Are we moving too fast? Longevity...

[Toobuilder]

Originally Posted by kamikaze

... Dynon to their credit are doing this with the SE edition!

However, as I pointed out, they removed the ability to talk to an IFR nav. A step backwards from even their first offering, the D10. Fix that oversight, and I'm on board.

I think what I'm really looking for is essentially a generic "six pack in one box" that is capable of supporting IFR ops.

[dynonsupport]

Michael,

The point of SE was to create a very simple user interface, and doing that forced us to make some hard choices on what we interface with because they add buttons and complexity.

You can always buy SkyView without SynVis and a map, which will then interface with an IFR navigator for an HSI, and will be a basic system at a lower price. That's always been the goal of SkyView, to support different choices and missions.

[Toobuilder]

I recognize and can appreciate the difficulty in bringing any new offering to a market which generally clamors for "more".

However, as I look at the still highly capable previous generation offerings from any manufacturer which are now financially "obsolete", I have finally started to think: "yes, enough already". Lock the configuration down and focus on reducing price and increasing reliability. That won't work of course, because the market demands newer and better. I realize people like me are not at all the driving force. I have an iphone 4 and I use perhaps 25% of its capability... yet this thing is considered a dinosaur and is already unsupportable in many ways.

I only hope that the radical development cycle of avionics will flatten out and they will just become LRU's instead of the "next big thing" just before Sun N Fun every year.

Again, no disrespect to those that feel gadgetry for gadgetry's sake is an important part of the hobby... I'm just not among you.

[hendrik]

I happen to be working for a small avionics company. From our point of view there are different kinds of devices, and we treat them differently:

There are the 300 dollar traffic displays, which we support as long as we can, but every customer understands that six years later we can't repair his device because we are missing parts, and instead have to offer him a discounted replacement.

Then there is the 1800 dollar radio or the 2000 dollar transponder. There isn't much functionality improvement over time -- unlike your EFIS/PFD. But people do expect them to work and be supported in 20 years from now, and we plan accordingly. That starts with selecting parts that have long term availability for repairs and ends with choosing a selling price which allows us to provide long term support. We recently had to redesign parts of our transponder because a part wasn't available anymore. Totally invisible to customers, but part of the product life cycle.

And finally there is stuff like 5000 dollar glas cockpit devices. Of course people expect them to work for a long time. They expect support, and updates. But they also understand that these things are computers and computer technology evolves at an incredible speed. Again in the design we choose hardware that has guaranteed availabilities of 15 years and more (including the CPU!). We also plan in a way that we can interface new devices with the existing ones (talking about LRUs ...). All this is part of the regular work of avionics people -- in every company.

[David-aviator]

Originally Posted by BobTurner

As someone twice your age, I'm not so sure the good old days were so good. When I started driving (1965) any car that made it to 100,000 miles was considered amazing. Now it's routine. As a long time Cessna owner I lost count of the number of times mechanical gyros were overhauled or replaced. And of course it was not if, but when, the dry vacuum pump would quit. I do think the modern glass has an infant mortality issue, and it's true that there can be superfluous information presented, but overall I think it's an amazing improvement from the past. And the cost, in inflation adjusted dollars, is so much less that triple redundancy is easily possible.

I agree, the old days some long for were not that great. I would not turn the clock back for anything. Viet Nam, chronic job insecurity, rioting in Watts, 2 Kennedy's assassinated, Cuban missile crisis - none of it very pretty.

I just bought a 2016 Honda Pilot after driving the 2006 Pilot 236,000 miles. This one is better yet, bring it in for engine service at 100,000, just change the oil. Consumer products today better than 50 years ago, although cell phones, like computers are thrown away due to technology advances.

The older one is, the greater the amount of change one has to accept or be left behind. Many older person are left behind, some won't use a cell phone much less a computer. Face Book, what's that?

No other generations have had to adjust to change as those born since 1900. Three hundred years ago, a person lived 60 years if lucky and saw very little change. Not so now.

Yes, money spent on avionics today must be considered expendable. ADS-B is evidence how quickly stuff gets old and is useless.

[Toobuilder]

There is plenty of change that is inevitable - ADSB and the like are good examples. We're going to pay that, we get it. But there is a whole bunch that NEVER will change, such as primary flight information. There will be little advances in the format of displaying a horizon, altitude, airspeed, heading, etc. yes, we now have little boxes to fly through, synthetic vision and lots of other "alternatve" methods of showing us how to get from A to B. These alternative methods are "fun" but are they really game changers? In many cases, no. A good example of avionics stability is the EMS - the format is very similar across all manufacturers, and there really has been no change to this format in a LONG time. I cant see any push to provide a "synthetic" EGT display or any other real change in how engine info is presented.

Personally, THAT'S what Id like to see in a PFD. Large format, crisp resolution, useful in IFR, no BS, familiar without reading a 500 page user manual, and supportable for decades.

[49clipper]

Amen to that, toolbuilder.

[Kyle Boatright]

Originally Posted by Toobuilder

Personally, THAT'S what Id like to see in a PFD. Large format, crisp resolution, useful in IFR, no BS, familiar without reading a 500 page user manual, and supportable for decades.

I agree. But from the perspective of the manufacturers, they need "improved" products to keep the upgrade treadmill running and generate repeat business. I don't fault them at all.

Besides, I don't have to get on the treadmill. But others are welcome to. ;-)

[dynonsupport]

I'm not quite sure the data is there to support the idea that experimental avionics are changing all the time and there's a treadmill of upgrades.

Dynon still sells the D10A that has been on the market since 2004. We've discontinued only one panel mounted product ever (the D10, which had the D10A drop in replacement). SkyView has existed since 2009 and almost all updates have been free software updates. Every product we've made except the D10 can be repaired and supported, and we'll sell you a D10A cheap to fix a broken D10.

We actually pride ourselves on not expecting a customer to rip up a panel every 5 years. When we sell a panel to a customer, the repeat business we get is from his buddy building another plane, not from trying to squeeze that same customer again.

I think there's a bit of associating glass cockpits with tablets, phones, and TV's just because they have a screen, but history shows a bit different. The D10A came out 3 years before the first iPhone, and SkyView 1.5 years before the first iPad, but clearly have not followed the path of those devices.

What is true however is that prospective customers generally ask the question "can your unit do XXX" and those questions get a bit more esoteric each year as everyone tries to decide between brand X, Y and Z. It's rare the customer that shops on user interface simplicity instead of feature sets. But we're trying with SkyView SE- and what's one of the first comments we get? "It doesn't do the one thing I need! Add just this one feature and I'll buy it"

--Ian @ Dynon

[walldan]

Originally Posted by dynonsupport

I'm not quite sure the data is there to support the idea that experimental avionics are changing all the time and there's a treadmill of upgrades.

Dynon still sells the D10A that has been on the market since 2004. We've discontinued only one panel mounted product ever (the D10, which had the D10A drop in replacement). SkyView has existed since 2009 and almost all updates have been free software updates. Every product we've made except the D10 can be repaired and supported, and we'll sell you a D10A cheap to fix a broken D10.

We actually pride ourselves on not expecting a customer to rip up a panel every 5 years. When we sell a panel to a customer, the repeat business we get is from his buddy building another plane, not from trying to squeeze that same customer again.

I think there's a bit of associating glass cockpits with tablets, phones, and TV's just because they have a screen, but history shows a bit different. The D10A came out 3 years before the first iPhone, and SkyView 1.5 years before the first iPad, but clearly have not followed the path of those devices.

What is true however is that prospective customers generally ask the question "can your unit do XXX" and those questions get a bit more esoteric each year as everyone tries to decide between brand X, Y and Z. It's rare the customer that shops on user interface simplicity instead of feature sets. But we're trying with SkyView SE- and what's one of the first comments we get? "It doesn't do the one thing I need! Add just this one feature and I'll buy it"

--Ian @ Dynon

Thank you for this information and perspective