Install Experimental Avionics - Not the builder

[fbrewer]

I'm just getting used to this "Experimental" world, and I have a question regarding experimental avionics.

I have an RV-6 and I am NOT the builder.

Could we install non-certified avionics (i.e. SkyView HDX) in our RV-6 under the supervision of an A&P?

Or

Are we now limited to just "Certified" Avionics?

[Mike S]

Sounds like you need to join the local EAA chapter, (if there is one) and get familiar with the EXP world.

As far as I know, you do not need any A/P supervision to install upgrades, certified or not, but considering you even asked the question, it may be the smart thing to do.

Good luck

[Jesse]

Legally the only thing you cannot do is sign off the condition inspection. Everything else you can do without any supervision at all. That is legally. As Mike said, it may be wise to get some help and/or supervision.

[BobTurner]

As to ?certified? (e.g., carries a TSO) vs ?non-certified? (no TSO): the FAA seems to have taken the position that, for EAB aircraft, a manufacturer?s statement that a box ?meets the TSO performance standards? is as good as an actual TSO. In practice, this means: (1) GPS used under IFR - must have applicable TSO; (2) transponder - must have TSO; (3) ADSB-out - must have TSO or manufacturer?s statement that it meets the performance standards.
Also, non-avionics like position lights and anti-collision lights must meet the performance standards, if the airplane is flown at night.

[Ed_Wischmeyer]

To expand a bit on what Jesse said -- avionics-wise, you can do anything you want, almost. Some avionics, such as transponders, have to be TSOed, experimental aircraft or not. And there's more gotchas that I will easily misquote.

If you do major modifications to the airframe/engine/prop, then you have to go back into Phase 1 flight testing.

Best advice? Get plugged in to the EAA. That kind of stuff is a big part of what they do.

Ed

[RV3bpilot]

I do not believe this is the case for experimentals. The equipment must meet or surpass the standards required to operate such equipment, I do not believe it has to be TSO.
I'm sure that goes even for radios and even GPS. If you can build or purchase equipment that will operate as good or better than the minimum standards set for such equipment.
I have a non TSO GPS I'm using for my position source for my ADS-b and it passed the test... It's good to go...

[BobTurner]

Originally Posted by RV3bpilot

I do not believe this is the case for experimentals. The equipment must meet or surpass the standards required to operate such equipment, I do not believe it has to be TSO.
I'm sure that goes even for radios and even GPS. If you can build or purchase equipment that will operate as good or better than the minimum standards set for such equipment.

I believe this is a true statement, although no one, to my knowledge, has claimed their non-TSO'd GPS meets the IFR TSO's performance standards.

I have a non TSO GPS I'm using for my position source for my ADS-b and it passed the test... It's good to go...

I believe this is not true. Passing the airborne "test" is not sufficient to say that the GPS will perform under certain specified adverse conditions. The manufacturer (or other knowledgeable person?) must state that it meets all of the TSO "performance standards", even if it lacks the actual TSO.

[rmartingt]

Originally Posted by BobTurner

I believe this is a true statement, although no one, to my knowledge, has claimed their non-TSO'd GPS meets the IFR TSO's performance standards.
...
The manufacturer (or other knowledgeable person?) must state that it meets all of the TSO "performance standards", even if it lacks the actual TSO.

Meeting TSO standards for an IFR GPS also means meeting the data integrity standards for the nav database. And really, by the time a company has gone through the effort to meet the performance standards, they might as well get the actual TSO and use that to broaden their sales base.


What's really interesting is that, for all aircraft, at least the ADS-B Out requirement is "meets the performance standards of". If you have a Cessna, you aren't required to have a TSO'ed ADS-B box. However, you still have to get that onto the aircraft in an approved manner--and by the rules in Part 21, that means it either needs a TSO, or it has to be approved in type data (TC or STC).

The FAA did issue guidance a few years ago that allows you to install ADS-B on a 337 without further approval, but one of the conditions is that the unit is TSO'ed. And so, for all practical purposes, certified aircraft are limited to TSO'ed equipment, because getting approval for non-TSO'ed boxes would cost more than just buying the approved stuff.

So, you could use a non-TSO'ed unit on a certified airplane if you can manage to get an actual STC to do so. And with Dynon now moving forward on STCs, I'd expect to see their ADS-B Out solution included in the Skyview HDX STC.

[vic syracuse]

Originally Posted by BobTurner

I believe this is a true statement, although no one, to my knowledge, has claimed their non-TSO'd GPS meets the IFR TSO's performance standards.



I believe this is not true. Passing the airborne "test" is not sufficient to say that the GPS will perform under certain specified adverse conditions. The manufacturer (or other knowledgeable person?) must state that it meets all of the TSO "performance standards", even if it lacks the actual TSO.

We might be talking around each other here. It doesn't necessarily have to be TSO's, but it has to be stated by the manufacturer that it does meet the 2020 requirements. I think Dynon's 2020 GPS might be an example, as are others such as the new wingtip one.

Vic

[az_gila]

Originally Posted by vic syracuse

We might be talking around each other here. It doesn't necessarily have to be TSO's, but it has to be stated by the manufacturer that it does meet the 2020 requirements. I think Dynon's 2020 GPS might be an example, as are others such as the new wingtip one.

Vic

Yes, here is the FAA FAQ addressing that issue -

https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/faq/#q4