Narrative:

I was in IMC flight in my columbia 350 at 5000 ft when I experienced a very rough running engine. I transmitted to ATC that I needed to land immediately. I suggested ZZZ1; but the controller; who was excellent during the entire emergency; suggested a heading for an ILS into ZZZ; which I accepted. The fog/clouds had the ceilings down at minimums. The controller was continuously helping me by giving me ATIS information; vectors to intercept the localizer; minimums; communication frequencys for tower and navigation frequencys for the ILS. The problem I now submit this form to complain about was the continuous aural warning of fuel pump failure that was being repeated by the garmin 1000 in my ear. It interfered on more than one occasion with my ability to effectively communicate to; or hear from ATC. When I called columbia aircraft manufacturing to report that this was a very important safety problem that compounded the emergency at hand rather than help it; they responded that their hands were tied because of a far that said something about continuous and repeated warnings being required for this type of problem. It is my understanding that the far was written before glass cockpits and I suggest that for the safety of all concerned it should be changed and each manufacturer required to change their software for the garmin 1000 to stop the repetitive aural warnings from happening to someone else in an emergency situation. I am glad to report that a safe landing was made and the problem which caused the emergency fixed.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the aural warning was much louder than the ATC/radio communications. He stated that the loudness was such that it overrode the ATC communications and he was unable to hear the directions the controller was issuing. The alert button on the garmin 1000 would mute the warning; but for only 20 seconds and that was not sufficient time to receive the information provided by the controller. The reporter stated that he had communications with garmin after the incident and garmin indicated that the aircraft manufacturer required the aural warning as prescribed by the FAA's FARS. The reporter was concerned that the aural warning; at its present volume; was a safety issue and could cause a pilot to misunderstand directions/clearance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LANCAIR COLUMBIA 350 PLT HAS CONCERN WITH CONTINUOUS AURAL WARNING ON A GARMIN 1000 FOR AN EQUIP FAILURE DURING AN ENG EMER.

Narrative: I WAS IN IMC FLT IN MY COLUMBIA 350 AT 5000 FT WHEN I EXPERIENCED A VERY ROUGH RUNNING ENG. I XMITTED TO ATC THAT I NEEDED TO LAND IMMEDIATELY. I SUGGESTED ZZZ1; BUT THE CTLR; WHO WAS EXCELLENT DURING THE ENTIRE EMER; SUGGESTED A HDG FOR AN ILS INTO ZZZ; WHICH I ACCEPTED. THE FOG/CLOUDS HAD THE CEILINGS DOWN AT MINIMUMS. THE CTLR WAS CONTINUOUSLY HELPING ME BY GIVING ME ATIS INFO; VECTORS TO INTERCEPT THE LOCALIZER; MINIMUMS; COM FREQS FOR TWR AND NAV FREQS FOR THE ILS. THE PROB I NOW SUBMIT THIS FORM TO COMPLAIN ABOUT WAS THE CONTINUOUS AURAL WARNING OF FUEL PUMP FAILURE THAT WAS BEING REPEATED BY THE GARMIN 1000 IN MY EAR. IT INTERFERED ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION WITH MY ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE TO; OR HEAR FROM ATC. WHEN I CALLED COLUMBIA ACFT MANUFACTURING TO RPT THAT THIS WAS A VERY IMPORTANT SAFETY PROB THAT COMPOUNDED THE EMER AT HAND RATHER THAN HELP IT; THEY RESPONDED THAT THEIR HANDS WERE TIED BECAUSE OF A FAR THAT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT CONTINUOUS AND REPEATED WARNINGS BEING REQUIRED FOR THIS TYPE OF PROB. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FAR WAS WRITTEN BEFORE GLASS COCKPITS AND I SUGGEST THAT FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL CONCERNED IT SHOULD BE CHANGED AND EACH MANUFACTURER REQUIRED TO CHANGE THEIR SOFTWARE FOR THE GARMIN 1000 TO STOP THE REPETITIVE AURAL WARNINGS FROM HAPPENING TO SOMEONE ELSE IN AN EMER SITUATION. I AM GLAD TO RPT THAT A SAFE LNDG WAS MADE AND THE PROB WHICH CAUSED THE EMER FIXED.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE AURAL WARNING WAS MUCH LOUDER THAN THE ATC/RADIO COMMUNICATIONS. HE STATED THAT THE LOUDNESS WAS SUCH THAT IT OVERRODE THE ATC COMMUNICATIONS AND HE WAS UNABLE TO HEAR THE DIRECTIONS THE CTLR WAS ISSUING. THE ALERT BUTTON ON THE GARMIN 1000 WOULD MUTE THE WARNING; BUT FOR ONLY 20 SECONDS AND THAT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TIME TO RECEIVE THE INFO PROVIDED BY THE CTLR. THE RPTR STATED THAT HE HAD COMMUNICATIONS WITH GARMIN AFTER THE INCIDENT AND GARMIN INDICATED THAT THE ACFT MANUFACTURER REQUIRED THE AURAL WARNING AS PRESCRIBED BY THE FAA'S FARS. THE RPTR WAS CONCERNED THAT THE AURAL WARNING; AT ITS PRESENT VOLUME; WAS A SAFETY ISSUE AND COULD CAUSE A PLT TO MISUNDERSTAND DIRECTIONS/CLRNC.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.