Narrative:

We departed and climbing through 15;000 feet we received an EFIS comp mon caution with IAS flag. I noticed that my airspeed indicator (ca (captains) side) was no longer matching the first officer's (first officer's) airspeed indicator or the standby airspeed indicator; and that my airspeed was decreasing very quickly. The first officer was flying the aircraft so he remained the flying pilot and I began to run the QRH for unreliable airspeed. At the time of the event we had just entered into ice and could see accumulation on windshield wipers and windows. I suspected that maybe my airspeed indicator may have become clogged but was not certain. I proceeded with the QRH for unreliable airspeed. The procedure eventually called for landing at nearest suitable and to exit icing conditions if suspected that this was the cause of the issue but was not sure. I [advised ATC] and returned to field. The QRH was completed and normal checklists where completed. We landed safely and returned to the gate. No passenger issues where noted. While in the air completing the QRH procedure the pfd (primary flight display) started losing other instruments on the ca side. Eventually showing red on every instrument. Descending through 10;000 feet everything came back to normal on the captains side. Made a normal landing. I made the landing due gusty wind conditions. I think the correct procedure to use is confusing. The procedures in question are unreliable airspeed procedure in flight; and EFIS comp mon IAS flag. If an individual determines that they should conduct the unreliable airspeed in-flight QRH procedure. As per our policies you would proceed by running the qrc; emergency; abnormal checklists. Unreliable airspeed being in the emergency section of the QRH. If a person has determined that one or more airspeed sources is considered reliable while running the unreliable airspeed procedure. The procedure leads you to step one or more airspeed source is considered reliable. Air data source selector confirm norm. Reliable airspeed source monitor with caution. Pitch/N1 set using tables. Land at the nearest suitable airport. This procedure is very different then the EFIS comp mon caution IAS flag. This procedure only has you use the unreliable airspeed procedure if no reliable airspeed side can be determined. Why is it if one or more sources considered reliable in one procedure has you divert and the other just have you select the source you think is working and continue. I chose to use the more conservative of the 2 procedures and return to field. My reasons for returning to the field are: I was not sure the icing was causing the issue. I did identify one unreliable airspeed source and the unreliable airspeed procedure addresses this issue specifically. In the unreliable airspeed procedure it directs the individual to perform no crew action for the following messages: caution EFIS comp mon IAS flag; EFIS comp inoperative IAS flag; stall fail; mach trim. I was displaying several of these cautions. Furthermore previous versions of the unreliable airspeed procedure where similar to the EFIS comp mon caution procedure. Knowing this and that a change was made provided incentive to run the latest procedure. I would like some clarification regarding the correct use of the QRH.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ-200 flight crew reported losing multiple instruments during flight in icing conditions; returned to the departure airport.

Narrative: We departed and climbing through 15;000 feet we received an EFIS comp MON caution with IAS flag. I noticed that my airspeed indicator (CA (Captains) Side) was no longer matching the FO's (First Officer's) airspeed indicator or the Standby airspeed indicator; and that my airspeed was decreasing very quickly. The First Officer was flying the aircraft so he remained the Flying Pilot and I began to run the QRH for UNRELIABLE airspeed. At the time of the event we had just entered into ICE and could see accumulation on windshield wipers and windows. I suspected that maybe my airspeed indicator may have become clogged but was not certain. I proceeded with the QRH for unreliable airspeed. The procedure eventually called for landing at nearest suitable and to exit icing conditions if suspected that this was the cause of the issue but was not sure. I [advised ATC] and returned to field. The QRH was completed and normal checklists where completed. We landed safely and returned to the gate. No passenger issues where noted. While in the air completing the QRH procedure the PFD (Primary Flight Display) started losing other instruments on the CA side. Eventually showing red on every instrument. Descending through 10;000 feet everything came back to normal on the Captains side. Made a normal landing. I made the landing due gusty wind conditions. I think the correct procedure to use is confusing. The procedures in question are Unreliable Airspeed Procedure In Flight; and EFIS COMP MON IAS flag. If an individual determines that they should conduct the Unreliable Airspeed In-Flight QRH procedure. As per our policies you would proceed by running the QRC; Emergency; Abnormal checklists. Unreliable airspeed being in the Emergency section of the QRH. If a person has determined that one or more airspeed sources is considered reliable while running the Unreliable Airspeed procedure. The procedure leads you to step ONE OR MORE AIRSPEED SOURCE IS CONSIDERED RELIABLE. AIR DATA source selector CONFIRM NORM. Reliable airspeed source MONITOR WITH CAUTION. Pitch/N1 Set using tables. Land at the nearest suitable airport. This procedure is very different then the EFIS COMP MON caution IAS flag. This procedure only has you use the Unreliable airspeed procedure if no reliable airspeed side can be determined. Why is it if one or more sources considered reliable in one procedure has you divert and the other just have you select the source you think is working and continue. I chose to use the more conservative of the 2 procedures and return to field. My reasons for returning to the field are: I was not sure the icing was causing the issue. I did identify one unreliable airspeed source and the unreliable airspeed procedure addresses this issue specifically. In the unreliable airspeed procedure it directs the individual to perform no crew action for the following messages: Caution EFIS COMP MON IAS Flag; EFIS COMP INOP IAS Flag; STALL FAIL; MACH TRIM. I was displaying several of these cautions. Furthermore previous versions of the Unreliable airspeed procedure where similar to the EFIS COMP MON caution procedure. Knowing this and that a change was made provided incentive to run the latest procedure. I would like some clarification regarding the correct use of the QRH.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.