VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   ADS-B (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=113)
-   -   Possible AD for certain NAVWORX ADS-B Units (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=142967)

rleffler 10-30-2017 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonR (Post 1215153)
Bob,

How do I know if I have got a "new" EXP unit? Is there a serial number or a date of shipment which defines the new ones?

And you say "unless you have a new EXP..." What if I do have a new EXP, how do I attach a certified GPS to qualify for AMOC? The doghouse and v 7.0.0 software was going to do that.

And if we scrape up enough money for another unit, how do we know that they comply and will not do a NavWorx on us in a couple of years? Unless we go to Garmin of course and pay $5K!

GordonR

If you have a new EXP, you would know it as you would have received it in the last week or two. It looks different too.

I?m waiting to hear results from somebody that has one. I?ve already been contacted for assistance.

I can?t answer your last question. My only advice is to watch the FAA approved list and make sure the position source is listed. In the EAB market 90% of our vendors are small businesses. There are no guarantees.

Timberwolf 10-30-2017 07:28 PM

When the unit is trash I?ll pull it and not put one back in that plane. I?m waiting on the garmin Gdl-82 for the RV. Burned once, I?ll stick with garmin.

As a side note I was never informed by the FAA that there was an AD on this unit. Being as though it?s an experimental and ADs typically do not apply, (I know the argument when this whole fiasco started) I?m curious to see if they start contacting people after the AD date and start handing down fines.

Tracer 10 10-30-2017 07:54 PM

Garmin ADSB at 5k...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonR (Post 1215153)
Bob,

How do I know if I have got a "new" EXP unit? Is there a serial number or a date of shipment which defines the new ones?

And you say "unless you have a new EXP..." What if I do have a new EXP, how do I attach a certified GPS to qualify for AMOC? The doghouse and v 7.0.0 software was going to do that.

And if we scrape up enough money for another unit, how do we know that they comply and will not do a NavWorx on us in a couple of years? Unless we go to Garmin of course and pay $5K!

GordonR

I highly recommend the STRATUS APPAREO 1090ES Transponder. Model ESG for ADSB Out at under 2K or the ESGi for ADSB IN/OUT at 3K. It has worked perfectly the last 6 months in our RV6. Sold our KT76A and got the $500 rebate to offset the cost. And Yes—We got caught in the NavWorx ESG Debacle..!!

Abbygirl1 10-31-2017 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tracer 10 (Post 1215230)
I highly recommend the STRATUS APPAREO 1090ES Transponder. Model ESG for ADSB Out at under 2K or the ESGi for ADSB IN/OUT at 3K. It has worked perfectly the last 6 months in our RV6. Sold our KT76A and got the $500 rebate to offset the cost. And Yes?We got caught in the NavWorx ESG Debacle..!!


I did exactly that several months ago. I am very pleased with the Apparreo unit.....AND i got a new xponder to replace the aging KT76 to boot.

Jesse 10-31-2017 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonR (Post 1215153)
And if we scrape up enough money for another unit, how do we know that they comply and will not do a NavWorx on us in a couple of years? Unless we go to Garmin of course and pay $5K!

Don?t assume that it will be compliant just because it says Garmin on it. Ask the people who forked out huge dollars for the GDL90. People were trying to hit a moving target regarding ads-b for years. Let?s hope the target doesn?t continue to move.

roadrunner20 11-03-2017 07:39 AM

With the number of Navworx units in the AD, has there been a mention or discussion related to the Avidyne products that Navworx was producing for them?

Some of the early delivery issues where related to Navworx closing the line to produce a large order for Avidyne.

I've not heard mention of any of their devices.

DavidBunin 11-03-2017 09:33 AM

The units they made for Avidyne were receive-only boxes. They were never part of the AD, so not affected.

No word on how many units were built for Avidyne before NavWorx shuttered, but the assumption is "plenty".

FORANE 11-03-2017 09:42 AM

If it is the ads-b in box I am thinking of, they were asking around $2500 for it when it launched. Not sure how many would bite at that price.

emuyshondt 11-03-2017 02:55 PM

My new-to-me 182 came with one. Avidyne calls it a SkyTrax 100 or MLB100. The paperwork says it is a Navworx ADS600 B 200-11. The STC is from Navworx.

Avidyne doesn't say much about it. They are working on a new unit, but wouldn't give me any details. For now, the unit seems to be working ok. I would prefer a dual-band device, but this one will do for now. I am just learning it, as I got the 182 last week. It came with an Avidyne IFD540, AXP340 transponder/ADS-B Out and the Navworx unit. Since it doesn't transmit, it is not affected by the AD.

GordonR 11-03-2017 03:44 PM

Dallas Avionics
 
So here is the offer from Dallas Avionics that came in yesterday (Nov 2). I would like to hear opinions on the uAvionics systems mentioned. Do they replicate the functions of the defunct NavWorx EXP? Are we assured that uAvionics is approved by FAA and will not bite us again?

I welcome discussions and opinions.

GordonR



Attention: Experimental & LSA Aircraft Owners

Dallas Avionics, Inc. is pleased to announce a "plug and play" replacement system for your Experimental or LSA Aircraft with existing NavWorx AD affected system.

Working with uAvionix Corp., we are pleased to be offering the EchoUAT and SkyFyx Bundle (P/N ECHOFIX-KL5) at reduced price of $1090.00 (regularly $1499.00). The System bundle will come with a factory supplied "pig tail" harness/connector that will require no additional wiring making replacement system "plug and play" for those with an existing ADS600-EXP. (Those with experimental aircraft with the ADS-600B system are also included in this special but will require connector replacement). With all the capabilities of your existing system, the EchoUAT also provides Dual (978 & 1090) traffic as a dual frequency receiver.

In addition to the "plug and play" system, we will offer additional configurations to include a bundle with SKYFYX-EXT which includes replacement of your existing portable antenna with a GPS antenna with built in WAAS receiver (in antenna). This bundle is offered at a discounted price of $1050.00 (regularly $1399.00).

Lastly, for those customers that would like to interface an existing compatible WAAS GPS (Garmin, Avidyne, etc) we offer just the EchoUAT at a discounted price of $799.00 (regularly $999.00).

Customers must verify serial number of existing ADS-600EXP or ADS-600B system to qualify for this incredible one time offer. Dallas Avionics, Inc. will offer this price through 12/31/17.

Please visit dallasavionics.com or uavionix.com for detailed unit specifications. Dallas Avionics, Inc. will begin to accept orders on Friday 11/3/17.

Note: This solution is for Experimental and LSA aircraft only. Dallas Avionics, Inc. is working on a similar solution for Certified Aircraft Owners and should have additional information in the next coming weeks.

Dallas Avionics, Inc.
2525 Santa Anna Ave
Dallas, TX 75228
800-527-2581 / 214-320-9770

DavidBunin 11-04-2017 07:58 AM

Quote:

Are we assured that uAvionics is approved by FAA and will not bite us again?
uAvionics only produces products for drones, light sport, and experimental aircraft. None of their products are certified by the FAA, although they are rumored to be working on approval for certified aircraft.

With the exception of the NavWorx ADS600-EXP, the FAA appears to be content to ignore that experimental aircraft use experimental avionics products.

At the price levels given, there is no way that uAvionics products contain a TSO-certified GPS. But then, the regulations don't require TSO certification, just TSO-like performance. But we all see how well that worked out for NavWorx.

maus92 11-04-2017 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidBunin (Post 1216265)
uAvionics only produces products for drones, light sport, and experimental aircraft. None of their products are certified by the FAA, although they are rumored to be working on approval for certified aircraft.

With the exception of the NavWorx ADS600-EXP, the FAA appears to be content to ignore that experimental aircraft use experimental avionics products.

At the price levels given, there is no way that uAvionics products contain a TSO-certified GPS. But then, the regulations don't require TSO certification, just TSO-like performance. But we all see how well that worked out for NavWorx.

Sounds like uAvionics documented their engineering, and plays well with the FAA. Something to be said for that approach.

GordonR 11-05-2017 11:43 AM

uAvionics echoUAT and the FAA
 
This is a call to FAA-savvy readers to comment on the suitability and acceptance by FAA of the uAvionics ADS-B equipment, and to compare and contrast with the NavWorx 600-EXP.

The uAvionics echoUAT documentation contains this information:

"The echoUAT meets the Minimum Operational Performance Standards of DO-282B Class B1S and meets the performance requirements of TSO-C154c. It complies with the ADS-B Final Rule Technical Amendment, dated 2/9/2015, affecting 14 CFR 91.225(b)(1)(ii) which permits ADS-B Out in the National Airspace System for devices meeting the performance of TSO_C154c. Accordingly, when installed in accordance with the installation instructions fo this guide, the device complies with the aircraft requirement of 14 CFR 91.227"

.. then it goes on to say

"The equipment contains FCC ID 2AFFTUAT016 and is marked on the equipment nameplate.
The equipmenet also contains FCC ID 2ADUIESP-12 and is marked on the equipment nameplate"

Even though as DavidBunin points out it is not TSO'ed, it seems to me that the FAA has blessed their implementation. Is that how more knowledgeable folks read it?

By way of comparison, the NavWorx equivalent statements in their documentation were:

"The ADS600-EXP UAT complies with section 3 requirements of TSO-C154c and when installed in accordance with the installation instructions of this document complies with the aircraft requirements of 14 CFR 91.227.

1.3.1 FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization.
This equipment has been issued an FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization. The FCC ID is marked on the equipment nameplate."

Looks pretty similar, doesn't it? So how do we gauge the FAA acceptance of the uAvionics equipment?

flightlogic 11-05-2017 11:57 AM

strength of wifi
 
A member wrote to me asking if the uAvionix wifi would reach behind a rear bulkhead. I really don't know how strong the wifi is. Anybody got any ideas?

recapen 11-05-2017 12:03 PM

Meeting the performance and meeting the standards without the actual certification is what got NavWorx in trouble in the first place. The certified NavWorx units were never in question by the FAA. The EXP units (along with the -0012 and -0013 devices), without a certified position source were deemed to start with non-SIL=3 - which was OK as long as the FAA was broadcasting to non-SIL=3! - then the FAA said "No SIL=3 - no data"...

Has the SIL for this UNIT been approved at 3 and is that in writing from the FAA to the vendor?

I would suggest that the same potential for the FAA changing its mind at a later time could put these folks in the same place. The SIL requirement change is what bit NavWorx - I would make sure that this gear meets the SIL requirements and have that in writing from the FAA to this vendor!

Bitten once - now aware of what and how things are written.

Not disparaging any other products out there as it sounds like this is good gear and functionality - just like the NavWorx boxes...just asking if their i's are dotted and their t's are crossed!

Fred.Stucklen 11-05-2017 08:10 PM

Sill value
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonR (Post 1216547)
This is a call to FAA-savvy readers to comment on the suitability and acceptance by FAA of the uAvionics ADS-B equipment, and to compare and contrast with the NavWorx 600-EXP.

The uAvionics echoUAT documentation contains this information:

"The echoUAT meets the Minimum Operational Performance Standards of DO-282B Class B1S and meets the performance requirements of TSO-C154c. It complies with the ADS-B Final Rule Technical Amendment, dated 2/9/2015, affecting 14 CFR 91.225(b)(1)(ii) which permits ADS-B Out in the National Airspace System for devices meeting the performance of TSO_C154c. Accordingly, when installed in accordance with the installation instructions fo this guide, the device complies with the aircraft requirement of 14 CFR 91.227"

.. then it goes on to say

"The equipment contains FCC ID 2AFFTUAT016 and is marked on the equipment nameplate.
The equipmenet also contains FCC ID 2ADUIESP-12 and is marked on the equipment nameplate"

Even though as DavidBunin points out it is not TSO'ed, it seems to me that the FAA has blessed their implementation. Is that how more knowledgeable folks read it?

By way of comparison, the NavWorx equivalent statements in their documentation were:

"The ADS600-EXP UAT complies with section 3 requirements of TSO-C154c and when installed in accordance with the installation instructions of this document complies with the aircraft requirements of 14 CFR 91.227.

1.3.1 FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization.
This equipment has been issued an FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization. The FCC ID is marked on the equipment nameplate."

Looks pretty similar, doesn't it? So how do we gauge the FAA acceptance of the uAvionics equipment?

So I have to ask, What is the transmitted SIL value of the EchoUAT-KL5 that is being offered up as a NavWorx ADS600-EXP unit? I have not seen it advertised anywhere.

JBPILOT 11-06-2017 05:49 AM

Got my report day one - -
 
3 3 3 3 3 ( for enough info )

rleffler 11-06-2017 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonR (Post 1216547)
This is a call to FAA-savvy readers to comment on the suitability and acceptance by FAA of the uAvionics ADS-B equipment, and to compare and contrast with the NavWorx 600-EXP.

The uAvionics echoUAT documentation contains this information:

"The echoUAT meets the Minimum Operational Performance Standards of DO-282B Class B1S and meets the performance requirements of TSO-C154c. It complies with the ADS-B Final Rule Technical Amendment, dated 2/9/2015, affecting 14 CFR 91.225(b)(1)(ii) which permits ADS-B Out in the National Airspace System for devices meeting the performance of TSO_C154c. Accordingly, when installed in accordance with the installation instructions fo this guide, the device complies with the aircraft requirement of 14 CFR 91.227"

.. then it goes on to say

"The equipment contains FCC ID 2AFFTUAT016 and is marked on the equipment nameplate.
The equipmenet also contains FCC ID 2ADUIESP-12 and is marked on the equipment nameplate"

Even though as DavidBunin points out it is not TSO'ed, it seems to me that the FAA has blessed their implementation. Is that how more knowledgeable folks read it?

By way of comparison, the NavWorx equivalent statements in their documentation were:

"The ADS600-EXP UAT complies with section 3 requirements of TSO-C154c and when installed in accordance with the installation instructions of this document complies with the aircraft requirements of 14 CFR 91.227.

1.3.1 FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization.
This equipment has been issued an FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization. The FCC ID is marked on the equipment nameplate."

Looks pretty similar, doesn't it? So how do we gauge the FAA acceptance of the uAvionics equipment?

The short answer is that you can't. For EAB aircraft, the vendors can self certify. This means that the FAA will trust them until proven otherwise, which was Navworx's demise. Even Navworx was burned by a vendor that misrepresented their product to Navworx.

Caveat Emptor.......

The good news is that the community is pretty small and is very self policing. Unfortunately, that doesn't protect early adopters of their products.

GalinHdz 08-05-2018 09:44 PM

The fallout from this unfortunate situation continues for many. VAF NAVWORX bankruptcy thread. :(


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:14 AM.