ADS-B

[midlifeflyer]

Well, Apple use to have their own protocols, only competition from IBM PC made them change, sort of, they still tightly control what runs on their mobile devices, they are not exactly an "open" system.

I think they can fix this real easy with 1 change: all certified equipment must publish their external interfaces/protocols. That way we can still have innovation, but other equipment makers don't have to do reverse engineering 

You'd probably get some disagreement on that from a pretty large group that firmly believes innovation is best fostered by at permitting protection of trade secrets and the temporary monopolies of copyright and patent protection.  

[PTK]

The government could have forced a standardized protocol that all manufacturers needed to meet. In other words, a requirement that Brand A will integrate with Brand B. Without that requirement, they are protecting their turf through propriety firmware not allowing access to a competitor.

If the GDL-88 worked with the Aspen MFD, I would be flying with it today. Instead, I am waiting for a compatible solution.

Your problem is Aspen. You need to get on them to give you what you want. And if they don't go elsewhere.

The certified boxes are already regulated Peter. That is why you pay dearly for the privilege of flying behind a "certified" box. Ever check the prices between "certified" and "uncertified" boxes?

Sounds like you would be happier if you had to pay whatever HP, Dell, Acer or Apple asked for a SD drive because it would only work on "their" machine.

No, no, no! Not the regulation you're talking about! No way!

I'm perfectly ok flying behind certified equipment and paying for them.

I'm also ok buying an HP or a Dell or an Apple, Windows, iOS, android or whatever.

As a consumer I can make the choice. These different technologies coexist in the free marketplace quite nicely. They all have flourished in their own way.

What you want is to have the government intervene and tell Apple, for example, make iOS compatible with MS Windows or Android.

I don't want the government interfering. We have too much gov'nt interference already!

Garmin, King, Aspen Avidyne and whoever else can also flourish in their own way in the free marketplace.

[PTK]

The government could have forced a standardized protocol that all manufacturers needed to meet. In other words, a requirement that Brand A will integrate with Brand B. Without that requirement, they are protecting their turf through propriety firmware not allowing access to a competitor.

If the GDL-88 worked with the Aspen MFD, I would be flying with it today. Instead, I am waiting for a compatible solution.

Why do you need the GDL88?

Won't one of these Aspen products work with your Aspen MFD?

[DonMuncy]

Had a chat with my avionics guru this morning. He theorizes that it would be illegal to install a UAT unit in a plane with a service ceiling over 18,000 ft., as (as of 2020), it would be illegal to fly over 18, and you (and he) would be putting a limitation on the plane not FAA approved.

Food for thought. 

[Cruiser]

no different than not certifying it for IFR flight, or flying with the nav lights burned out during the daytime or not have oxygen aboard or not having a Mode C transponder. 

 

You are not changing anything on the airplane certification, only the applicable use in which the plane may be operated.

[DonMuncy]

Good points Cruiser. I like your theory better than his.

[kortopates]

Try installing an altimeter that only goes to 18K.

Regardless though, don't you think future buyers are going to really wonder about a turbo that can't go to 18K? Curb appeal will probably be on par with planes missing ADS-B out.

[DonMuncy]

That was my thinking as well. Legalities aside, I had pretty well decided to go with the ES. It appears the difference is likely to be about 2 AMU. And any prospective new owner might devalue it by 5 or 6 AMU.

I really wonder how many turbo owners have flown above 18,000.

[chrisk]

That was my thinking as well. Legalities aside, I had pretty well decided to go with the ES. It appears the difference is likely to be about 2 AMU. And any prospective new owner might devalue it by 5 or 6 AMU.

I really wonder how many turbo owners have flown above 18,000.

I went with an ES transponder since I didn't want to limit the service ceiling by 6000 feet.  As for flying that high, it is rare and totally depends on the winds.  My last trip from Austin Tx to Tampa Fl was at FL210 to pick up a nice tail wind. 200+ kts (ground speed) on 11GPH.  Of course it took 40 minutes to get to that altitude an a 100 mile descent.