Quote:
Originally Posted by rgilbride
My 600-EXP has worked fine for nearly 3 years so I still find it hard to understand what the problem is. I strongly believe that if the FAA is going to mandate that we install new equipment tom comply with their NexRad program, then they also have a responsibility to that we have the necessary information, (which units they actually approve for use) so the end user can make an educated/informed decision before purchasing. Navworx hasn't been working in a vacuum or selling on the "Dark Web". The FAA new they were providing a product that was advertised as "2020 compliant" but did nothing until the AD to inform operators of a problem.
Rick Gilbride
RV6
|
Here?s my take on the Navworx issue. The fact that an ADS-B unit gets a passing report has nothing to do with meeting the requirements. The report shows that it is reporting an SIL of 3 and an SDA of 2. It also shows the percentage of dropouts and things like that. It does not know the accuracy, just hat it reports the accuracy of the SIL and SDA levels. What Navworx did is certify their GPS chip at a lower accuracy, then when the FAA changed their requirements fto wake up the ground stations (end of 2015 IIRC), Navworx changed their software to the higher SIL to continue waking up the ground stations. This was the main beef with the FAA, or at least the beginning of it. If you report these accuracy levels, the report will show compliance, whether you are in compliance or not.
The certified units ar stated to be in compliance with the TSO paperwork.
My problem with this situation is that the Navworx unit may have meet the accuracy requirements, even though it wasn?t TSOed to that level. The -EXP box reported the higher SIL and SDA, but the rule said hat they had to meet the accuracy requirements of the TSO, not actually be TSOed. Navworx states that it met those requirements, so to recall the via the AD, the FAA should have (and may have) tested the GPS chip to establish that it, in fact, did NOT meet the accuracy requirement. Otherwise, based on heir rule, there was no basis for he AD on that unit. This problem is compounded because the -EXP doesn?t have an option for an external GPS input. A lot of people have the -EXP box with a GTN or GNSW unit that could provide the compliant position, but they have no way to connect the two units. I would have to read the AD again to remember the details, but if you are using the -EXP as ADS-B In, you should still be able to do this, but will need to disable the Out, if this is possible. That was the real benefit of the Navworx units, they provided In and Out for the cost of other options that were just Out.
For all of the ADS600-B units, if there is a position source listed in the AD or fitting with the Global AMOCS, the only cost to comply is running the wire(s) and sending in he paperwork if/as required by the local FSDO.
My main question at this point would be, is there a way that the FAA can tell if you have a NavWorx box outputting the UAT? I?m not condoning using this method any more than I am condoning the ignoring of any AD, but I am wondering. For example, my main fear of User Fees for GA is that people are going to start flying IFR without being in the system to avoid the fees. This is illegal, but it will happen. That is another issue, but the FAA can?t police that except in cases of accidents (which there will certainly be more of), which would be the same case with non-compliant Navworx boxes, unless they have a way of knowing what box is outputting the UAT signal. Again, I do NOT condone this, but it will be done, both deliberately and out of ignorance. Many mechanics, both A&P and Repairmen, don?t check AD?s on experimentales, and are not aware of the NavWorx AD, so there will continue to be aircraft flying non-compliant units well into the future. Just like the Cherokee that I did an annual on that had an AD 25 years ago hat had never been complied with, that took 3 minutes to inspect for compliance. It had just never been done.
It would be nice if someone could make a piggyback box that would provide a simple input for a compliant source.