Garmin policy

[Piloto]

14 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

None of this will change until the FAA relaxes the certification standards. When any mom and pop electronics company can produce avionics and get them certified for a reasonable amount of money, the world will be flooded with extremely reliable and capable avionics for a reasonable cost. and if they are not reliable the market will reject them faster then the FAA can write an AD.

I personally think the FAA certification standards are appropriate and comprehensive. What makes the certification cost expensive is the test equipment required, in particular planes. A tablet does not need to satisfy the functionality and integrity  requirements that an FAA certified unit needs to neither to be flown on a jet. A watchdog timer is common in flight critical avionics but not on tablets. A tablet can show a frozen moving map (on approach) and the pilot may not be aware while an FAA approved equipment will have its watchdog timer kick in the processor or alert the pilot of a malfunction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchdog_timer

José

[Guillaume]

1 hour ago, turbotrk said:

Waas in europe is almost useless....

SBAS (known as EGNOS and not WAAS here) is highly relevant in some parts of Europe. You can see on this map that Germany or France is almost fully covered with LPV approaches.

France already started to decommission ILS's at some regional airports where LPV approaches are available.

Edited May 19, 2016 by Guillaume

[turbotrk]

1 minute ago, Guillaume said:

SBAS (known as EGNOS and not WAAS here) is highly relevant in some parts of Europe. You can see on this map that Germany or France are almost fully covered with LPV approaches.

France already started to decommission ILS's at some regional airports where LPV approaches are available.

Yes, it's getting better, as usual italy is behind and Rome FCO airport is forbidden to GA aircrafts. For sure in the next years a was upgrade will be worth it also in my country.

[N201MKTurbo]

I had breakfast with a man who works at MD Helicopters a while back. He told me horror stories about how dysfunctional the certification folks at the FAA are. He said if you talk to 10 people you will get ten different interpretations of what needs to be done. Nobody will make a decision on anything. Everybody wants more tests because nobody wants to take responsibility for anything.

[TrekLawler]

Hello Everyone,

   I wanted to make sure everyone actually knew the Garmin policy as this looks like it's not quite clear. Garmin still does support the -10 non WAAS GNS series of units. these are the units known as the dual voltage 14/28 volt units. the ones we no longer can support are the -00 which are the very early production units which only have the capability of the comm's working with a 28 volt source. so as it's been identified we do not have the repair parts or capability to update these units to the current comm boards. so in order to support the -00 units they can only be WAAS upgraded. Again we still support the non WAAS -10 units and as of this date have no immediate plans to stop this support.

 

Oh yea, to address the last issue with updating the non WAAS units to terrain , we also still do this and have kits available for the field shops to do this as well if a customer has a -00 unit and wants to perform this function at their facility per the service bulletin issued in 2005.

 

I hope this helps clarify this, please feel free to contact me with any questions on this and I'll be happy to squash any rumors.

Edited May 20, 2016 by TrekLawler

[takair]

16 minutes ago, TrekLawler said:

Hello Everyone,

   I wanted to make sure everyone actually knew the Garmin policy as this looks like it's not quite clear. Garmin still does support the -10 non WAAS GNS series of units. these are the units known as the dual voltage 14/28 volt units. the ones we no longer can support are the -00 which are the very early production units which only have the capability of the comm's working with a 28 volt source. so as it's been identified we do not have the repair parts or capability to update these units to the current comm boards. so in order to support the -00 units they can only be WAAS upgraded. Again we still support the non WAAS -10 units and as of this date have no immediate plans to stop this support.

 

Oh yea, to address the last issue with updating the non WAAS units to terrain , we also still do this and have kits available for the field shops to do this as well if a customer has a -00 unit and wants to perform this function at their facility per the service bulletin issued in 2005.

 

I hope this helps clarify this, please feel free to contact me with any questions on this and I'll be happy to squash any rumors.

Trek

i have one of the old -00 units that was updated to WAAS years ago.  Is that still a 28v only unit or did the WAAS upgrade make it a 14 or 28 v unit?  I am still carrying around the old 14 to 28v converter.

[turbotrk]

4 hours ago, TrekLawler said:

Hello Everyone,

   I wanted to make sure everyone actually knew the Garmin policy as this looks like it's not quite clear. Garmin still does support the -10 non WAAS GNS series of units. these are the units known as the dual voltage 14/28 volt units. the ones we no longer can support are the -00 which are the very early production units which only have the capability of the comm's working with a 28 volt source. so as it's been identified we do not have the repair parts or capability to update these units to the current comm boards. so in order to support the -00 units they can only be WAAS upgraded. Again we still support the non WAAS -10 units and as of this date have no immediate plans to stop this support.

 

Oh yea, to address the last issue with updating the non WAAS units to terrain , we also still do this and have kits available for the field shops to do this as well if a customer has a -00 unit and wants to perform this function at their facility per the service bulletin issued in 2005.

 

I hope this helps clarify this, please feel free to contact me with any questions on this and I'll be happy to squash any rumors.

I went to local Garmin center 2 years ago and asked to update to terrain and they told me it would not be possible. So I have to assume they gave me wrong infos.

[TrekLawler]

10 hours ago, takair said:

Trek

i have one of the old -00 units that was updated to WAAS years ago.  Is that still a 28v only unit or did the WAAS upgrade make it a 14 or 28 v unit?  I am still carrying around the old 14 to 28v converter.

No, the WAAS update does not convert the unit or it's part number to change this to a dual voltage unit however if there is a comm problems we do have the means and path to correct it. so we will continue to support it. so unfortunately the converter is still needed for your comm system.

Edited May 20, 2016 by TrekLawler

[TrekLawler]

5 hours ago, turbotrk said:

I went to local Garmin center 2 years ago and asked to update to terrain and they told me it would not be possible. So I have to assume they gave me wrong infos.

My apologies for this, regretfully it sounds as if the dealer may not remember or have been kept updated on this as it is over 10 years old. we just recently in 2013 actually revised the SB for this mod. for the GNS 4XX series of non WAAS units this bulletin is SB 0532. the kit is still available and is sold for a cost of $500 uninstalled.

[Glenn]

While we are all scrutinizing Garmin's policies and intentions, let's take a minute for those of us who have been flying for a few decades to remember the avionics landscape prior to Garmin.  KX170's and NARCO.  No moving maps, no NEXRAD radar, and towards the end no NARCO parts to the shops in the field. Garmin was a game changer, that we have all benefited from, even if using brands that have followed the path that Garmin pioneered.

[Marauder]

2 minutes ago, TrekLawler said:

My apologies for this, regretfully it sounds as if the dealer may not remember or have been kept updated on this as it is over 10 years old. we just recently in 2013 actually revised the SB for this mod. for the GNS 4XX series of non WAAS units this bulletin is SB 0532. the kit is still available and is sold for a cost of $500 uninstalled.

Trek -- since we have you on this thread. Any update on the GTX-345 and compatibility with the Aspen products? Also, do you know if this version of the 345 will display ADS-B in on both the Aspen and GTN 650? I love having that ability with my WX-500.

[TrekLawler]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

Trek -- since we have you on this thread. Any update on the GTX-345 and compatibility with the Aspen products? Also, do you know if this version of the 345 will display ADS-B in on both the Aspen and GTN 650? I love having that ability with my WX-500.

The capability is already there. it is up to Aspen to get their systems up to a software level to support this.

[MB65E]

On May 19, 2016 at 2:08 PM, turbotrk said:

 

Now that was a King Stack if I've ever seen one!! 

Sweet clock on your yoke in the 1st pic!

Garmin does it right I think. The update process with the GTN software could be more user friendly but the data that is managed there is crazy detailed. 

I hope our 530W lasts forever! I'm happy with it.

-Matt

[Marauder]

2 hours ago, Marauder said: Trek -- since we have you on this thread. Any update on the GTX-345 and compatibility with the Aspen products? Also, do you know if this version of the 345 will display ADS-B in on both the Aspen and GTN 650? I love having that ability with my WX-500.

The capability is already there. it is up to Aspen to get their systems up to a software level to support this.

Thanks Trek. I will check in with Aspen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Aerodon]

We're supposed to be a bunch of smart people, but it always amazes me of the amount of ignorance and illogical thinking.  I have done a lot of work on remnant life assessment, life cycle costing and reliability based maintenance.  Maybe this biases my outlook, but the same principles apply to airframes, engines, avionics, paint, hoses etc.  Everything ages, wears out, depreciates, just at different rates.  I think avionics do pretty well in comparison to other electronics like TV's and computers.  I don't see any 5 year old computers worth turning on in my house, even if they do still work.  And i'm not going to throw $1000 flat rate repair on my 5 year old Macbook - money better spent on a new one.  Frustrating for sure, but at least I don't have to pay a $5000 installation fee like new avionics.

I don't have one, but a G430 is amazing.  How many electronic products out there that were in production for around 15 years an then still have 10 years of ongoing support?  And sure, we're probably in the last 5 years of this support, so plan accordingly.

I look at it like this:

1) Use straight line depreciation over 20 years and plan and price accordingly.

2) I would pay top dollar for a 5 year old unit, and almost nothing for a 20.  Cross your fingers with the 5 year old unit, budget a factory update for a 20 year old unit (almost better, because your now have an almost new unit)?

3) It amazes me that the market pricing has very little differential for new and old units, yet we wouldn't do this with cars, TV's, computers etc?  Uneducated or unrealistic buyers, bonus for sellers.  I have taken advantage of this, bought nearly new SL30's and sold perfectly good but 15 year old ones for not much less.  Full disclosure on the age and status, but huge difference in 'remnant life'.

4) And there are avionics that have been used for thousands of hours and parked in the sun, vs. others that have done 500 hours and parked in a hangar.  Once again, pay a premium for something nice and you have way less risk.

5) Yes, its frustrating when you get to the sunset years of many avionics items, but you can still find good 35 year old Cessna RT385 radios for a slide in replacement for less than the repair cost.  Same for KX155's, G430's GX50's etc.

6) when that all runs out, at least there is a nice plug and play solution like Avidyne for 430/530 users.

7) support the manufacturers that have better long term customer support.  I look after my equipment, hangared, not used very much, never any broken knobs, scratched screens etc.  So I hate flat rate repairs.  Flying schools on the other hand love them?

 

Excuse me if I'm rambling...

 

Aerodon

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gary0747]

The Garmin parts excuse is a cop out as far as I am concerned. They or some one else could make good money repairing legacy Garmin products if they wanted to. It can be done with long rang purchase planning of parts or opening up their vault of how to repair information to outside vendors.  I do not plan to purchase Garmin in the future if I can find a better policy with another supplier. 

[Bob_Belville]

32 minutes ago, Gary0747 said:

The Garmin parts excuse is a cop out as far as I am concerned. They or some one else could make good money repairing legacy Garmin products if they wanted to. It can be done with long rang purchase planning of parts or opening up their vault of how to repair information to outside vendors.  I do not plan to purchase Garmin in the future if I can find a better policy with another supplier. 

My mother had a saying for this kind of thinking. "Cut off your nose to spite your face." 

[Bob_Belville]

On 5/20/2016 at 6:43 PM, Marauder said:

Thanks Trek. I will check in with Aspen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Chris, let us know what your learn. I plan to spend time @ Aspen @ Oshkosh. But I wonder if I'd care about Aspen display of info I now see on the larger 750 screen...

[Jerry 5TJ]

One of the oldest designs in my panel is the G500.  It is 8 years into the 20 year cycle Aerodon describes. 

When the replacement Gxx appears I may be better off financially to upgrade while G500 still enjoys strong resale value. 

 

 

 

[jclemens]

1 hour ago, Gary0747 said:

The Garmin parts excuse is a cop out as far as I am concerned. They or some one else could make good money repairing legacy Garmin products if they wanted to. It can be done with long rang purchase planning of parts or opening up their vault of how to repair information to outside vendors.  I do not plan to purchase Garmin in the future if I can find a better policy with another supplier. 

We should start a class action lawsuit against Bendix King, I know they could upgrade a KX170B to WAAS if they wanted too!  The lifespan of avionics equipment is exponentially greater than any other piece of electronics.  I don't get why people get all up in arms when they are told their 20 year old GPS is no longer viable.  Do the same people get pissed off when they can't play a Blu-ray disk in their betamax player?  Do they drive a 20 year old car and expect it to perform like a brand new one?  How about a 20 year old computer, do you expect that to be upgradable to compete with a brand new one?  I ,for one, like new things.  I have customers that tell me all the time that a new GTN 750 won't do anything that the KLN89B they have in the panel does...really?  

[Jerry 5TJ]

44 minutes ago, jclemens said:

I have customers that tell me all the time that a new GTN 750 won't do anything that the KLN89B they have in the panel does...really?  

Perhaps it says more about the customer than the box. It is true if all they know how to use is the "Direct To" button.  

[Godfather]

4 hours ago, Gary0747 said:

The Garmin parts excuse is a cop out as far as I am concerned. They or some one else could make good money repairing legacy Garmin products if they wanted to. It can be done with long rang purchase planning of parts or opening up their vault of how to repair information to outside vendors.  I do not plan to purchase Garmin in the future if I can find a better policy with another supplier. 

Sounds like a great business venture.  There are 100k units in circulation... Do some reverse engineering and find some suppliers for parts.  Get your business certified and call it Gary's Garmin Repair.   

[N201MKTurbo]

The problem is to make things like displays and ICs is an undertaking that is too big for even the likes of Garmin. Especially if the technology that produced the parts is obsolete. The only way to maintain these things for the long haul is to make smaller chunks like a display, button panel, CPU, AHRS, radio and air data computer, instead of an integrated solution that has it all in one box. That way if say a display becomes obsolete it can be replaced with a new display that has the exact same software and hardware interface, without replacing the whole thing. This would also allow third parties to make things like replacement radios for a Garmin system. This is probably one reason why Garmin is not building them this way, to keep third parties out, but the FAA is partially to blame, they probably wouldn't allow the parts of a system to be certified separately even though it seems like a system wide validation protocol could be run on any combination of parts to validate that configuration. Then you run into the problem of who owns the validation protocol? It would only work if there was an industry standards organization like AIRINC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-replaceable_unit

This is the communications protocol they should use:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avionics_Full-Duplex_Switched_Ethernet

Edited May 30, 2016 by N201MKTurbo

[gsengle]

On 19 May 2016 at 11:23 PM, Godfather said: Nice looking panel!  I have to admit that I did not realize the waas (or similar) approaches are not available in the EU.  I understand why you just want a working unit.

Turbo is wrong there are tons of LPV approaches in Europe, almost the same number as in the US.  I don't know a major ga airfield in,Europe that does not have LPV or is working on getting it. The longest delay is actually Garmin as it takes them one year to program the approach and release it.  

Andrew

Garmin doesn't program approaches, jeppesen does, unless it's different in Europe?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Piloto]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Just now, gsengle said:

Garmin doesn't program approaches, jeppesen does, unless it's different in Europe?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem is to make things like displays and ICs is an undertaking that is too big for even the likes of Garmin. Especially if the technology that produced the parts is obsolete. The only way to maintain these things for the long haul is to make smaller chunks like a display, button panel, CPU, AHRS, radio and air data computer, instead of an integrated solution that has it all in one box. That way if say a display becomes obsolete it can be replaced with a new display that has the exact same software and hardware interface, without replacing the whole thing. This would also allow third parties to make things like replacement radios for a Garmin system. This is probably one reason why Garmin is not building them this way, to keep third parties out, but the FAA is partially to blame, they probably wouldn't allow the parts of a system to be certified separately even though it seems like a system wide validation protocol could be run on any combination of parts to validate that configuration. Then you run into the problem of who owns the validation protocol? It would only work if there was an industry standards organization like AIRINC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-replaceable_unit

This is the communications protocol they should use:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avionics_Full-Duplex_Switched_Ethernet

Having it all in one box reduces the overall cost since there is no need for interconnect connectors, harness and interface hardware. It makes it easier for the plane manufacturer. And the overall reliability improves since there is no interface problems. Of course there are limitations to all in one box solutions. Radar, TCAS, IRS and others are too big to fit in one box. For this there are international standards to assure interface compatibility such as ARINC 429. You can get 429 ICs the size of 0.25" x 0.25" x 0.05" that will interface with 429 compatible LRUs from www.Holtic.com. Talking about integration I never expected that my cell phone would be a GPS, camera, calculator and connect to the internet in a one flat box smaller than my wallet. Can you imagine the cost and size of all that in separate boxes. Have to get cargo pants or bigger ladies purse.

José