing day I DEP 60NM south of Canberra YSCB for Sydney YSSY in a C182 in CLD all the way, 30 minutes in and ABM CB I started losing radios by 45 minutes I was in the dark. So, it was a Controller based breakout at YSCB at about 700AGL using a torch and handheld radio, it wasn't the usual limited panel stuff as I still had the Vac AH and DG, but no turn coordinator just the ball. It was due to a flat spotting drivebelt and the usual Cessna ammeter which tend not move much.
Such a good video, I’ve watched it three times now! I look forward to getting a PPL and IFR rating myself, hopefully not in the too distant future. Well done.
Having the full IR is such a good experience. Plus they basic flight, take off, climb, descent is so easy. Just do what you get told. The main difficulties imo are what are highlighted in this video. En route weather avoidance, approach and landing weather…down to minimums and then dealing abnormalities within the cockpit
It looks like the yellow annunciation indicated a potential issue with the alternator sensor rather than an actual alternator failure. Since the battery wasn’t draining and there was no low battery alert, it suggests that the alternator was likely functioning properly, with the sensor providing a false alert. In this situation, the pilot-in-command (PIC) would reasonably assess it as a low-priority issue, especially if all other electrical systems were stable and operating as expected. In such cases, the yellow annunciation serves as a cautionary indicator rather than a critical warning, alerting the PIC to monitor the situation rather than take immediate corrective action. Flying 50 miles from a storm cell, especially at dusk, isn’t inherently poor aeronautical decision-making (ADM). It reflects a calculated risk management approach, balancing safety and operational goals while maintaining situational awareness. Weather distances like 50 miles can be appropriate
That return flight looked a little uncomfortable, Jon, that storm look pretty brutal... but made for an entertaining vlog. Good call to reduce the water crossing I thought👍🏻 👏🏻👏🏻
Hi Jon! Well! That was interesting! Great flying by Robbie, ably assisted by your good self. I can imagine your concern when ALT 2 Fault indication flashed up, but it all went swimmingly in the end. Best wishes from Wirral.
Routine IFR flight in a single, especially at night, or over water, is a little bit "bold" if you take my meaning. All the shiney screens and other toys do not mitigate that a) you only have one engine, b) can be battered to break-up by the weather.
@@Rewsky21 Which of us, as sprog pilots, has not had a silent thrill at flying in a cockpit festooned with new and exciting pretty lights, when first flying at night, no matter it be a Cessna 152 on a 1st night landing, or a modern Cirrus? The trick is to remain cognisant that flying a single at night, is a risky undertaking. Doing so over water, is doubly so, and with CB's about it's bordering on being a "little bit silly". I had an engine-failure or rough-running engine about every 750 hours over a career instructing on light singles and twins. Nothing could induce me to fly a single at night, with CB's about, and over the English Channel. I'd happily do ONE of those, but would not be a happy bunny doing two or more.
I’m in total agreement with you, flying at night is a fun but you always need to be three steps ahead compared to day flying, I have a grand total of just 36 night flying hours and yes some where over quite long water legs, but the enjoyment can make you blind to the risks. I took my young son with me a few times, and now as I no longer fly I look back and think to myself what hell was I thinking 😮
@@Rewsky21 The advice I received for having to force-land at night: Aim at the dark bits, when low enough, turn your landing light on. If you don't like what you see, (forests etc) turn it off again!
Really nice informative video John, thanks for taking the time, I was glued to it all the way, alot of info to process, I was interested in how u can understand ATC pigeon English once u leave UK airspace,I know English is the language in communication but there's English and English, I thought you both have mastered it. Thanks again.
At least the ‘Pigeon English’ is in ICAO standard. As a non native speaker I have more difficulty understanding UK ATC than any other country in Europe.
Looks like a great aircraft! With both alternators failing intermittently I imagine it would be caused by the thunderstorm’s em radiation? I would think electrical failures or irregularities would be common flying that close?
One alternator failing intermittently. I wondered whether the thunderstorm was affecting a sensor, but it was more than 50 miles away, and static was barely detectable on the VHF.
@@TheFlyingReporter That makes sense, it should be too far to affect anything. At the 8 minute mark the display also shows alt 1 failing, or at least only outputting 1amp, looks like both were having issues.
Spot on. I couldn’t have said it better. Add to that typically your two engine transport category aircraft has four generators on it -two per engine plus the APU.
Nice video…. I’m curious why neither of you are on oxygen.. even though the “Oxygen RQD” is indicted on the alerts. In the video, it looks like you are at 12.0 (at night) without O2 which is already sketchy.. The FAR states that crew need to be on O2 at 12.5 - 14.0 (after 30mins) but your alerts are flashing (Oxygen RQD). Just curious…??
What was the alternator fault? Have you seen aircraft alternators? They total junk and I think amongst the most common failures in GA pretty much everyone will have a janky alternator failure in just a few hundred hours. Car alternators used to be the same but very rarely fail these days. At least the aviation alternators are readily serviceable.
Yes - I've had three failures in my 10 years - two in the air and one on the ground. It has to be one of the most common failures in light aircraft, and usually not an issue (VFR/Day). I'm afraid I don't know what the problem was. The aeroplane was sent to maintenance afterwards.
@@TheFlyingReporter Most aircraft alternator failures are nothing to do with the Alternator or the regulator. The week part of the system is the electrical cables forward of the firewall, these cables have lived in a harsh environment with oil, exhaust gasses , rain , vibration and a heat cycle every time the engine has started. Add to this the age of the aircraft and you have the perfect recipe for unreliability. If n every aircraft I have owned I have replaced the firewall forward electrical cables, it is a very inexpensive way to increase reliability and avoid the shotgun maintenance of changing stuff until the system runs ( poorly ) again.
@Robinbamv this is very true, they use 10A cable for 60A alternator resulting in large drops, huge amounts of noise and the regulator is usually mounted remote from the alternator which is a massive no-no. The regulator is usually an on or off affair resulting in huge ripple currents that get worse as all the janky connections gain resistance with age. I've also had 3 failures, and it was returned to service twice with a shorted diode by a certified overhauller. Utter garbage. I now have a selection of bearings, stator, diodes and castings for prestolite alternators so I can have a good one once it starts flapping. Another challenge is that people hang on to a crap battery for too long because of the cost. So the internal resistance of the battery keeps climbing until under load you end up busting the over voltage relay limit and it gets more frequent until you replace the battery. That could be what's happening here, but it won't reset itself you have to cycle it. Such junk I wouldn't put on my car but its OK for aircraft.
I think realistically, to fly IFR at night in a single engine is a risk. But, I think you obtaining a full IFR rating is a worthwhile thing to do as you use your aircraft for a lot of business flights throughout the year. Such a pity the UK IMC can’t piggyback some European version, our CAA realised the need for an IMC whereas they don’t in Europe. For many a full IR is just unobtainable due to cost. Unfortunately, I think many people do fly IFR without the licence.
At night you should use oxygen a bit earlier than during the day. I'd put it on at 9000' if climbing above. The reason for this is that cone-cells which provide colour vision, require higher oxygenation levels that rod cells. (IIRC from training 30 odd years ago).
Can't talk about legal requirements but some sources recommend using it about 6000 or 8000 feet. The response to reduced oxygen is also subjective, for example SoCal Flying Monkey's family members felt very dizzy while he had no symptoms. You also might experience reduced mental capacity well before the full-on hypoxia.
Hello, i notice that your safety harness buckle is near the middle of your chest? Usually it is recommended it be tightened around waist, it could cause nasty injuries if there were an impact?
Well, they were constantly visual with the storm and observed the storm motion before take-off. So in this particular case this one satellite update was arguably sufficient.
But it looked like they had stormscope which show live strikes .. it's just one part of the puzzle for IFR flying and nobody has said they relied on this to avoid it paints a picture
Maybe the thunderstorm upset the alterineter I'm only a armchair airplane interest. But I know they don't advise you to use a mobile phone during storms and once we had a specialist phone for the deaf ne and mum thought it would be okay during storms mum was inohobeduribg storm we heard a boom mum was thrown against walk not hurt but had a oerbenebt bruise on her temple plug was brown but we were in a housing association property so electrician didn't cost us but it was a lesson never used phone again during storms
Interesting, useful and clearly challenging. Funny you say you would declare a PAN call if you were in a similar situation in your Pa28. If you were flying at night in poor weather with an alternator failure in your Arrow I reckon that indubitably counts as a full on MAYDAY! As for the Cirrus - I recognise there are Cirrus experts here who will minutely distinguish between the functions of each alternator, but frankly it looks like madness to me to carry on with that flight in those conditions - and presumably you also already knew Biggin was going to have 'difficult' weather, just to add to the difficulties. Surely the sensible thing would be to divert (to EBOS for example, which was en route and on this side of the sea-crossing) and get it checked! Your pilot friend was no doubt experienced, but the decisions made here - dare I say - were, at best, highly questionable. Curious, and instructive, to see that at several points you too are obviously concerned about the sea crossing at night in such a position. I do have an IR with admittedly a less sophisticated aircraft (a 182) but frankly I felt increasingly uncomfortable as this flight evolved. So was diverting ever fully discussed? Or did you just press on and see what happened?
At night in IMC, with CBs about and an ALT failure but hey these guys pay my channel For a yourtuber constantly lecturing about safety there was a LOT to find fault with in this video wow
Question is why is one flying at night with convective activity? That’s a big no-no for me for a night flight. Indeed I follow the airline rule where night operations are prohibited if the radar is inoperative. And no, data-linked weather is NOT radar. There is a lapse of at least six minutes (translation, the image displayed is at least six minutes old ) and more than a handful of accidents have occurred where pilots thought it was equivalent to radar and bumbled right into one. Data linked weather is more for strategic planning planning and definitely not for tactical maneuvers around convection This guy should’ve known better!!! Douglas Boyd Commercial single/multi engine land IFR.
You don’t need to sign off youtube comments even if you do want to show off your qualifications. The Cirrus is more than capable of night IFR flying and they were clearly able to maintain safe flight.
I’m showing my credentials as a qualified pilot with a decent amount of experience close to 1,700 hours. Additionally, I hold a faculty position at a US aeronautical University and have published over 30 aviation safety related scientific publications including at least one on aeronautical decision making. Notwithstanding the capability of the Cirrus aircraft, one of our papers showed that over 50% of GA accidents are due to poor ADM. Because they got away with it once does not mean it’s safe.
@@douglasb5046 1700 hours is barely enough to even start flying in the airlines. Also, you’re in the US but commenting on someone flying with a british IR, which is FAR more detailed and borderline airline level compared to the (im my opinion better for GA) GA focused US IR. This pilot knew what he was doing and was perfectly safe doing so in this aircraft.
But the PIC here considered precisely that, the delay in connext ey as compared to an on board radar, which is why ample distance to the cell was maintained (50+NM). There is a case on the air safety institute channel showcasing what happens when you assume the data is real time - you fly right into the storm. But the pilot here seems to have considered that, so I would argue the ADM was actually solid
50 nmi isn’t much if you’re moving at 3 miles per minute. Plus near cloud turbulence (published on in the last few years) shows that this phenomenon can extend well beyond the thunderstorm associated precipitation (radar return ) As I said, this is one of the reasons why the airlines prohibit operations if radar is inoperative at night.
Yes, decision making is binary yes or no predicated on conditions for commercial aviation. Not so for general aviation where pilots need to really practice sound aeronautical decision-making, which I think was lacking for this Cirrus pilot.
It was a sensor issue, not an alternator failure. There were no additional alerts, and it was a low-risk scenario. The weather build-up was clearly visible, as there was still some light, allowing for easy identification and avoidance.
“Should be fine with one alternator” the QRH explicitly stated to avoid night and IMC when losing 1 ALT utter cowboys, just because you have glass screens and IFR clearances doesn’t make you airliners, this is still a SEP, what redundancy? Being down to 1 gen in the commercial world would be a pan pan pan at the very least
@@TheFlyingReporter you are obfuscating. In this specific flight you were planning on flying at night in IMC over water with 1 ALT, the on screen checklist itself said to avoid IMC/night flying. I’ve watched your channel for years and you claim you always put safety first and yet we have this video. It’s a very poor demonstration of decision making and risk mitigation in my opinion and reminds me why I avoid the GA world like a plague
I’m not inclined to debate another pilots decision making. But I’ve indicated my view of flight at night over water with one alternator which applies to 90% of GA flights. In this case, the alternator fault indication was resolved before flight over water. Had it not been there was the option to divert. When stable, the flight over water was at 12,000 feet at the shortest crossing (26 miles). It really was a non-issue.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
This looks a professionally planned and well risk managed IFR flight. The negative comments are predictable (A Cirrus is involved!) but regrettable nonetheless. One small technical correction to the narrative: Alt 2 provides power to the EBus only, it isn’t the primary power as indicated in the narrative. When Alt 2 fails Alt 1 (which normally powers MBus) will provide all the power necessary for both MBus and EBus. It does not work the other way around (Alt 2 will not power MBus) so in short Alt 2 failure is a minor issue whereas if Alt 1 were to fail you will loose all the MBus items (including flaps for landing) but still leaving you with the main items required for IFR flight and communication but no redundancy… after approx 30 minutes of Bat 1 is used up. I am very sure this pilot knew that and factored it in to his decision to continue to Biggin for an ILS Approach. As for the comments on weather radar versus, yes the Connext system is “not radar” but they had studied and planned in advance for the weather avoidance, and used the Connext to verify their advance planning to stay 50 miles North of the cell! Well done and thanks Jon for posting an interesting video and not being afraid to spark some debate.
Thanks John and for the insight into the electrical system.
E bus & M bus = Essential bus & Main Bus ?
See you were up @ FL120, was it a very low pressure day or were you wearing cannula oxygen?, difficult to see in the video. Cheers
I can't help being jealous of all the technology in a modern Cirrus aircraft. Very nice to have your checklists available on the displays. That looked like a great day of flying and some well considered planning for weather and decision making with the alt failure.
Ignoring the Cirrus Envy crowd for a second…incredible video, fantastic scene out the left window and shows why we fly, the safety of the plane, its redundancy and the value of an IR. It’s an incredible plane and piloted by a truly exceptional pilot. I would fly with Robbie any day of the week!
I recently spent three days flying with Robbie from New York to Biggin Hill in a G7 SR22T. He is a professional, experienced and highly capable pilot. His decision making logic was always informed and sensible. I watched this video and, knowing the capabilities and limitations of the aircraft, am in agreement with his choices. They had a working alternator plus remaining battery time and several airfields available if things took a turn for the worse. An alternator potentially failing increases the flight risk profile; I don’t believe it makes ‘land now’ a necessity. Garmin Connext is not to be used to pick a way between cells, but it is sufficiently current to guide the pilot on the areas to avoid. And this is what Robbie and Jon did.
It looks like it has been handled excellently by Robbie.. Although this is the world of GA, these guys hold ATPLs / CPLs for doing this work. The cirrus looks like a fantastic machine for this sort of weather, especially with the level of redundancy for this type of situation.
Excellent video! I didn't need any arm twisting to keep me watching till the end. I was riveted! Thankfully, it all worked out well. My GA flying days are now long behind me but, if I still flew GA and could afford one, I'd definitely own a Cirrus SR22. An amazing GA aircraft!
What a lovely aircraft, and those storm views… wow!!
Also so impressed by the European Controllers, so laid back and happy to help.
All round a great video
Thanks for watching - glad you enjoyed the ride.
Excellent video. Robbie’s ATC comms are a model of clarity, succinctness and professionalism.
Very Impressed!! Amazing tech from the cirrus, and can see why the full rating is well worth it. Great adventure!!
It's quite a machine isn't it!
What a terrific video!
What an excellent flight to watch. That is the kind of job I'd love to have if I could!
Excellent and really interesting video. Thanks Jon.
Lovely film Jon, thank you. Really informative and great to look at too. Modern sensors make low-light filming not only possible but really watchable too.
Dear John ! I wish i’d known you would visit EBAW Antwerpen, my hometown airport … because as a spotter and former technical employee there. There are a lot of Cirrus aircraft on the Belgian Civil Register. I saw on Robby’s phone, that he collected information before landing at Ebaw. I gather it was a short stop on your way to Lübeck in Germany. By the way many congrats on your Skymaster video, loved it very much. In the 90’s there were up to 8 C.337 Skymasters on our civil register, non whatsoever now, shame ! All the best to you and your family ! Greetings.
Love this video, one of the best so far. I flew to Lübeck this year, the city is worth a visit!
My goodness, what a flight with some tense moments. I can’t help but be impressed with the aircraft!
What an adventure. IFR is so much fun.
That bring back a memory very early one boxing day I DEP 60NM south of Canberra YSCB for Sydney YSSY in a C182 in CLD all the way, 30 minutes in and ABM CB I started losing radios by 45 minutes I was in the dark.
So, it was a Controller based breakout at YSCB at about 700AGL using a torch and handheld radio, it wasn't the usual limited panel stuff as I still had the Vac AH and DG, but no turn coordinator just the ball.
It was due to a flat spotting drivebelt and the usual Cessna ammeter which tend not move much.
Brilliant thank you
Such a good video, I’ve watched it three times now! I look forward to getting a PPL and IFR rating myself, hopefully not in the too distant future. Well done.
As usual, great video. 👍
@TheFlyingReporter I never tire of watching the wonderful content that you put on here. Just fantastic.
Having the full IR is such a good experience. Plus they basic flight, take off, climb, descent is so easy. Just do what you get told. The main difficulties imo are what are highlighted in this video. En route weather avoidance, approach and landing weather…down to minimums and then dealing abnormalities within the cockpit
It looks like the yellow annunciation indicated a potential issue with the alternator sensor rather than an actual alternator failure. Since the battery wasn’t draining and there was no low battery alert, it suggests that the alternator was likely functioning properly, with the sensor providing a false alert. In this situation, the pilot-in-command (PIC) would reasonably assess it as a low-priority issue, especially if all other electrical systems were stable and operating as expected.
In such cases, the yellow annunciation serves as a cautionary indicator rather than a critical warning, alerting the PIC to monitor the situation rather than take immediate corrective action.
Flying 50 miles from a storm cell, especially at dusk, isn’t inherently poor aeronautical decision-making (ADM). It reflects a calculated risk management approach, balancing safety and operational goals while maintaining situational awareness. Weather distances like 50 miles can be appropriate
That return flight looked a little uncomfortable, Jon, that storm look pretty brutal... but made for an entertaining vlog. Good call to reduce the water crossing I thought👍🏻 👏🏻👏🏻
Hi Jon!
Well! That was interesting!
Great flying by Robbie, ably assisted by your good self.
I can imagine your concern when ALT 2 Fault indication flashed up, but it all went swimmingly in the end.
Best wishes from Wirral.
Gosh....the audio is amazing! Just two chaps in a room?
That looked amazing.
Routine IFR flight in a single, especially at night, or over water, is a little bit "bold" if you take my meaning. All the shiney screens and other toys do not mitigate that a) you only have one engine, b) can be battered to break-up by the weather.
Agree, I think many Cirrus pilots think they’re flying an Airbus !
@@Rewsky21 Which of us, as sprog pilots, has not had a silent thrill at flying in a cockpit festooned with new and exciting pretty lights, when first flying at night, no matter it be a Cessna 152 on a 1st night landing, or a modern Cirrus? The trick is to remain cognisant that flying a single at night, is a risky undertaking. Doing so over water, is doubly so, and with CB's about it's bordering on being a "little bit silly". I had an engine-failure or rough-running engine about every 750 hours over a career instructing on light singles and twins. Nothing could induce me to fly a single at night, with CB's about, and over the English Channel. I'd happily do ONE of those, but would not be a happy bunny doing two or more.
I’m in total agreement with you, flying at night is a fun but you always need to be three steps ahead compared to day flying, I have a grand total of just 36 night flying hours and yes some where over quite long water legs, but the enjoyment can make you blind to the risks. I took my young son with me a few times, and now as I no longer fly I look back and think to myself what hell was I thinking 😮
@@Rewsky21 The advice I received for having to force-land at night:
Aim at the dark bits, when low enough, turn your landing light on. If you don't like what you see, (forests etc) turn it off again!
This Cirrus pilot needs to be schooled in aeronautical decision-making.
Excellent flight.
Really nice informative video John, thanks for taking the time, I was glued to it all the way, alot of info to process, I was interested in how u can understand ATC pigeon English once u leave UK airspace,I know English is the language in communication but there's English and English, I thought you both have mastered it. Thanks again.
At least the ‘Pigeon English’ is in ICAO standard. As a non native speaker I have more difficulty understanding UK ATC than any other country in Europe.
@@missedapproachmark thanks for the reply, I'm only a large model flyer, so unfamiliar with ICAO standard, thanks the reply and info, Matt
Just like a day in the simulator.
Hi John and Robbie brilliant flight when landing was there a fault with the alternator look forward to your next video Paul in Kent
Looks like a great aircraft! With both alternators failing intermittently I imagine it would be caused by the thunderstorm’s em radiation? I would think electrical failures or irregularities would be common flying that close?
One alternator failing intermittently. I wondered whether the thunderstorm was affecting a sensor, but it was more than 50 miles away, and static was barely detectable on the VHF.
@@TheFlyingReporter That makes sense, it should be too far to affect anything. At the 8 minute mark the display also shows alt 1 failing, or at least only outputting 1amp, looks like both were having issues.
That is normal I think when alt 2 is operating normally.
Spot on. I couldn’t have said it better. Add to that typically your two engine transport category aircraft has four generators on it -two per engine plus the APU.
I regularly, in fact, almost always fly with one alternator, all the time. 😂
@@TheFlyingReporter 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Nice video…. I’m curious why neither of you are on oxygen.. even though the “Oxygen RQD” is indicted on the alerts. In the video, it looks like you are at 12.0 (at night) without O2 which is already sketchy.. The FAR states that crew need to be on O2 at 12.5 - 14.0 (after 30mins) but your alerts are flashing (Oxygen RQD). Just curious…??
What was the alternator fault? Have you seen aircraft alternators? They total junk and I think amongst the most common failures in GA pretty much everyone will have a janky alternator failure in just a few hundred hours. Car alternators used to be the same but very rarely fail these days. At least the aviation alternators are readily serviceable.
Yes - I've had three failures in my 10 years - two in the air and one on the ground. It has to be one of the most common failures in light aircraft, and usually not an issue (VFR/Day). I'm afraid I don't know what the problem was. The aeroplane was sent to maintenance afterwards.
@@TheFlyingReporter Most aircraft alternator failures are nothing to do with the Alternator or the regulator. The week part of the system is the electrical cables forward of the firewall, these cables have lived in a harsh environment with oil, exhaust gasses , rain , vibration and a heat cycle every time the engine has started. Add to this the age of the aircraft and you have the perfect recipe for unreliability. If n every aircraft I have owned I have replaced the firewall forward electrical cables, it is a very inexpensive way to increase reliability and avoid the shotgun maintenance of changing stuff until the system runs ( poorly ) again.
@Robinbamv this is very true, they use 10A cable for 60A alternator resulting in large drops, huge amounts of noise and the regulator is usually mounted remote from the alternator which is a massive no-no. The regulator is usually an on or off affair resulting in huge ripple currents that get worse as all the janky connections gain resistance with age. I've also had 3 failures, and it was returned to service twice with a shorted diode by a certified overhauller. Utter garbage. I now have a selection of bearings, stator, diodes and castings for prestolite alternators so I can have a good one once it starts flapping. Another challenge is that people hang on to a crap battery for too long because of the cost. So the internal resistance of the battery keeps climbing until under load you end up busting the over voltage relay limit and it gets more frequent until you replace the battery. That could be what's happening here, but it won't reset itself you have to cycle it. Such junk I wouldn't put on my car but its OK for aircraft.
What altitude do you need to use oxygen ?
FL 125 I'm told on an N reg.
I think realistically, to fly IFR at night in a single engine is a risk. But, I think you obtaining a full IFR rating is a worthwhile thing to do as you use your aircraft for a lot of business flights throughout the year. Such a pity the UK IMC can’t piggyback some European version, our CAA realised the need for an IMC whereas they don’t in Europe. For many a full IR is just unobtainable due to cost. Unfortunately, I think many people do fly IFR without the licence.
At night you should use oxygen a bit earlier than during the day. I'd put it on at 9000' if climbing above. The reason for this is that cone-cells which provide colour vision, require higher oxygenation levels that rod cells. (IIRC from training 30 odd years ago).
@@TheFlyingReporter Doesn't matter N reg if you're flying in EASA land. EASA land says above FL100 if longer than 30min and above FL130.
Can't talk about legal requirements but some sources recommend using it about 6000 or 8000 feet. The response to reduced oxygen is also subjective, for example SoCal Flying Monkey's family members felt very dizzy while he had no symptoms. You also might experience reduced mental capacity well before the full-on hypoxia.
Hello, i notice that your safety harness buckle is near the middle of your chest? Usually it is recommended it be tightened around waist, it could cause nasty injuries if there were an impact?
A satellite update every 20min does not tell you where the storm is.
Well, they were constantly visual with the storm and observed the storm motion before take-off. So in this particular case this one satellite update was arguably sufficient.
@@el_quba I didn't say they didn't know where the storm was now did I. I said something completely different.
But it looked like they had stormscope which show live strikes .. it's just one part of the puzzle for IFR flying and nobody has said they relied on this to avoid it paints a picture
@@PILOTCIRRUSASIA I didn’t say that either.
@@markor2476 cool you just stated the obvious that the connect systems is delayed. Cheers
Maybe the thunderstorm upset the alterineter I'm only a armchair airplane interest.
But I know they don't advise you to use a mobile phone during storms and once we had a specialist phone for the deaf ne and mum thought it would be okay during storms mum was inohobeduribg storm we heard a boom mum was thrown against walk not hurt but had a oerbenebt bruise on her temple plug was brown but we were in a housing association property so electrician didn't cost us but it was a lesson never used phone again during storms
Interesting, useful and clearly challenging. Funny you say you would declare a PAN call if you were in a similar situation in your Pa28. If you were flying at night in poor weather with an alternator failure in your Arrow I reckon that indubitably counts as a full on MAYDAY!
As for the Cirrus - I recognise there are Cirrus experts here who will minutely distinguish between the functions of each alternator, but frankly it looks like madness to me to carry on with that flight in those conditions - and presumably you also already knew Biggin was going to have 'difficult' weather, just to add to the difficulties. Surely the sensible thing would be to divert (to EBOS for example, which was en route and on this side of the sea-crossing) and get it checked! Your pilot friend was no doubt experienced, but the decisions made here - dare I say - were, at best, highly questionable. Curious, and instructive, to see that at several points you too are obviously concerned about the sea crossing at night in such a position. I do have an IR with admittedly a less sophisticated aircraft (a 182) but frankly I felt increasingly uncomfortable as this flight evolved. So was diverting ever fully discussed? Or did you just press on and see what happened?
alt failed, concerning, imagine an engine failure, lads please please please dont fly single engine aircraft at night or in IMC its not worth it
Not the wisest thing to do, SE night over water !
It's a cirrus mate. You know, with the CAPS parachute and things. I wouldn't be afraid of crossing the English Channel at any point of day in one.
@@matthew07 Yeah Right ! CAPS is just what you need when plonking down in middle of the channel 😂
Not to mention in vector activity. This Cirrus pilot needs to be schooled in aeronautical decision-making. Shame on him.
At night in IMC, with CBs about and an ALT failure but hey these guys pay my channel
For a yourtuber constantly lecturing about safety there was a LOT to find fault with in this video wow
@@abingdonboyit looked like sensor issue as battery didn't look like it was draining. But yeah you know best RUclips troll.
Question is why is one flying at night with convective activity? That’s a big no-no for me for a night flight. Indeed I follow the airline rule where night operations are prohibited if the radar is inoperative. And no, data-linked weather is NOT radar. There is a lapse of at least six minutes (translation, the image displayed is at least six minutes old ) and more than a handful of accidents have occurred where pilots thought it was equivalent to radar and bumbled right into one. Data linked weather is more for strategic planning planning and definitely not for tactical maneuvers around convection This guy should’ve known better!!! Douglas Boyd Commercial single/multi engine land IFR.
You don’t need to sign off youtube comments even if you do want to show off your qualifications. The Cirrus is more than capable of night IFR flying and they were clearly able to maintain safe flight.
I’m showing my credentials as a qualified pilot with a decent amount of experience close to 1,700 hours. Additionally, I hold a faculty position at a US aeronautical University and have published over 30 aviation safety related scientific publications including at least one on aeronautical decision making. Notwithstanding the capability of the Cirrus aircraft, one of our papers showed that over 50% of GA accidents are due to poor ADM. Because they got away with it once does not mean it’s safe.
@@douglasb5046 1700 hours is barely enough to even start flying in the airlines.
Also, you’re in the US but commenting on someone flying with a british IR, which is FAR more detailed and borderline airline level compared to the (im my opinion better for GA) GA focused US IR. This pilot knew what he was doing and was perfectly safe doing so in this aircraft.
But the PIC here considered precisely that, the delay in connext ey as compared to an on board radar, which is why ample distance to the cell was maintained (50+NM). There is a case on the air safety institute channel showcasing what happens when you assume the data is real time - you fly right into the storm. But the pilot here seems to have considered that, so I would argue the ADM was actually solid
50 nmi isn’t much if you’re moving at 3 miles per minute. Plus near cloud turbulence (published on in the last few years) shows that this phenomenon can extend well beyond the thunderstorm associated precipitation (radar return ) As I said, this is one of the reasons why the airlines prohibit operations if radar is inoperative at night.
Yes, decision making is binary yes or no predicated on conditions for commercial aviation. Not so for general aviation where pilots need to really practice sound aeronautical decision-making, which I think was lacking for this Cirrus pilot.
It was a sensor issue, not an alternator failure. There were no additional alerts, and it was a low-risk scenario. The weather build-up was clearly visible, as there was still some light, allowing for easy identification and avoidance.
“Should be fine with one alternator” the QRH explicitly stated to avoid night and IMC when losing 1 ALT
utter cowboys, just because you have glass screens and IFR clearances doesn’t make you airliners, this is still a SEP, what redundancy? Being down to 1 gen in the commercial world would be a pan pan pan at the very least
I regularly fly with one alternator. All the time!
@@TheFlyingReporterat night in IMC over the water?
Flew at night last week with one alternator. And would do so over water at 12,000 feet within gliding range to airports either end.
@@TheFlyingReporter you are obfuscating. In this specific flight you were planning on flying at night in IMC over water with 1 ALT, the on screen checklist itself said to avoid IMC/night flying.
I’ve watched your channel for years and you claim you always put safety first and yet we have this video. It’s a very poor demonstration of decision making and risk mitigation in my opinion and reminds me why I avoid the GA world like a plague
I’m not inclined to debate another pilots decision making. But I’ve indicated my view of flight at night over water with one alternator which applies to 90% of GA flights. In this case, the alternator fault indication was resolved before flight over water. Had it not been there was the option to divert. When stable, the flight over water was at 12,000 feet at the shortest crossing (26 miles). It really was a non-issue.