Update navworx adsb boxes

Use this area for aviation related general discussions, newsworthy items, and non model specific topics.

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby Gripdana » Thu Nov 24, 2016 10:54 pm

Thank you for that information. So it looks like if I want this to work now and after 2020. Navworks needs to upgrade the GPS hardware or prove it's capability so that the SIL code could be something compliant with the 2020 mandate. I am not opposed to sending it back to have another GPS installed. I would have purchased the more expensive model at the time had I known this was going on.
Dana Baker
Scratch Built
First Flight March 8, 2015
Sonex #1534 - N1534S "Aluminum Foil"
Aerovee-Dual Controls-Tail Dragger
Gripdana
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:59 pm

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby WaiexN143NM » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:38 am

Hi all,
Jonathan, thanks for the detailed good explanation. My disappointment with navworx made me walk away from this for a day, i was going to write a similiar post. Navworx is living in fantasy land. This whole fiasco could have been easily avoided. If the internal gps on a couple of models was/is within acceptable tolerance, then a request to change the sil code to the faa could have been made. The FAA folks are not going to forget any of this. Any resolution, or any new products will now be slowballed, pushed to the corner of the desk, or forgotten about. Shutting the door in the face of the inspectors twice has not earned them any respect. And the FAA is not going to give them any. Incredible. Im wondering if i have a $1300 paperweight.
WaiexN143NM
Michael
Retired FAA
WaiexN143NM
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:04 am
Location: SF CA, Tucson AZ

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby Jonathan McGee » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:16 pm

WaiexN143NM wrote:Hi all,
Jonathan, thanks for the detailed good explanation. My disappointment with navworx made me walk away from this for a day, i was going to write a similiar post. Navworx is living in fantasy land. This whole fiasco could have been easily avoided. If the internal gps on a couple of models was/is within acceptable tolerance, then a request to change the sil code to the faa could have been made. The FAA folks are not going to forget any of this. Any resolution, or any new products will now be slowballed, pushed to the corner of the desk, or forgotten about. Shutting the door in the face of the inspectors twice has not earned them any respect. And the FAA is not going to give them any. Incredible. Im wondering if i have a $1300 paperweight.
WaiexN143NM
Michael
Retired FAA

I tried to keep my initial post as matter-of-fact as I could. Now that it's not my initial post...

I agree that Navworx is in the wrong here. They had to address the fact that hardware they already sold was non-compliant with the mandate (i.e. the SIL) and instead of trying to work with the FAA to resolve it, they simply took the easy way out and flipped a few bits in the ADS-B packet to make the problem go away. The very bits which say "this is a high-precision, high-reliability GPS source that can be trusted for life-or-death decisions." When called on it, they doubled-down and pulled a "think of the customers!" while placing their customers directly in the line of fire.

[Edit/New Para]: Their press release is extremely telling. If they had the data they claim they do, they would have provided it to FAA before we got this far. So either the FAA rejected it (which I'm sure they would have spun in their press release) or they simply didn't provide it. The FAA inspector tried to access their facility (as he has legal authority under the TSO) on three separate prearranged times and was turned away each time. I can't fathom a situation where this makes sense and their press release doesn't even try.

This feels like Ameri-King all over again.

Because I didn't want to deal with this whole multiple unit/multiple antenna nonsense, I was planning to just stick a Garmin GTX 345 (or some variant thereof) in the aircraft. Sure it costs more, but it seems to sidestep a huge number of these problems. While I have yet to execute on the decision, it seems like the better decision every day.
Attempt #2 at this whole Sonex Business.
Waiex-B WXB0019 [Progress reported upon completion]
Jonathan McGee
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:04 am
Location: KPAO

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby mike.smith » Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:29 pm

Mike Smith
Sonex N439M
Scratch built, AeroVee, Dual stick, Tail dragger
http://www.mykitlog.com/mikesmith
mike.smith
 
Posts: 933
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:45 pm

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby daleandee » Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:32 am

*
Last edited by daleandee on Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
daleandee
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 6:14 pm

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby fastj22 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:44 am

daleandee wrote:Here you go ...

http://navworx.com/

Dale
N319WF

Oh what a tangled web we weave....
Sure makes you never want to go into the business of trying to be compliant with the FAA.
This does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the future of my SkyGuard unit.

John Gillis
Waiex N116YX, Jabiru 3300, Tail dragger, SkyGuard ADS-B
First flight, 3/16/2013. 350+ hours and climbing.
Home: CO15. KOSH x 4 States landed in: CO, NB, NM, TX, OK, IA, KS, WI, IL, WY
User avatar
fastj22
 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:56 pm
Location: Mile High

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby kmacht » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:15 am

They might have saved themselves alot of headache if they didn't start manufacturing based on a phone call and didn't try to resolve things by writing an email (and waiting 5 weeks now for a response back).

Keith
#554
kmacht
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 11:30 am

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby intoaircooled » Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:12 pm

sounds like someone got their undies in a bunch and now both sides are digging in and won't relent, unfortunately it's at the expense and safety of the flying public. And we wonder why GA has been on a steady slow decline.
Carl Benda
A&P
Intoaircooled Engines
Barn find Sonex 048 AeroVee 2.1 Turbo
intoaircooled
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:57 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby fastj22 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:58 pm

So, let me get this straight, I'm flying along in my Cirrus SR22 enjoying the situational awareness of seeing weather and traffic via TIS-B on my fancy certified Garmin G3000 and some malcontent experimental broadcasting SIL-0 enters the airspace and the FAA turns off TIS-B for everyone and my G3000 goes dark?

John Gillis
Waiex N116YX, Jabiru 3300, Tail dragger, SkyGuard ADS-B
First flight, 3/16/2013. 350+ hours and climbing.
Home: CO15. KOSH x 4 States landed in: CO, NB, NM, TX, OK, IA, KS, WI, IL, WY
User avatar
fastj22
 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:56 pm
Location: Mile High

Re: Update navworx adsb boxes

Postby kevinh » Wed Dec 21, 2016 12:35 am

fastj22 wrote:So, let me get this straight, I'm flying along in my Cirrus SR22 enjoying the situational awareness of seeing weather and traffic via TIS-B on my fancy certified Garmin G3000 and some malcontent experimental broadcasting SIL-0 enters the airspace and the FAA turns off TIS-B for everyone and my G3000 goes dark?


update: oops - I was dumb, never mind the following... ;-)

(This is wrong) No. They just turn it off for the SIL-0 person (which is still bogus - but different).
Last edited by kevinh on Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Taildragger Waiex in progress, tail done, wings done, about to mate wings to fuse,
then cowl, canopy, paint (photos): flush rivets, turbo aerovee, acro ailerons
(I built my RV7A and happily flew it for about 500 hrs)
User avatar
kevinh
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:46 pm
Location: San Mateo, CA

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests