iFly GPS Forum

We have a new Forum!  Go here to get started: https://adventurepilot.community.forum.  
The new forum is easier to use and much more capable than the old, we hope you will join our community! 

Below is a copy of the old forum. This will remain available for a short period so you can access and review the information contained here. To continue a conversation, or start a new one, please register and create a post at our new forum location.
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsiFly General Di...iFly General Di...Navworx in troubleNavworx in trouble
Previous
 
Next
New Post
10/28/2016 9:26 PM
 
Since NavWorx updated the SW to show a SIL of 0 (yours was probably shipped that way), you should be receiving traffic. I flew the other day in my 182 and traffic lit up my iFly. I am also a Mid-Air survivor, back shortly after I purchased my Grumman in 1981. The change in the GPS requirements that came out in the AC to my understanding was for aircraft under 9K GW I think. When looking through the docket responses I did notice this one from a Chris Schulte who appears to be a 2 year veteran of the FAA office working on software acceptance: "I am vehemently opposed of ANY degradation to the NAS. Once this occurs we will not be able to recover. Any and all automated transmission into the NAS must be controlled to TSO standards. The integrity of future safe flight depends on this. My fear with this AD and any AD is they are not required for Experimental - Homebuilt Aircraft. We must have a way to remove these units from the growing number of home built "kit planes" which tend to use lower end or uncertified avionics. The majority of NavWorx products are not certified and unfit for broadcast into the NAS yet this continues to be allowed. With regards to the certified aircraft I believe the AD for removal of the product is sufficient." Sounds like he is fully baked into the mentality that General Aviation is bad, in particular Homebuilt Aircraft. The FAA is looking to stack the deck here.
 
New Post
10/28/2016 9:30 PM
 
Sorry, the first sentence was wrong. it should have said: Since NavWorx updated the SW to show a SIL of 3....
 
New Post
10/28/2016 10:08 PM
 

Chris Schulte who appears to be a 2 year veteran of the FAA office working on software acceptance: "I am vehemently opposed of ANY degradation to the NAS. Once this occurs we will not be able to recover. Any and all automated transmission into the NAS must be controlled to TSO standards. The integrity of future safe flight depends on this. My fear with this AD and any AD is they are not required for Experimental - Homebuilt Aircraft.

... and therein lies my confusion! Experimental aircraft are not required to comply with AD's. This apparently is an AD against an avionics unit that one model of which is installed in Experimental aircraft. If the AD is finalized and approved, can or cannot the AD be ignored by those with Experimental aircraft???

(Of course, I hope all this is theoretical and am confident that NavWorx will either get this resolved with the FAA or do a revision mod to get their units compliant should the AD stand!)

 
New Post
11/3/2016 1:37 PM
 

John

Bill at Navworx suggested keeping my 600 EXP unit because they were accepted without the TSO requirement as long as they met the performance requirements and they appear to be doing so.

I expect the 600 EXP units will be excluded from the AD...but time will tell.

I will keep using my unit to keep me a bit safer in the crowded skies of Southern California.

John

 
New Post
11/3/2016 2:59 PM
 

John Miller wrote:

Bill at Navworx suggested keeping my 600 EXP unit because they were accepted without the TSO requirement as long as they met the performance requirements and they appear to be doing so.

I expect the 600 EXP units will be excluded from the AD...but time will tell.

I will keep using my unit to keep me a bit safer in the crowded skies of Southern California.

John

Yes, Bill advised me the same ... of course, that would be a reasonable outcome for the EXP units, but when has the FAA ever been "reasonable?" Haha! I'm definitely continuing to use my ADS600-EXP unless forced to do otherwise!

John A.

 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsiFly General Di...iFly General Di...Navworx in troubleNavworx in trouble