Uncertified PFD MFD in GA airplanes

[ChristianGodin]

Anyone have any ideas if we will be allowed to installed uncertified PFD MFD like G3X touch in GA airplanes anytime soon? It seem faa is rewriting part 23

[Hank]

We are all hoping for such an outcome! I'd much rather update to a fancy Dynon for $4000 than spend $15,000+ for a new Garmin touch screen, or even $8000 for a used G430W if anything happens to mine.

[N33GG]

It is amusing to me that much of the innovation in aviation is coming out of the unregulated sectors. Free enterprise and product development really doesn't respond well to government control.

[DaV8or]

It is amusing to me that much of the innovation in aviation is coming out of the unregulated sectors. Free enterprise and product development really doesn't respond well to government control.

 

Regulation is a bit of a damper, but in fairness, liability is IMO, a bigger damper. The word "Experimental" written on the side of an airplane combined with an official document from the FAA that the plane is experimental and does not conform to FAA standards does wonders for letting manufacturers off the hook from lawsuits. Once again I make the pitch for an E/FB category. Allow us to turn our certified airplanes into experimentals with the same rules that people buying used experimentals enjoy. The key is "Experimental"

 

From there, watch GA grow again.

[FlyDave]

We are all hoping for such an outcome! I'd much rather update to a fancy Dynon for $4000 than spend $15,000+ for a new Garmin touch screen, or even $8000 for a used G430W if anything happens to mine.

 

Hank,

 

A friend of mine told me that, at least for flying IFR, you will still need an approach certified GPS (Garmin, etc) to use with the Dynon units as the Dynon units GPS are not certified. I looked around the internet and found this on the Dynon web site clarifying this:

 

http://dynonavionics.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1322435967/0

 

Dave

[aviatoreb]

Its embarrassing how inexpensive and complete the Garmin G3x touch is - full pfd/engine monitor/gps/and includes a digital autopilot - its a complete panel for something like $7500.

 

Thumbs up for E/FB.

[Rwsavory]

Hank,

A friend of mine told me that, at least for flying IFR, you will still need an approach certified GPS (Garmin, etc) to use with the Dynon units as the Dynon units GPS are not certified. I looked around the internet and found this on the Dynon web site clarifying this:

http://dynonavionics.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1322435967/0

Dave

Same deal with the G3X. It's not certified for GPS approaches. Still, a very attractive package though.

[hindsight2020]

Um, the legislation was already passed and signed into law by the President last year. It's the goddamn FAA dragging their feet on the implementation of the part 23 re-write. The law gives the FAA until DEC 2015 to give it up and adopt the changes but those treasonous bureaucrats are dragging their heels until 2017 from last I read. (which I don't understand how that can be legal).

 

Btw, you don't have to come up with a term, what you guys are coining "E/FB" already was included in that legislation as part of the recommendations of the ARC (aviation rulemaking committee). It's called Primary non-commercial category. It will allow you to change a factory airplane from a normal/utility category airworthiness certificate to this primary/non-commercial A/W certificate, allowing you all the discretion of E/AB in the maintenance, [lack of] records keeping and modifications of your factory built spam can, without having to ask mother-may-I to the FAA in the form of STCs and go-nowhere 337 field approval requests.

 

Primary non-commercial, as the name implies, forbids you from using the aircraft in commercial operations, much like E/AB delineates in their airworthiness certificate category limitations. Additionally, primary non-comm airplanes can be reverted back to normal category A/W certs provided you return the aircraft to the condition specified by the factory TCDS (type certificate data sheet), which nobody is likely to do, I might add.

 

It will absolutely be a reinvigorating element in the otherwise sure death of GA. Stalling it is doing nothing but continue to hurt GA. I can tell you right now, if primary non-commercial became a reality, I would automatically go out spend 15 AMUs in labor and parts to various avionics vendors and sheet metal shops. I would immediate begin work on installing Arrow III tanks on my Arrow II (48 gal usable to 72 gal usable upgrade, currently not available in STC nor does the FAA have interest in entertaining a non-cost-prohibitive 337 request) and rip my panel out and install experimental AHRS-based PFDs to forever be free from mechanical gyros, crappy heading inaccuracies and partial panel nonsense. I would additionally be able to replace my autopilot for pennies on the dollar and have a more robust AP.  Oh and throw in a wing paint job after the tank modification, in there for good measure.

 

Could I do all of this today? With the exception of the tanks, probably, but they want all that extortion money. So I sit on my hands and don't contribute to the economy instead, as a matter of principle. My flying is more dangerous (IMC behind mechanical gyros) and I'm less likely to burn that avgas and support businesses because I'm worried about certified maintenance kabuki eating me alive getting stuck broke off-station. Oh well. Im not paying their racket money though. Sorry Aspen, I'll buy your PFD if you match Dynon's pricing. Otherwise, I can wait.

 

So, we're here already on the legal front, but the FAA yet again is robbing us from the opportunity of moving ahead. It rest solely on the FAA's head right now. They're the enemy. Not Congress.

[Piloto]

Same deal with the G3X. It's not certified for GPS approaches. Still, a very attractive package though.

 

If you are going to buy non approved equipment recommend to get it from a manufacturer that also makes FAA approved products. Most of the non approved equipment from Garmin is design and tested by the same equipment and personnel for the approved equipment.

 

José 

[ArtVandelay]

If you are going to buy non approved equipment recommend to get it from a manufacturer that also makes FAA approved products. Most of the non approved equipment from Garmin is design and tested by the same equipment and personnel for the approved equipment.

José

Unfortunately they don't always have what you need, for example:

It would be nice to connect the gdl88 to some uncertified MFD to display the WX,traffic, but it it only supports certified 430,650, etc

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hank]

SkyRadar will connect to several MFDs--little Garmins, Dynon, a couple of others. Once the FAA gets the ball rolling, I anticipate a surge of orders for these suppliers.

[DaV8or]

Um, the legislation was already passed and signed into law by the President last year. It's the goddamn FAA dragging their feet on the implementation of the part 23 re-write. The law gives the FAA until DEC 2015 to give it up and adopt the changes but those treasonous bureaucrats are dragging their heels until 2017 from last I read. (which I don't understand how that can be legal).

 

If you look up the bill, there are no mandates for any particular changes. There are suggestions, but the specifics are left to the FAA. Basically the bill just says, "Do something!" Sadly, we shouldn't get our hopes up for any real reform. We can hope, but the FAA being what it is, I wouldn't expect anything radical.

 

 

 

Btw, you don't have to come up with a term, what you guys are coining "E/FB" already was included in that legislation as part of the recommendations of the ARC (aviation rulemaking committee). It's called Primary non-commercial category. It will allow you to change a factory airplane from a normal/utility category airworthiness certificate to this primary/non-commercial A/W certificate, allowing you all the discretion of E/AB in the maintenance, [lack of] records keeping and modifications of your factory built spam can, without having to ask mother-may-I to the FAA in the form of STCs and go-nowhere 337 field approval requests.

 

Actually, IMO, you do need a different name. I feel it is critical that the new category be in the experimental category, because this is the only way the manufacturer can be protected from the liability of the certified airplane. So if we want to truly have the cost savings and innovation of the Experimental community, we have to join them. Primary, non commercial still puts the plane in a certified category. I doubt that all the neat, lower cost toys you can get in the experimental world will be available.

 

Again, all the details have yet to be worked out, whatever they will be. I just think people should get their hopes too high. The bill that was passed was mostly feel good legislation.

[hindsight2020]

If you look up the bill, there are no mandates for any particular changes. There are suggestions, but the specifics are left to the FAA. Basically the bill just says, "Do something!" Sadly, we shouldn't get our hopes up for any real reform. We can hope, but the FAA being what it is, I wouldn't expect anything radical.

 

 

 

Actually, IMO, you do need a different name. I feel it is critical that the new category be in the experimental category, because this is the only way the manufacturer can be protected from the liability of the certified airplane. So if we want to truly have the cost savings and innovation of the Experimental community, we have to join them. Primary, non commercial still puts the plane in a certified category. I doubt that all the neat, lower cost toys you can get in the experimental world will be available.

 

Again, all the details have yet to be worked out, whatever they will be. I just think people should get their hopes too high. The bill that was passed was mostly feel good legislation.

 

That would be incredibly subversive. Without access to experimental avionics, there's literally no difference between a normal AW airplane and primary non-commercial. Meaning, unless you suggest they will disregard the law and NOT "do something!", then at a minimum they WILL have to allow certified spam cans gain access to non-certified avionics solutions. There's nothing else it allows you to do. If you still have to abide by ADs and certified logbook records keeping, then it's not different at all. And if you think they're gonna let you do all the maintenance but still hold you to certified standards you're smoking crack. that's not the intent of primary non-commercial and they would have zero incentive to even bother with it at that point.

 

Also, think about the genesis of it all. They're trying to band aid the 2020 mandate by allowing the spam cans to resolve their compliance via experimental pricing, because they know the certified pricing will crush GA enough that they'll hear from enough white people. I recognize you're a pessimist when it comes to the FAA and I share your cynicism, but as it pertains to primary non-commercial, I don't share your prognosis because there is nothing BUT experimental modifications to distinguish such a category from the current normal A/W. This leaves the FAA with only the option of not creating any category at all, which I don't think they'll get away with for the aforementioned 2020 ADS-B compliance motivations.

 

This is gonna happen. They're gonna drag their feet and scream like petulant rent-seeking children, but there's enough of a white people's hobby on the line that they'll cave.

[Piloto]

I think the FAA should focus on the medical certification revision. If you are healthy enough to drive a car why couldn't you be healthy enough to fly a plane. If I fall asleep for 1 minute in my plane nothing really happens. But try that on a car at 60 mph and it will be over in less than a minute. The FAA medical exam does not even check for how prone to sleep you are which is one of the mayor causes in auto accidents. I cannot drive for more than three hours after lunch without feeling sleepy (siesta time). It only takes a few seconds of siesta time while driving and is over. Could not figure out why an AME have to check your hearing or color blindness when these are needed for every day driving (traffic lights, horns and sirens). What medical condition is more critical in flying than driving? Your health is more critical for driving than for flying.

 

José   

[scottfromiowa]

That would be incredibly subversive. Without access to experimental avionics, there's literally no difference between a normal AW airplane and primary non-commercial. Meaning, unless you suggest they will disregard the law and NOT "do something!", then at a minimum they WILL have to allow certified spam cans gain access to non-certified avionics solutions. There's nothing else it allows you to do. If you still have to abide by ADs and certified logbook records keeping, then it's not different at all. And if you think they're gonna let you do all the maintenance but still hold you to certified standards you're smoking crack. that's not the intent of primary non-commercial and they would have zero incentive to even bother with it at that point.

 

Also, think about the genesis of it all. They're trying to band aid the 2020 mandate by allowing the spam cans to resolve their compliance via experimental pricing, because they know the certified pricing will crush GA enough that they'll hear from enough white people. I recognize you're a pessimist when it comes to the FAA and I share your cynicism, but as it pertains to primary non-commercial, I don't share your prognosis because there is nothing BUT experimental modifications to distinguish such a category from the current normal A/W. This leaves the FAA with only the option of not creating any category at all, which I don't think they'll get away with for the aforementioned 2020 ADS-B compliance motivations.

 

This is gonna happen. They're gonna drag their feet and scream like petulant rent-seeking children, but there's enough of a white people's hobby on the line that they'll cave.

This is a real question, not being a wise-ass. What is with the "White People's Hobby" multiple references? Why are you making this about race?

[aviatoreb]

I think the FAA should focus on the medical certification revision. If you are healthy enough to drive a car why couldn't you be healthy enough to fly a plane. If I fall asleep for 1 minute in my plane nothing really happens. But try that on a car at 60 mph and it will be over in less than a minute. The FAA medical exam does not even check for how prone to sleep you are which is one of the mayor causes in auto accidents. I cannot drive for more than three hours after lunch without feeling sleepy (siesta time). It only takes a few seconds of siesta time while driving and is over. Could not figure out why an AME have to check your hearing or color blindness when these are needed for every day driving (traffic lights, horns and sirens). What medical condition is more critical in flying than driving? Your health is more critical for driving than for flying.

 

José   

 

I agree completely Jose'.  Heck a school bus driver has no medical check right?  Why should a small airplane driver be expected to have some silly irrelevant check that a school bus driver does not?

 

It is nice that there is this push toward a new med standard for VFR, non commercial, below 14500 flight, and it is welcome, but it is silly to constrain it.  There should be no medical at all since it is medically an irrelevant check and I do not believe that a 727 captain is more prone to damage his passengers than a grey hound bus driver on the major city highways can cause havoc.  But a 727 captain has a copilot.  And also I bet the new VFR only no-medical standard will cause a secondary problem which is former IFR pilots will start either illegally flying IFR anyway, or there will be more scud running.  A medical standard system should not be coaxing people to make poor aeronautical decisions.

[aviatoreb]

I would definitely put airbag seat belts in my airplane which the FAA in its great wisdom won't let me have.

 

Maybe I would put a Garmin G3X touch system and autopilot in my airplane.

 

Maybe I would hang the EPS 8 cylinder 420hp diesel in my airplane when my current engine decides its time to be replaced - yes derated to my current 305hp....well maybe to 310hp....  :-)  5 extra horsepower would be ok.  http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013/08/eps-20130804.html

 

Gosh darn the FAA even slowed my adoption of the ADSB out standard that they claim to want us to adopt.  In March I told my avionics shop I was ready to install the KT74 transponder into my panel - but they warned me the FAA certification of the out feature was slowed.  The feature is there but they aren't allowed to connect the wires.  Otherwise the transponder is halfway certified so it is allowed to be installed into my panel and do exactly what my ancient Kt76 transponder already does which is mode C.  Gee thanks I'll wait.

[DaV8or]

I agree completely Jose'.  Heck a school bus driver has no medical check right?  Why should a small airplane driver be expected to have some silly irrelevant check that a school bus driver does not?

 

Well, in California, you do have to have medical to drive a school bus. You need a commercial driver's license and you do need a medical that is identical to the third class medical. Renewed every two years. Carrying anything over 10 passengers requires a class B license or greater, so even the 15 passenger Econoline vans need the medical. That's just California, I have no idea about other states.

[1964-M20E]

Well, in California, you do have to have medical to drive a school bus. You need a commercial driver's license and you do need a medical that is identical to the third class medical. Renewed every two years. Carrying anything over 10 passengers requires a class B license or greater, so even the 15 passenger Econoline vans need the medical. That's just California, I have no idea about other states.

Dave

Thanks for the clarification regarding commercial operators of vehicles carrying many passengers or even just large cargo trucks. This is not such a bad idea for them and I’m sure you will find this in most states to some degree.

 

I am in the camp of eliminating the 3^rd class physical all together but as I stated before I could accept a physical if it was just between the doctor and the pilot it’s their decision no paperwork  to the FEDS and no bureaucrat making a decision about your ability to fly just you and your doctor making the decision together and deciding when you need a checkup it could be 1 year, 2 years, 5 years or even 10 years.

[aviatoreb]

Well, in California, you do have to have medical to drive a school bus. You need a commercial driver's license and you do need a medical that is identical to the third class medical. Renewed every two years. Carrying anything over 10 passengers requires a class B license or greater, so even the 15 passenger Econoline vans need the medical. That's just California, I have no idea about other states.

 

I didn't know that!

 

But still - I think all this medicals are dumb.  And useless.

 

Besides driving my little car, I could easily have a heart attack, or otherwise fall asleep due to sleep apnea, or whatever, and run into that school bus and take us both out - and I claim that such accidents are easier to imagine hurting someone other than myself in a car than in a small airplane.  And in big airplanes you have multiple pilots.

 

And why is the government so worried about me flying an airplane without a medical but has no worried if I am manic depressive or schizophrenic if I want to buy a gun?  Not that I want medicals there - but a little consistency please.  Let's dump the medicals.  All of them.

[hindsight2020]

This is a real question, not being a wise-ass. What is with the "White People's Hobby" multiple references? Why are you making this about race?

 

Sorry, late to the reply. I don't peruse mooneyspace as much as the other board. I just saw you PM'd with the same question so I'll reply here for the benefit of all.

 

The race reference was 100% facetious on my part. It was an attempt at political humor while still trying to make a point I genuinely believe in, which is that Congress listens to demographics of power. If the fact affluent white people are a more politically powerful demographic or the fact affluent white people represent the preponderance of general aviation participants upsets your sensitivities, I got nothing for you nor do I apologize for those two assertions being factual.

 

That said, please understand that wasn't the intent of my post at all, I was just pointing at the fact I believe this legislation will lead certified aircraft of the stated gross weight limits, down the avenue of experimental avionics, which would be a great thing for certified single engine piston GA.

 

I'm not affluent nor Caucasian as an aircraft owner (I am white skinned though, for the sake of full disclosure) and I was merely being facetious with the race/political angle. I realize now not everyone in this demographic will appreciate my humor, and for that liberty I do apologize. In the interest of attaining progress out of the dark shadows of certified aviation I do hope we stand in agreement as a collective.

 

Sorry for the de-rail, now back to your regular programming.  

[Piloto]

I didn't know that!

 

But still - I think all this medicals are dumb.  And useless.

 

Besides driving my little car, I could easily have a heart attack, or otherwise fall asleep due to sleep apnea, or whatever, and run into that school bus and take us both out - and I claim that such accidents are easier to imagine hurting someone other than myself in a car than in a small airplane.  And in big airplanes you have multiple pilots.

 

And why is the government so worried about me flying an airplane without a medical but has no worried if I am manic depressive or schizophrenic if I want to buy a gun?  Not that I want medicals there - but a little consistency please.  Let's dump the medicals.  All of them.

 

 

At least they should require a blood and urine samples results  before a gun is issued to the buyer. I bet you this will reduce all these gun related killings. The gun is the common denominator in all these killings. Is very easy to pull the trigger vs other means like a knife or a bat. All that I have as a  weapon in my hangar is an old  oil squitter full of MEK. And I only use it for the passing by roaches. Unlike insecticides were the roaches keep on going, MEK flips them right away with no suffering. And for ants nest MEK does an instant job down to the queen.

 

José 

[Marauder]

At least they should require a blood and urine samples results before a gun is issued to the buyer. I bet you this will reduce all these gun related killings. The gun is the common denominator in all these killings. Is very easy to pull the trigger vs other means like a knife or a bat. All that I have as a weapon in my hangar is an old oil squitter full of MEK. And I only use it for the passing by roaches. Unlike insecticides were the roaches keep on going, MEK flips them right away with no suffering. And for ants nest MEK does an instant job down to the queen.

José

You sound like a serial killer

[scottfromiowa]

Sorry, late to the reply. I don't peruse mooneyspace as much as the other board. I just saw you PM'd with the same question so I'll reply here for the benefit of all.

 

The race reference was 100% facetious on my part. It was an attempt at political humor while still trying to make a point I genuinely believe in, which is that Congress listens to demographics of power. If the fact affluent white people are a more politically powerful demographic or the fact affluent white people represent the preponderance of general aviation participants upsets your sensitivities, I got nothing for you nor do I apologize for those two assertions being factual.

 

That said, please understand that wasn't the intent of my post at all, I was just pointing at the fact I believe this legislation will lead certified aircraft of the stated gross weight limits, down the avenue of experimental avionics, which would be a great thing for certified single engine piston GA.

 

I'm not affluent nor Caucasian as an aircraft owner (I am white skinned though, for the sake of full disclosure) and I was merely being facetious with the race/political angle. I realize now not everyone in this demographic will appreciate my humor, and for that liberty I do apologize. In the interest of attaining progress out of the dark shadows of certified aviation I do hope we stand in agreement as a collective.

 

Sorry for the de-rail, now back to your regular programming.

Here it is man. I find your words offensive, but you haven't a clue why...Your reply was all I needed to clarify WHO you are. I don't see "RACE" when I think GA...In fact I refuse to be baited by you Mr. 10-poster. Humor? I call you on your statements..."Ah man, I was just kidding". What a bunch of crap. Your words are there to separate...to categorize...to label...I don't give a flying $#@^ what color your skin is...I just read what you say and I say NOPE.

[hindsight2020]

Here it is man. I find your words offensive, but you haven't a clue why...Your reply was all I needed to clarify WHO you are. I don't see "RACE" when I think GA...In fact I refuse to be baited by you Mr. 10-poster. Humor? I call you on your statements..."Ah man, I was just kidding". What a bunch of crap. Your words are there to separate...to categorize...to label...I don't give a flying $#@^ what color your skin is...I just read what you say and I say NOPE.

 

This thread went tumbleweed. Adiós.