VPX feedback from another FORUM
Subject: COZY: Re: [c-a] Product Report - 4 products in a Varieze
One point that's worth mentioning is some clarification regarding how the choice of the MGL Extreme was made. The MGL Extreme is the only SMALL EFIS option that supports the VPX integration. If a larger EFIS was an option, we would've gone in a different direction.
This brings up what I consider a major issue with the VPX. In order to use one in the plane, you MUST also acquire one of the supported third party EFIS's to control it since VPX does not offer an independent "stand alone" screen or interface. From their website....
"Interfaces
The VP-X requires an EFIS for alarm and status display. The currently supported systems include:
Advanced Flight Systems 3400s, 3500s, 4500s, 5000 series
Grand Rapids Technologies HX and Sport SX, HXr
MGL Avionics Voyager GEN II/Odyssey Gen II/Xtreme/iEFIS
Garmin G3X
Dynon SkyView SV-D1000 & SV-D700 (plus $275 license fee charge by Dynon)"
For example, if a circuit blows, the alert is sent to the EFIS screen. Or if you want to turn off a circuit, this is done through the VPX integration page in the supported third party EFIS. This obviously creates a technical dependency between VPX components and the partner company. If the relationship between VPX and the partner company weakens or development doesn't keep pace with the product line of the partner company then it could be a problem.
We were impacted on this project in such a way from two distinct events:
1. When I first ordered the MGL Extreme, I was told I would receive the unit in two weeks. They took my money and then informed me of a back order. I didn't get the new MGL display unit for a couple of months. This effectively blocked me from doing any integration testing with the VPX (such as the starter lockout circuit). I had to change my project strategy because I wasn't able to start building the avionics bus until I had my hands on that head unit. When I did get the unit, there were some changes to it that were not expected, like plastic fittings on the back for pitot and static instead of metal ones that were shown in the pictures. There were some other ripples too but that's enough for now.
2. During installation, we had a sort of "hard fault" error that came up when we were testing the starter circuits. The VPX support person suggested that the event was a known issue when a VPX was hooked to an MGL. The root cause may have been the MGL, or may have been the VPX. Fortunately, THE support person at MGL and THE support person at VPX know each other and have a reasonable and professional bearing towards one another but it took some pushing and shoving to establish some effective collaboration. To this day, I'm not sure if a technical fix was ever published or documented or if there will be some sort of technical update to the software or either system to address the glitch. Marc was forced into a position where he had to take the canard off the plane, hook up a LAN cable, and borrow an old laptop that supported the VPX software in order to hook up the VPX to force a hard reset. It's important to mention that the VPX was continuing to function even with the uncleared fault code, so it wasn't a flight safety issue, but was something that was WAY harder to deal with than it should have been.
And anyway why require the EFIS rather than the EMS? After all isn't the electrical bus a systems problem rather than a flight deck problem? That is probably a debatable position but I sure would have like to have had this thing integrate with my EI-CGR which is a MUCH better instrument and much less critical to flight safety.
Would I purchase the VPX again? It depends. It's got a lot of promise, and it delivers on 80% of what was promised, at least so far. But the risk that friends/partners today, become uncooperative competitors tomorrow isn't something I want to have to deal with, especially since it's so expensive to get established with a solution package. I don't want to get caught in the middle if there's a fight.
This is a purely speculative controversial opinion on my part, and I'm probably wrong, in fact I hope to be proven wrong. The cynic in me doesn't really see the VPX getting a lot of support from it's new parent company Astronics. They sell devices similar to the VPX for bigger planes like Pilatus, Eclipse and Lear that have starting prices at $40,000 and up. So from a business perspective, it doesn't seem like it would make a lot of financial sense for Astronics to want to push a development effort into the high risk, low profit experimental market. A cynic might speculate that Astronic purchased VPX to suppress the technology so it won't develop to the point that it risks their other highly profitable existing ECB solutions and that any VPX that's sold on the market today is simply an effort to sell off existing inventory. This entire statement is a direct contradiction to the message being put out by VPX who believes the product is stronger now than ever and that new development efforts are underway and we should see new products, integration and enhancements in the near future. And I am watching closely for evidence of exactly that.
For the foreseeable future, I must live with the fear that my VPX will burn out for some reason, and I won't be able to get a replacement because the product goes out of production with no replacements and THE support guy's cell phone is disconnected. This would make a wonderful horror show because it's absolutely central to the entire electrical buss for the aircraft. The entire electrical system would need to be ripped out, redesigned and rewired back to a traditional Aeroelectric style buss. We're talking months of downtime and thousands in materials. Not to mention that I'm now stuck with an MGL Extreme that was purchased at the exclusion of other options primarily to support technology that is no longer in the airplane....
So the verdict at this juncture is NO, it's unlikely I would choose to invest in the VPX Pro technology for my Cozy Mark IV unless I see some real product development and some of these weaknesses addressed. I don't feel better or more confident that my airplane is better for having the VPX installed in it.
Overall, I'm happy I went through this exercise, but like all learning experiences, just wish it didn't cost so much.